RSS
Back in 1999 I was invited to join Steve Sailer’s HBD email group, where I encountered all sorts of interesting people. The participants were mostly intellectuals or journalists having sharply heterodox views about racial differences, especially those involving IQ and crime, and this was reflected in the somewhat euphemistic title, which stood for “Human Bio-Diversity.” A reasonable sense of the controversial roster is that less than a year earlier a founding member named Glayde Whitney had contributed the Foreword to David Duke’s 700 page opus My Awakening.
Although the discussions were intended to focus on scientific matters, it sometimes seemed that half the heated arguments revolved around immigration, and on that highly contentious topic, I was invariably outnumbered around 99-to-1, with even the handful of self-proclaimed liberals regularly ranging themselves against me. Despite such apparently long odds, I regarded myself as always victorious in all those endless debates, though I would have to admit that 99% of the audience probably would have disagreed with my verdict.
Particularly contentious was the question of Hispanic immigrant crime rates, which I claimed were roughly the same as those of whites, a position that virtually all those professors and authors denounced as utter lunacy. That particular dispute went on for so many years that eventually I no longer even bothered to argue the case, but just every now and then provided some satirical jibes on the topic.
As it happens, the late J. Philippe Rushton, longtime professor of Psychology at the University of Western Ontario, was a very occasional participant, and one of my jokes happened to catch his eye. Being a bit on the humorless side, he failed to comprehend that my remarks were actually tongue-in-cheek, and after three or four explanatory exchanges, I was finally forced to state my position as explicitly as possible: “Hispanics have approximately the same crime rates as whites of the same age.” He found my claim totally astonishing, saying that it contradicted absolutely everything he had learned about the topic and even threatened to overturn his entire ideological world-view, which he had so painstakingly built up over his previous thirty years of scientific investigation into human racial differences. Therefore, he said I couldn’t possibly be right.
Now Rushton was then widely regarded as being the world’s foremost White Nationalist academic scholar, and he was basically saying that he would eat his own hat if my contradictory racial analysis proved correct. Such an intellectual challenge was just too tempting for me to resist, so I took a brief hiatus from my ongoing software project to work out the crime numbers.
Sure enough, the quantitative results came out exactly the way I knew they would, and I was quite pleased with my resulting cover story “The Myth of Hispanic Crime” that ran in the March 2010 issue of The American Conservative. Not only did my detailed analysis eventually win over Prof. Rushton and most of my more thoughtful critics, but it also sparked an enormous Internet debate, and probably had widespread influence. I was puzzled at the time that such simple calculations had not previously been undertaken by America’s vast army of pro-immigrant academics and journalists, and could only wonder whether they had deliberately avoided investigating the issue for fear that the claims of their anti-immigrant opponents would prove entirely correct. Regardless of the cause, for years afterward whenever I Googled “Hispanic Crime” or “Latino Crime”, the search engine would turn up many tens of millions of web pages, but my own article was generally listed in the top five or six results, quite often in the top two or three. Even today, nearly a decade later, copies of my article still rank remarkably high in such searches on Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo.
Was my controversial analysis actually correct? Well, when I moved to Palo Alto in 1992, neighboring East Palo Alto had America’s highest per capita murder rate, which obviously made people here rather nervous. But then over the next 25 years, a vast flood of Hispanic immigrants, both legal and illegal, swept into the region, and the city became overwhelmingly Latino and immigrant. Perhaps coincidentally, the homicide rate fell by some 99%, with the last two years marred by only a single killing, a murder-suicide involving a couple of elderly white lesbians, while all other crime rates have also plummeted. Palo Alto is home to the CEOs of Google, Facebook, Apple, and numerous other leading tech companies, so perhaps rightwing activists should be less than totally mystified why their anti-immigrant zealotry has generally fallen on rather deaf ears within the Silicon Valley business community.
Although immigration and Hispanic crime were perennial topics in that HBD group, for a few years after the 9/11 attacks the latter issue was almost entirely displaced by feverish exchanges on Muslim terrorism and the accompanying Clash of Civilizations. Once again, I was invariably on the short end of a 99-to-1 divide, with nearly all the others in the group claiming that destruction of the World Trade Center conclusively proved that we needed to close our borders to foreign immigrants. I pointed out that since the Arab hijackers involved hadn’t been immigrants, but had generally entered our country on tourist visas, maybe the “War on Terrorism” should be renamed the “War on Tourism,” and we should protect America by completely closing our borders to the horrifying risks of the latter. Yet everyone ignored my sage advice.
The 9/11 attacks themselves had astonished me as much as everyone else on the HBD list, but aside from carefully reading the developing story in the New York Times and my other morning newspapers, I was too busy with my work to otherwise follow the topic. At first, everyone seemed certain that there would soon be a wave of follow-up attacks by the dozens or perhaps even hundreds of other Islamic terrorists remaining in our country, but nothing like that ever happened. After a few weeks had gone by without any further explosions, even small ones, I told the other HBD listmembers that I now strongly suspected that every last Al Qaeda terrorist in America had probably died in the suicide attacks of September 11th, and there wasn’t a single remaining operative left behind to commit further mayhem. Many of the others disagreed with me, but as the months and years went by, my surprising hypothesis turned out to be correct.
There was one important exception to this pattern, but it actually served to confirm the rule. As I wrote a few years ago in my original “American Pravda” article:
Consider the almost forgotten anthrax mailing attacks in the weeks after 9/11, which terrified our dominant East Coast elites and spurred passage of the unprecedented Patriot Act, thereby eliminating many traditional civil-libertarian protections. Every morning during that period the New York Times and other leading newspapers carried articles describing the mysterious nature of the deadly attacks and the complete bafflement of the FBI investigators. But evenings on the Internet I would read stories by perfectly respectable journalists such as Salon’s Laura Rozen or the staff of the Hartford Courant providing a wealth of additional detail and pointing to a likely suspect and motive.
Although the letters carrying the anthrax were purportedly written by an Arab terrorist, the FBI quickly determined that the language and style indicated a non-Arab author, while tests pointed to the bioweapons research facility at Ft. Detrick, Md., as the probable source of the material. But just prior to the arrival of those deadly mailings, military police at Quantico, Va., had also received an anonymous letter warning that a former Ft. Detrick employee, Egyptian-born Dr. Ayaad Assaad, might be planning to launch a national campaign of bioterrorism. Investigators quickly cleared Dr. Assaad, but the very detailed nature of the accusations revealed inside knowledge of his employment history and the Ft. Detrick facilities. Given the near-simultaneous posting of anthrax envelopes and false bioterrorism accusations, the mailings almost certainly came from the same source, and solving the latter case would be the easiest means of catching the anthrax killer.
Who would have attempted to frame Dr. Assaad for bioterrorism? A few years earlier he had been involved in a bitter personal feud with a couple of his Ft. Detrick coworkers, including charges of racism, official reprimands, and angry recriminations all around. When an FBI official shared a copy of the accusatory letter with a noted language-forensics expert and allowed him to compare the text with the writings of 40 biowarfare lab employees, he found a perfect match with one of those individuals. For years I told my friends that anyone who spent 30 minutes with Google could probably determine the name and motive of the likely anthrax killer, and most of them successfully met my challenge.
This powerful evidence received almost no attention in the major national media, nor is there any indication that the FBI ever followed up on any of these clues or interrogated the named suspects. Instead, investigators attempted to pin the attacks on a Dr. Steven Hatfill based on negligible evidence, after which he was completely exonerated and won a $5.6 million settlement from the government for its years of severe harassment. Later, similar hounding of researcher Bruce Ivins and his family led to his suicide, after which the FBI declared the case closed, even though former colleagues of Dr. Ivins demonstrated that he had had no motive, means, or opportunity. In 2008, I commissioned a major 3,000-word cover story in my magazine summarizing all of this crucial evidence, and once again almost no one in the mainstream media paid the slightest attention.
Unlike the 9/11 attacks themselves, I had closely followed the Anthrax terrorism, and was shocked by the strange silence of the government investigators and our leading newspapers. At the time, I generally assumed that the attacks were totally unconnected with 9/11 and merely opportunistic, but I simply couldn’t understand how a few minutes a day of reading Salon and the Hartford Courant on the web could seemingly solve the front-page mystery that was baffling everyone at the FBI and the New York Times. It was around that point when I first started to wonder whether the elite media publications I had always relied upon were merely “Our American Pravda” under a different name. Moreover, a 2014 book by Prof. Graeme MacQueen that I only very recently discovered has made a reasonably persuasive case that the Anthrax killings were intimately connected to the 9/11 attacks themselves, greatly magnifying the malfeasance of our media elites.
In theoretical physics, new scientific breakthroughs often occur when known objects are found to behave in inexplicable ways, thereby suggesting the existence of previously unsuspected forces or particles. In evolutionary biology, when an organism appears to be acting against its own genetic interests, we may safely assume that it has probably fallen under the control of some other entity, typically a parasite, which has hijacked the host and is directing its activities toward different ends. While I couldn’t be entirely sure what was happening to the politics and media of my own country, something very odd and disturbing was certainly taking place.
Things soon became much worse. Since the 9/11 attacks had apparently been organized by Osama bin Laden and he was based in Afghanistan under Taliban protection, our attack on that country at least seemed rational. But suddenly there also soon appeared talk of attacking Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, which made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
At first I couldn’t believe what was taking place, simply awed by the breathtaking power and dishonesty of “our American Pravda,” with the establishment media so easily transforming black into white and night into day. Once again, quoting from my original article of that title:
The circumstances surrounding our Iraq War demonstrate this, certainly ranking it among the strangest military conflicts of modern times. The 2001 attacks in America were quickly ascribed to the radical Islamists of al-Qaeda, whose bitterest enemy in the Middle East had always been Saddam Hussein’s secular Baathist regime in Iraq. Yet through misleading public statements, false press leaks, and even forged evidence such as the “yellowcake” documents, the Bush administration and its neoconservative allies utilized the compliant American media to persuade our citizens that Iraq’s nonexistent WMDs posed a deadly national threat and required elimination by war and invasion. Indeed, for several years national polls showed that a large majority of conservatives and Republicans actually believed that Saddam was the mastermind behind 9/11 and the Iraq War was being fought as retribution. Consider how bizarre the history of the 1940s would seem if America had attacked China in retaliation for Pearl Harbor.
True facts were easily available to anyone paying attention in the years after 2001, but most Americans do not bother and simply draw their understanding of the world from what they are told by the major media, which overwhelmingly—almost uniformly—backed the case for war with Iraq; the talking heads on TV created our reality. Prominent journalists across the liberal and conservative spectrum eagerly published the most ridiculous lies and distortions passed on to them by anonymous sources, and stampeded Congress down the path to war.
The result was what my late friend Lt. Gen. Bill Odom rightly called the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history.” American forces suffered tens of thousands of needless deaths and injuries, while our country took a huge step toward national bankruptcy. Economics Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz and others have estimated that with interest the total long-term cost of our two recent wars may reach as high as $5 or $6 trillion, or as much as $50,000 per American household, mostly still unpaid. Meanwhile, economist Edward Wolff has calculated that the Great Recession and its aftermath cut the personal net worth of the median American household to $57,000 in 2010 from a figure nearly twice as high three years earlier. Comparing these assets and liabilities, we see that the American middle class now hovers on the brink of insolvency, with the cost of our foreign wars being a leading cause.
But no one involved in the debacle ultimately suffered any serious consequences, and most of the same prominent politicians and highly paid media figures who were responsible remain just as prominent and highly paid today. For most Americans, reality is whatever our media organs tell us, and since these have largely ignored the facts and adverse consequences of our wars in recent years, the American people have similarly forgotten. Recent polls show that only half the public today believes that the Iraq War was a mistake.
Author James Bovard has described our society as an “attention deficit democracy,” and the speed with which important events are forgotten once the media loses interest might surprise George Orwell.
As President George W. Bush began inexorably moving America toward the Iraq War in 2002, I realized with a terrible sinking feeling that the notoriously pro-Israel Neocon zealots had somehow managed to seize control of the foreign policy of his administration, a situation I could never have imagined even in my worst nightmare.
Throughout the 1990s and even afterward, I’d been on very friendly terms with the Neocons in NYC and DC, working closely with them on issues relating to immigration and assimilation. Indeed, my December 1999 article “California and the End of White America” was not only one of the longest cover stories ever published in Commentary, their intellectual flagship, but had even been cited as the centerpiece of its annual fund-raising letter.
I and my other DC friends were well aware of the fanatical views most Neocons held on Israel and Middle Eastern policy, with their foreign policy obsessions being a regular staple of our jokes and ridicule. But since it seemed unimaginable that they would ever be given any authority in that sphere, their beliefs had seemed a relatively harmless eccentricity. After all, could anyone possibly imagine fanatical libertarians being placed in total control of the Pentagon, allowing them to immediately disband the American armed forces as a “statist institution”?
Moreover, the complete ideological triumph of the Neocons after the 9/11 attacks was all the more shocking given the crushing recent defeat they had suffered. During the 2000 presidential campaign, nearly all of the Neocons had aligned themselves with Sen. John McCain, whose battle with Bush for the Republican nomination had eventually turned quite bitter, and as a consequence, they had been almost totally frozen out of high-level appointments. Both Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were then widely regarded as Bush Republicans, lacking any significant Neocon ties, and the same was true for all the other top administration figures such as Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice, and Paul O’Neil. Indeed, the only Neoconservative offered a Cabinet spot was Linda Chavez, and not only was the Labor Department always regarded as something of a boobie prize in a GOP Administration, but she was ultimately forced to withdraw her nomination due to her “nanny problems.” The highest-ranking Neocon serving under Bush was Rumsfeld Deputy Paul Wolfowitz, whose seemingly inconsequential appointment had passed without any notice.
Most of the Neocons themselves certainly seemed to recognize the catastrophic loss they had suffered in the 2000 election. Back in those days, I was on very friendly terms with Bill Kristol, and when I stopped by his office at the Weekly Standard for a chat in the spring of 2001, he seemed in a remarkably depressed state of mind. I remember that at one point, he took his head in his hands and wondered aloud whether it was time for him to just abandon the political battle, resigning his editorship and taking up a quiet post at a DC thinktank. Yet just eight or ten months later, he and his close allies were on their way to gaining overwhelming influence in our government. In an eerie parallel to the aftermath of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Lenin in Zurich, the totally fortuitous 9/11 attacks and the outbreak of war had suddenly allowed a small but committed ideological faction to seize control of a gigantic country.
A thorough account of the Neocons and their takeover of the Bush Administration in the aftermath of 9/11 is provided by Dr. Stephen J. Sniegoski in his 2008 book The Transparent Cabal, conveniently available on this website:
Oddly enough, for many years after 9/11, I paid very little attention to the details of the attacks themselves. I was entirely preoccupied with building my content-archiving software system, and with the little time I could spend on public policy matters, I was totally focused to the ongoing Iraq War disaster, as well as my terrible fears that Bush might at any moment suddenly extend the conflict to Iran. Despite Neocon lies shamelessly echoed by our corrupt media, neither Iraq nor Iran had had anything whatsoever to do with the 9/11 attacks, so those events gradually faded in my consciousness, and I suspect the same was true for most other Americans. Al Qaeda had largely disappeared and Bin Laden was supposedly hiding in a cave somewhere. Despite endless Homeland Security “threat alerts,” there had been absolutely no further Islamic terrorism on American soil, and relatively little anywhere else outside the Iraq charnel house. So the precise details of the 9/11 plots had become almost irrelevant to me.
Others I knew seemed to feel the same way. Virtually all the exchanges I had with my old friend Bill Odom, the three-star general who had run the NSA for Ronald Reagan, had concerned the Iraq War and risk it might spread to Iran, as well as the bitter anger he felt toward Bush’s perversion of his beloved NSA into an extra-constitutional tool of domestic espionage. When the New York Times broke the story of the massive extent of domestic NSA spying, Gen. Odom declared that President Bush should be impeached and NSA Director Michael Hayden court-martialed. But in all the years prior to his untimely passing in 2008, I don’t recall the 9/11 attacks themselves even once coming up as a topic in our discussions.
During those same years, I’d also grown quite friendly with Alexander Cockburn, whose Counterpunch webzine seemed a very rare center of significant opposition to our disastrous foreign policy towards Iraq and Iran. I do recall that he once complained to me in 2006 about the “conspiracy nuts” of the 9/11 Truth movement who were endlessly harassing his publication, and I extended my sympathies. Each of us move in different political circles, and that brief reference may have been the first and only time I heard of the 9/11 Truthers during that period, causing me to regard them more like an eccentric UFO cult than anything else.
Admittedly, I’d occasionally heard of some considerable oddities regarding the 9/11 attacks here and there, and these certainly raised some suspicions. Most days I would glance at the Antiwar.com front page, and it seemed that some Israeli Mossad agents had been caught while filming that plane attacks in NYC, while a much larger Mossad “art student” spy operation around the country had also been broken up around the same time. Apparently, FoxNews had even broadcast a multi-part series on the latter topic before that expose was scuttled and “disappeared” under ADL pressure.
Although I wasn’t entirely sure about the credibility of those claims, it did seem plausible that Mossad had known of the attacks in advance and allowed them to proceed, recognizing the huge benefits that Israel would derive from the anti-Arab backlash. I think I was vaguely aware that Antiwar.com editorial director Justin Raimondo had published The Terror Enigma, a short book about some of those strange facts, bearing the provocative subtitle “9/11 and the Israeli Connection,” but I never considered reading it. In 2007, Counterpunch itself published a fascinating follow-up story about the arrest of that group of Israeli Mossad agents in NYC, who were caught filming and apparently celebrating the plane attacks on that fateful day, and the Mossad activity seemed to be far larger than I had previously realized. But all these details remained a little fuzzy in my mind next to my overriding concerns about wars in Iraq and Iran.
However, by the end of 2008 my focus had begun to change. Bush was leaving office without having started an Iranian war, and America had successfully dodged the bullet of an even more dangerous John McCain administration. I assumed that Barack Obama would be a terrible president and he proved worse than my expectations, but I still breathed a huge sigh of relief every day that he was in the White House.
Moreover, around that same time I’d stumbled across an astonishing detail of the 9/11 attacks that demonstrated the remarkable depths of my own ignorance. In a Counterpunch article, I’d discovered that immediately following the attacks, the supposed terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden had publicly denied any involvement, even declaring that no good Muslim would have committed such deeds.
Once I checked around a little and fully confirmed that fact, I was flabbergasted. 9/11 was not only the most successful terrorist attack in the history of the world, but may have been greater in its physical magnitude than all past terrorist operations combined. The entire purpose of terrorism is to allow a small organization to show the world that it can inflict serious losses upon a powerful state, and I had never previously heard of any terrorist leader denying his role in a successful operation, let alone the greatest in history. Something seemed extremely wrong in the media-generated narrative that I had previously accepted. I began to wonder if I had been as deluded as the tens of millions of Americans in 2003 and 2004 who naively believed that Saddam had been the mastermind behind the September 11th attacks. We live in a world of illusions generated by our media, and I suddenly felt that I had noticed a tear in the paper-mache mountains displayed in the background of a Hollywood sound-stage. If Osama was probably not the author of 9/11, what other huge falsehoods had I blindly accepted?
A couple of years later, I came across a very interesting column by Eric Margolis, a prominent Canadian foreign policy journalist purged from the broadcast media for his strong opposition to the Iraq War. He had long published a weekly column in the Toronto Sun and when that tenure ended, he used his closing appearance to run a double-length piece expressing his very strong doubts about the official 9/11 story, noting that the former director of Pakistani Intelligence insisted that Israel had been behind the attacks.
In addition, an old friend of mine with strong connections to elite French circles at some point shared what he regarded as an amusing anecdote. He mentioned that at a private dinner party in Paris attended by influential political and media figures, France’s former Defense Minister had told the other disbelieving guests that the Pentagon had been struck by a missile rather than a civilian jetliner. My friend explained that the minister in question was widely regarded as extremely intelligent and level-headed, thereby proving that even the most highly reputable individuals may sometimes believe in utterly crazy things.
But I interpreted those same facts very differently. France probably possessed one of the four or five best intelligence service in the world, and surely a French Defense Minister would be privy to better information about true events than a typical media pundit. In fact, one of the earliest books sharply questioning the official 9/11 narrative was 9/11: The Big Lie by French journalist Thierry Meyssan, which appeared in 2002. This book had similarly argued that the Pentagon had been struck by a missile, perhaps suggesting that it may have been partly influenced by leaks coming from French Intelligence.
I later shared that account of the French minister’s private opinions with a very well-connected American individual situated in our elite Establishment with whom I’d become a little friendly. His reaction made it clear that he held the same highly unorthodox views about the 9/11 attacks, although he had never publicly voiced them lest he risk losing his elite Establishment membership card.
I eventually discovered that in 2003 former German Cabinet Minister Andreas von Bülow had published a best-selling book strongly suggesting that the CIA rather than Bin Laden was behind the attacks, while in 2007 former Italian President Francesco Cossiga had similarly argued that the CIA and the Israeli Mossad had been responsible, claiming that fact was well known among Western intelligence agencies.
Over the years, all these discordant claims had gradually raised my suspicions about the official 9/11 story to extremely strong levels, but it was only very recently that I finally found the time to begin to seriously investigate the subject and read eight or ten of the main 9/11 Truther books, mostly those by Prof. David Ray Griffin, the widely acknowledged leader in that field. And his books, together with the writings of his numerous colleagues and allies, revealed all sorts of very telling details, most of which had previously remained unknown to me. I was also greatly impressed by the sheer number of seemingly reputable individuals of no apparent ideological bent who had become adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement over the years.
I certainly attempted to locate contrary books supporting the official 9/11 story, but the only one widely discussed was a rather short volume published by Popular Mechanics magazine, whose lead researcher turned out to be the cousin of Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff. None of the writers appeared to have any serious academic credentials, and they seemed to generally ignore or deflect some of the strongest pieces of evidence provided by the numerous scholars and experts involved in the 9/11 Truth movement. Therefore I hardly found their rebuttal persuasive, and I half-wondered whether Homeland Security had quietly arranged the publication, which might help explain the extremely odd nepotistic coincidence. Popular magazines simply do not carry the scientific weight of research professors at major universities. Perhaps the holes in the official 9/11 narrative were so numerous and large that no serious scholar could be enlisted to defend it.
When utterly astonishing claims of an extremely controversial nature are made over a period of many years by numerous seemingly reputable academics and other experts, and they are entirely ignored or suppressed but never effectively refuted, reasonable conclusions seem to point in an obvious direction. Based on my very recent readings in this topic, the total number of huge flaws in the official 9/11 story has now grown enormously long, probably numbering in the many dozens. Most of these individual items seem reasonably likely and if we decide that even just two or three of them are correct, we must totally reject the narrative that so many of us have believed for so long.
The numerous Griffin books, beginning with his important 2004 volume The New Pearl Harbor, provide a very helpful evolving compendium of these. Although they all contain a great deal of overlap I might emphasize Debunking 9/11 Debunking, a 2007 reply to the Popular Mechanics volume, and the 2008 book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited as among the more important ones. In addition, he co-edited an important 2007 collection of essays with scholar Peter Dale Scott entitled 9/11 and American Empire. For those too cheap or impatient to click a button and order something from Amazon, I’m pleased to provide three of the shorter Griffin books in HTML form:
Now I am obviously just an amateur in the complex intelligence craft of extracting nuggets of truth from a mountain of manufactured falsehood. Although the arguments of the 9/11 Truth Movement seem quite persuasive to me, I would obviously feel much more comfortable if they were seconded by an experienced professional, such as a top CIA analyst. A few years ago, I was shocked to discover that was indeed the case.
William Christison had spent 29 years at the CIA, rising to become one of its senior figures as Director of its Office of Regional and Political Analysis, with 200 research analysts serving under him. In August 2006, he published a remarkable 2,700 word article explaining why he no longer believed the official 9/11 story and felt sure that the 9/11 Commission Report constituted a cover-up, with the truth being quite different. The following year, he provided a forceful endorsement to one of Griffin’s books, writing that “[There’s] a strong body of evidence showing the official U.S. Government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies.” And Christison’s extreme 9/11 skepticism was seconded by that of many other highly-regarded former US intelligence officers.
We might expect that if a former intelligence officer of Christison’s rank were to denounce the official 9/11 report as a fraud and a cover-up, such a story would constitute front-page news. But it was never reported anywhere in our mainstream media, and I only stumbled upon it a decade later.
Even our supposed “alternative” media outlets were nearly as silent. Throughout the 2000s, Christison and his wife Kathleen, also a former CIA analyst, had been regular contributors to Counterpunch, publishing many dozens of articles there and certainly were its most highly-credentialed writers on intelligence and national security matters. But editor Alexander Cockburn refused to publish any of their 9/11 skepticism, so it never came to my attention at the time. Indeed, when I mentioned Christison’s views to current Counterpunch editor Jeffrey St. Clair a couple of years ago, he was stunned to discover that the friend he had regarded so very highly had actually become a “9/11 Truther.” When media organs serve as ideological gatekeepers, a condition of widespread ignorance becomes unavoidable.
For those so interested, Christison’s 2006 article mentioned the strong evidence he found in a C-Span broadcast of a two-hour panel discussion on the September 11th terrorist attacks, and he especially cited the documentary Loose Change as an excellent summary of many of the flaws in the official 9/11 case. The full “Final Cut” version of that film is conveniently available on YouTube:
With so many gaping holes in the official story of the events seventeen years ago, each of us is free to choose to focus on those we personally consider most persuasive, and I have several of my own. Danish Chemistry professor Niels Harrit was one of the scientists who analyzed the debris of the destroyed buildings and detected the residual presence of nano-thermite, a military-grade explosive compound, and I found him quite credible during his hour-long interview on Red Ice Radio. The notion that an undamaged hijacker passport was found in an NYC street after the massive, fiery destruction of the skyscrapers is totally absurd, as was the claim that the top hijacker conveniently lost his luggage at one of the airports and it was found to contain a large mass of incriminating information. The testimonies of the dozens of firefighters who heard explosions just before the collapse of the buildings seems totally inexplicable under the official story. The sudden total collapse of Building Seven, never hit by any jetliners is also extremely implausible.
Let us now suppose that the overwhelming weight of evidence is correct, and concur with high-ranking former CIA intelligence analysts, distinguished academics, and experienced professionals that the 9/11 attacks were not what they appeared to be. We recognize the extreme implausibility that three huge skyscrapers in New York City suddenly collapsed at free-fall velocity into their own footprints after just two of them were hit by airplanes, and also that a large civilian jetliner probably did not strike the Pentagon leaving absolutely no wreckage and only a small hole. What actually did happen, and more importantly, who was behind it?
The first question is obviously impossible to answer without an honest and thorough official investigation of the evidence. Until that occurs, we should not be surprised that numerous, somewhat conflicting hypotheses have been advanced and debated within the confines of the 9/11 Truth community. But the second question is probably the more important and relevant one, and I think it has always represented a source of extreme vulnerability to 9/11 Truthers.
The most typical approach, as generally followed in the numerous Griffin books, is to avoid the issue entirely and focus solely on the gaping flaws in the official narrative. This is a perfectly acceptable position but leaves all sorts of serious doubts. What organized group would have been sufficiently powerful and daring to carry off an attack of such vast scale against the central heart of the world’s sole superpower? And how were they possibly able to orchestrate such a massively effective media and political cover-up, even enlisting the participation of the U.S. government itself?
The much smaller fraction of 9/11 Truthers who choose to address this “whodunit” question seem to be overwhelmingly concentrated among rank-and-file grassroots activists rather than the prestigious experts, and they usually answer “inside job!” Their widespread belief seems to be that the top political leadership of the Bush Administration, probably including Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, had organized the terrorist attacks, either with or without the knowledge of their ignorant nominal superior, President George W. Bush. The suggested motives included justifying military attacks against various countries, supporting the financial interests of the powerful oil industry and military-industrial complex, and enabling the destruction of traditional American civil liberties. Since the vast majority of politically-active Truthers seem to come from the far left of the ideological spectrum, they regard these notions as logical and almost self-evident.
Although not explicitly endorsing those Truther conspiracies, filmmaker Michael Moore’s leftist box office hit Fahrenheit 9/11 seemed to raise such similar suspicions. His small budget documentary earned an astonishing $220 million by suggesting that the very close business ties between the Bush family, Cheney, the oil companies, and the Saudis were responsible for the Iraq War aftermath of the terrorist attacks, as well as a domestic crackdown on civil liberties, which was part-and-parcel of the right-wing Republican agenda.
Unfortunately, this apparently plausible picture seems to have almost no basis in reality. During the drive to the Iraq War, I read Times articles interviewing numerous top oil men in Texas who expressed total puzzlement at why America was planning to attack Saddam, saying that they could only assume that President Bush knew something that they themselves did not. Saudi Arabian leaders were adamantly opposed to an American attack on Iraq, and made every effort to prevent it. Prior to his joining the Bush Administration, Cheney had served as CEO of Halliburton, an oil services giant, and his firm had heavily lobbied for the lifting of U.S. economic sanctions against Iraq. Prof. James Petras, a scholar of strong Marxist leanings, published an excellent 2008 book entitled Zionism, Militarism, and the Decline of US Power in which he conclusively demonstrated that Zionist interests rather than those of the oil industry had dominated the Bush Administration in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and promoted the Iraq War.
As for Michael Moore’s film, I remember at the time sharing a laugh with a (Jewish) friend of mine, both of us finding it ridiculous that a government so overwhelmingly permeated by fanatically pro-Israel Neocons was being portrayed as in thrall to the Saudis. Not only did the plot of Moore’s film demonstrate the fearsome power of Jewish Hollywood, but its huge success suggested that most of the American public had apparently never heard of the Neocons.
Bush critics properly ridiculed the president for his tongue-tied statement that the 9/11 terrorists had attacked America “for its freedoms” and Truthers have reasonably branded as implausible the claims that the massive attacks were organized by a cave-dwelling Islamic preacher. But the suggestion that that they were led and organized by the top figures of the Bush Administration seems even more preposterous.
Cheney and Rumsfeld had both spent decades as stalwarts of the moderate pro-business wing of the Republican Party, each serving in top government positions and also as CEOs of major corporations. The notion that they capped their careers by joining a new Republican administration in early 2001 and immediately set about organizing a gigantic false-flag terrorist attack upon the proudest towers of our largest city together with our own national military headquarters, intending to kill many thousands of Americans in the process, is too ridiculous to even be part of a leftist political satire.
Let’s step back a bit. In the entire history of the world, I can think of no documented case in which the top political leadership of a country launched a major false-flag attack upon its own centers of power and finance and tried to kill large numbers of its own people. The America of 2001 was a peaceful and prosperous country run by relatively bland political leaders focused upon the traditional Republican goals of enacting tax-cuts for the rich and reducing environmental regulations. Too many Truther activists have apparently drawn their understanding of the world from the caricatures of leftist comic-books in which corporate Republicans are all diabolical Dr. Evils, seeking to kill Americans out of sheer malevolence, and Cockburn was absolutely correct to ridicule them at least on that particular score.
Consider also the simple practicalities of the situation. The gigantic nature of the 9/11 attacks as postulated by the Truth movement would have clearly required enormous planning and probably involved the work of many dozens or even hundreds of skilled agents. Ordering CIA operatives or special military units to organize secret attacks against civilian targets in Venezuela or Yemen is one thing, but directing them to mount attacks against the Pentagon and the heart of New York City would be fraught with stupendous risk.
Bush had lost the popular vote in November 2000 and had only reached the White House because of a few dangling chads in Florida and the controversial decision of a deeply divided Supreme Court. As a consequence, most of the American media regarded his new administration with enormous hostility. If the first act of such a newly-sworn presidential team had been ordering the CIA or the military to prepare attacks against New York City and the Pentagon, surely those orders would have been regarded as issued by a group of lunatics, and immediately leaked to the hostile national press.
The whole scenario of top American leaders being the masterminds behind 9/11 is beyond ridiculous, and those 9/11 Truthers who make or imply such claims—doing so without a single shred of solid evidence—have unfortunately played a major role in discrediting their entire movement. In fact, the common meaning of the “inside job” scenario is so patently absurd and self-defeating that one might even suspect that the claim was encouraged by those seeking to discredit the entire 9/11 Truth movement as a consequence.
The focus on Cheney and Rumsfeld seems particularly ill-directed. Although I’ve never met nor had any dealings with either of those individuals, I was quite actively involved in DC politics during the 1990s, and can say with some assurance that prior to 9/11, neither of them were regarded as Neocons. Instead, they were the archetypical examples of moderate business-type mainstream Republicans, stretching all the way back to their years at the top of the Ford Administration during the mid-1970s.
Skeptics of this claim may note that they signed the 1997 declaration issued by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a leading Neocon foreign policy manifesto organized by Bill Kristol, but I would regard that as something of a red herring. In DC circles, individuals are always recruiting their friends to sign various declarations, which may or may not be indicative of anything, and I remember Kristol trying to get me to sign the PNAC statement as well. Since my private views on that issue were absolutely 100% contrary to the Neocon position, which I regarded as foreign policy lunacy, I deflected his request and very politely turned him down. But I was quite friendly with him at the time, so if I had been someone without strong opinions in that area, I probably would have agreed.
This raises a larger point. By 2000, the Neocons had gained almost total control of all the major conservative/Republican media outlets and the foreign policy wings of nearly all the similarly aligned thinktanks in DC, successfully purging most of their traditional opponents. So although Cheney and Rumsfeld were not themselves Neocons, they were swimming in a Neocon sea, with a very large fraction of all the information they received coming from such sources and with their top aides such as “Scooter” Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas Feith being Neocons. Rumsfeld was already somewhat elderly while Cheney had suffered several heart-attacks starting at age 37, so under those circumstances it may have been relatively easy for them to be shifted toward certain policy positions.
Indeed, the entire demonization of Cheney and Rumsfeld in anti-Iraq War circles has seemed somewhat suspicious to me. I always wondered whether the heavily Jewish liberal media had focused its wrath upon those two individuals in order to deflect culpability from the Jewish Neocons who were the obvious originators of that disastrous policy; and the same may be true of the 9/11 Truthers, who probably feared accusations of anti-Semitism. Regarding that former issue, a prominent Israeli columnist was characteristically blunt on the matter in 2003, strongly suggesting that 25 Neocon intellectuals, nearly all of them Jewish, were primarily responsible for the war. Under normal circumstances, the president himself would have surely been portrayed as the evil mastermind behind the 9/11 plot, but “W” was too widely known for his ignorance for such accusations to be credible.
It does seem entirely plausible that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and other top Bush leaders may have been manipulated into taking certain actions that inadvertently furthered the 9/11 plot, while a few lower-level Bush appointees might have been more directly involved, perhaps even as outright conspirators. But I do not think this is the usual meaning of the “inside job” accusation.
So where do we now stand? It seems very likely that the 9/11 attacks were the work of an organization far more powerful and professionally-skilled than a rag-tag band of nineteen random Arabs armed with box-cutters, but also that the attacks were very unlikely to have been the work of the American government itself. So who actually attacked our country on that fateful day seventeen years ago, killing thousands of our fellow citizens?
Effective intelligence operations are concealed in a hall of mirrors, often extremely difficult for outsiders to penetrate, and false-flag terrorist attacks certainly fall into this category. But if we apply a different metaphor, the complexities of such events may be seen as a Gordian Knot, almost impossible to disentangle, but vulnerable to the sword-stroke of asking the simple question “Who benefited?”
America and most of the world certainly did not, and the disastrous legacy of that fateful day have transformed our own society and wrecked many other countries. The endless American wars soon unleashed have already cost us many trillions of dollars and set our nation on the road to bankruptcy while killing or displacing many millions of innocent Middle Easterners. Most recently, that resulting flood of desperate refugees has begun engulfing Europe, and the peace and prosperity of that ancient continent is now under severe threat.
Our traditional civil liberties and constitutional protections have been drastically eroded, with our society having taken long steps toward becoming an outright police state. American citizens now passively accept unimaginable infringements on their personal freedoms, all originally begun under the guise of preventing terrorism.
I find it difficult to think of any country in the world that clearly gained as a result of the 9/11 attacks and America’s military reaction, with one single, solitary exception.
During 2000 and most of 2001, America was a peaceful prosperous country, but a certain small Middle Eastern nation had found itself in an increasingly desperate situation. Israel then seemed to be fighting for its life against the massive waves of domestic terrorism that constituted the Second Palestinian Intifada.
Ariel Sharon was widely believed to have deliberately provoked that uprising in September 2000 by marching to the Temple Mount backed by a thousand armed police, and the resulting violence and polarization of Israeli society had successfully installed him as Prime Minister in early 2001. But once in office, his brutal measures failed to end the wave of continuing attacks, which increasingly took the form of suicide-bombings against civilian targets. Many believed that the violence might soon trigger a huge outflow of Israeli citizens, perhaps producing a death-spiral for the Jewish state. Iraq, Iran, Libya, and other major Muslim powers were supporting the Palestinians with money, rhetoric, and sometimes weaponry, and Israeli society seemed close to crumbling. I remember hearing from some of my DC friends that numerous Israeli policy experts were suddenly seeking berths at Neocon thinktanks so that they could relocate to America.
Sharon was a notoriously bloody and reckless leader, with a long history of undertaking strategic gambles of astonishing boldness, sometimes betting everything on a single roll of the dice. He had spent decades seeking the Prime Ministership, but having finally obtained it, he now had his back to the wall, with no obvious source of rescue in sight.
The 9/11 attacks changed everything. Suddenly the world’s sole superpower was fully mobilized against Arab and Muslim terrorist movements, especially those connected with the Middle East. Sharon’s close Neocon political allies in America used the unexpected crisis as an opportunity to seize control of America’s foreign policy and national security apparatus, with an NSA staffer later reporting that Israeli generals freely roamed the halls of the Pentagon without any security controls. Meanwhile, the excuse of preventing domestic terrorism was used to implement newly centralized American police controls that were employed to harass or even shut down various anti-Zionist political organizations. One of the Israeli Mossad agents arrested by the police in New York City as he and his fellows were celebrating the 9/11 attacks and producing a souvenir film of the burning World Trade Center towers told the officers that “We are Israelis…Your problems are our problems.” And so it immediately became.
General Wesley Clark reported that soon after the 9/11 attacks he was informed that a secret military plan had somehow come into being under which America would attack and destroy seven major Muslim countries over the next few years, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya, which coincidentally were all of Israel’s strongest regional adversaries and the leading supporters of the Palestinians. As America began to expend enormous oceans of blood and treasure attacking all of Israel’s enemies after 9/11, Israel itself no longer needed to do so. Partly as a consequence, almost no other nation in the world has so enormously improved its strategic and economic situation during the last seventeen years, even while a large fraction of the American population has become completely impoverished during that same period and our national debt has grown to insurmountable levels. A parasite can often grow fat even as its host suffers and declines.
I have emphasized that for many years after the 9/11 attacks I paid little attention to the details and had only the vaguest notion that there even existed an organized 9/11 Truth movement. But if someone had ever convinced me that the terrorist attacks had been false-flag operations and someone other than Osama had been responsible, my immediate guess would have been Israel and its Mossad.
Certainly no other nation in the world can remotely match Israel’s track-record of remarkably bold high-level assassinations and false-flag attacks, terrorist and otherwise, against other countries, even including America and its military. Furthermore, the enormous dominance of Jewish and pro-Israel elements in the American establishment media and increasingly that of many other major countries in the West has long ensured that even when the solid evidence of such attacks was discovered, very few ordinary Americans would ever hear those facts.
The pattern of behavior is really quite remarkable. Even prior to the establishment of the State of Israel, the various Zionist factions assassinated Lord Moyne, the British Minister for the Middle East, and Count Folke Bernadotte, the UN Peace Negotiator, and made unsuccessful attempts to kill President Harry S. Truman and British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin, while even discussing the possible assassination of Prime Minister Winston Churchill. There seems considerable evidence that the Israeli Mossad subsequently played a central role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy because of the enormous pressure he was applying to persuade Israel to abandon its nuclear weapons development. Mossad defector Victor Ostrovsky warned the American government that Israel was planning to assassinate President George H.W. Bush in the early 1990s due to the bitter conflict over financial aid, and apparently those warnings were taken seriously. As recently as 2012, the editor of the largest Jewish newspaper in Atlanta publicly called for the assassination of President Barack Obam a over his policy differences with Israel.
The history of military and terrorist attacks is even more striking. One of history’s largest terrorist attacks prior to 9/11 was the 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem by Zionist militants dressed as Arabs, which killed 91 people and largely destroyed the structure. In the famous Lavon Affair of 1954, Israeli agents launched a wave of terrorist attacks against Western targets in Egypt, intending to have those blamed on anti-Western Arab groups. There are strong claims that in 1950 Israeli Mossad agents launched a wave of false-flag terrorist bombings against Jewish targets in Baghdad, successfully using those violent methods to help persuade Iraq’s thousand-year Jewish community to emigrate to the Jewish state. In 1967, Israel launched a deliberate air and sea attack against the U.S.S. Liberty, intending to leave no survivors, and ultimately killing or wounding over 200 American servicemen before word of the attack reached our Sixth Fleet and it was called off.
The enormous extent of pro-Israel influence in world political and media circles meant that none of these brutal attacks ever drew serious retaliation, and in nearly all cases, they were quickly thrown down the memory hole, so that today probably no more than one in a hundred Americans is even aware of them. Furthermore, most of these incidents came to light due to chance circumstances, so we may easily suspect that many other attacks of a similar nature have never become part of the historical record.
Once we accept that the 9/11 attacks were probably a false-flag operation, a central clue to the likely perpetrators has been their extraordinary success in ensuring that such a wealth of enormously suspicious evidence has been totally ignored by virtually the entire American media, whether liberal or conservative, left-wing or right-wing.
The only other such extreme cases that come to my mind almost invariably involve either Jewish issues or Israel. For example, virtually no Americans are today aware of the close Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s that played a crucial role in the establishment of the State of Israel. Similarly, although our Western media has enshrined it as one of the central events of the twentieth century, there seems a good likelihood that the Jewish Holocaust of the Second World War is either substantially or almost entirely fraudulent. Even highly successful false-flag terrorist operations will tend to leave behind a certain number of individual clues, and possessing the media power to cause that evidence to vanish from perceived reality is an extremely important tool for such operations.
In the particular case at hand, the considerable number of zealously pro-Israel Neocons situated just beneath the public surface of the Bush Administration in 2001 could have greatly facilitated both the successful organization of the attacks and their effective cover-up and concealment, with Libby, Wolfowitz, Feith, and Richard Perle being merely the most obvious names. Whether such individuals were knowing conspirators or merely had personal ties allowing them to be exploited in furthering the plot is entirely unclear.
Most of this information must surely have long been apparent to knowledgeable observers, and I strongly suspect that many individuals who had paid much greater attention than myself to the details of the 9/11 attacks may have quickly formed a tentative conclusion along these same times. But for obvious social and political reasons, there is a great reluctance to publicly point the finger of blame towards Israel on a matter of such enormous magnitude. Hence, except for a few fringe activists here and there, such dark suspicions remained private.
Meanwhile, the leaders of the 9/11 Truth movement probably feared they would be destroyed by media accusations of deranged anti-Semitism if they had ever expressed even a whisper of such ideas. This political strategy may have been necessary, but by failing to name any plausible culprit, they created a vacuum that was soon filled by “useful idiots” who shouted “inside job!” while pointing an accusing finger toward Cheney and Rumfeld, and thereby did so much to discredit the entire 9/11 Truth movement.
This unfortunate conspiracy of silence finally ended in 2009 when Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at the US Army War College, stepped forward and publicly declared that the Israeli Mossad had very likely been responsible for the 9/11 attacks, writing a series of columns on the subject, and eventually presenting his views in a number of media interviews, along with additional analyses.
Obviously, such explosive charges never reached the pages of my morning Times, but they did receive considerable if transitory coverage in portions of the alternative media, and I remember seeing the links very prominently featured at Antiwar.com and widely discussed elsewhere. I had never previously heard of Sabrosky, so I consulted my archiving system and immediately discovered that he had a perfectly respectable record of publication on military affairs in mainstream foreign policy periodicals and had also held a series of academic appointments at prestigious institutions. Reading one or two of his articles on 9/11, I felt he made a rather persuasive case for Mossad involvement, with some of his information already known to me but much of it not.
Since I was very busy with my software work and had never spent any time investigating 9/11 or reading any of the books on the topic, my belief in his claims back then was obviously quite tentative. But now that I have finally looked into the topic in much greater detail and done a great deal of reading, I think it seems quite likely that his 2009 analysis was entirely correct.
I would particularly recommend his long 2011 interview on Iranian Press TV, which I first watched just a couple of days ago. He came across as highly credible and forthright in his claims:
He also provided a pugnacious conclusion in a much longer 2010 radio interview:
Sabrosky focused much of his attention upon a particular segment of a Dutch documentary film on the 9/11 attacks produced several years earlier. In that fascinating interview, a professional demolition expert named Danny Jowenko who was largely ignorant of the 9/11 attacks immediately identified the filmed collapse of WTC Building 7 as a controlled-demolition, and the remarkable clip was broadcast worldwide on Press TV and widely discussed across the Internet.
And by a very strange coincidence, just three days after Jowenko’s broadcast video interview had received such heavy attention, he had the misfortune to die in a frontal collision with a tree in Holland. I’d suspect that the community of professional demolition experts is a small one, and Jowenko’s surviving industry colleagues may have quickly concluded that serious misfortune might visit those who rendered controversial expert opinions on the collapse of the three World Trade Center towers.
Meanwhile, the ADL soon mounted a huge and largely successful effort to have Press TV banned in the West for promoting “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories,” even persuading YouTube to entirely eliminate the huge video archive of those past shows, notably including Sabrosky’s long interview.
Most recently, Sabrosky provided an hour-long presentation at this June’s Deep Truth video panel conference, during which he expressed considerable pessimism about America’s political predicament, and suggested that the Zionist control over our politics and media had grown even stronger over the last decade.
His discussion was soon rebroadcast by Guns & Butter, a prominent progressive radio program, which as a consequence was soon purged from its home station after seventeen years of great national popularity and strong listener support.
The late Alan Hart, a very distinguished British broadcast journalist and foreign correspondent, also broke his silence in 2010 and similarly pointed to the Israelis as the likely culprits behind the 9/11 attacks. Those interested may wish to listen to his extended interview.
Journalist Christopher Bollyn was one of the first writers to explore the possible Israeli links to the 9/11 attacks, and the details contained in his long series of newspaper articles are often quoted by other researchers. In 2012, he gathered together this material and published it in the form of a book entitled Solving 9-11, thereby making his information on the possible role of the Israeli Mossad available to a much wider audience, with a version being available online. Unfortunately his printed volume severely suffers from the typical lack of resources available to the writers on the political fringe, with poor organization and frequent repetition of the same points due to its origins in a set of individual articles, and this may diminish its credibility among some readers. So those who purchase it should be forewarned about these serious stylistic weaknesses.
Probably a much better compendium of the very extensive evidence pointing to the Israeli hand behind the 9/11 attacks has been more recently provided by French journalist Laurent Guyénot, both in his 2017 book JFK-9/11: 50 Years of the Deep State and also his 8,500 word article “9/11 was an Israeli Job”, published concurrently with this one and providing a far greater wealth of detail than is contained here. While I would not necessarily endorse all of his claims and arguments, his overall analysis seems fully consistent with my own.
These writers have provided a great deal of material in support of the Israeli Mossad Hypothesis, but I would focus attention on just one important point. We would normally expect that terrorist attacks resulting in the complete destruction of three gigantic office buildings in New York City and an aerial assault on the Pentagon would be an operation of enormous size and scale, involving very considerable organizational infrastructure and manpower. In the aftermath of the attacks, the US government undertook great efforts to locate and arrest the surviving Islamic conspirators, but scarcely managed to find a single one. Apparently, they had all died in the attacks themselves or otherwise simply vanished into thin air.
But without making much effort at all, the American government did quickly round up and arrest some 200 Israeli Mossad agents, many of whom had been based in exactly the same geographical locations as the purported 19 Arab hijackers. Furthermore, NYC police arrested some of these agents while they were publicly celebrating the 9/11 attacks, and others were caught driving vans in the New York area containing explosives or their residual traces. Most of these Mossad agents refused to answer any questions, and many of those who did failed polygraph tests, but under massive political pressure all were eventually released and deported back to Israel. A couple of years ago, much of this information was very effectively presented in a short video available on YouTube.
There is another fascinating tidbit that I have very rarely seen mentioned. Just a month after the 9/11 attacks, two Israelis were caught sneaking weapons and explosives into the Mexican Parliament building, a story that naturally produced several banner-headlines in leading Mexican newspapers at the time but was greeted by total silence in the American media. Eventually, under massive political pressure, all charges were dropped and the Israeli agents were deported back home. This remarkable incident was only reported on a small Hispanic-activist website, and discussed in a few other places. Some years ago I easily found the scanned front pages of the Mexican newspapers reporting those dramatic events on the Internet, but I can no longer easily locate them. The details are obviously somewhat fragmentary and possibly garbled, but certainly quite intriguing.
One might speculate that if supposed Islamic terrorists had followed up their 9/11 attacks by attacking and destroying the Mexican parliament building a month later, Latin American support for America’s military invasions in the Middle East would have been greatly magnified. Furthermore, any scenes of such massive destruction in the Mexican capital by Arab terrorists would surely have been broadcast non-stop on Univision, America’s dominant Spanish-language network, fully solidifying Hispanic support for President Bush’s military endeavors.
Although my growing suspicions about the 9/11 attacks stretch back a decade or more, my serious investigation of the topic is quite recent, so I am certainly a newcomer to the field. But sometimes an outsider can notice things that may escape the attention of those who have spent so many years deeply immersed in a given topic.
From my perspective, it seems that a huge fraction of the 9/11 Truth community spends far too much of its time absorbed in the particular details of the attacks, debating the precise method by which the World Trade Center towers in New York were brought down or what actually struck the Pentagon. But these sorts of issues seem of little ultimate significance.
I would argue that the only important aspect of these technical issues is whether the overall evidence is sufficiently strong to establish the falsehood of the official 9/11 narrative and also demonstrate that the attacks must have been the work of a highly sophisticated organization with access to advanced military technology rather than rag-tag band of 19 Arabs armed with box-cutters. Beyond that, none of those details matter.
In that regard, I believe that the volume of factual material collected by determined researchers over the last seventeen years has easily met that requirement, perhaps even ten or twenty times over. For example, even agreeing upon a single particular item such as the clear presence of nano-thermite, a military-grade explosive compound, would immediately satisfy those two criteria. So I see little point in endless debates over whether nano-thermite was used, or nano-thermite plus something else, or just something else entirely. And such complex technical debates may serve to obscure the larger picture, while confusing and intimidating any casually-interested outlookers, thereby being quite counter-productive to the overall goals of the 9/11 Truth movement.
Once we have concluded that the culprits were part of a highly-sophisticated organization, we can then focus on the Who and the Why, which surely would be of greater importance than the particular details of the How. Yet currently all the endless debate over the How tends to crowd out the Who and the Why, and I wonder whether this unfortunate situation might even be intentional.
Perhaps one reason is that once sincere 9/11 Truthers do focus on those more important questions, the vast weight of the evidence clearly points in a single direction, implicating Israel and its Mossad intelligence service, with the case being overwhelmingly strong in motive, means, and opportunity. And leveling accusations of blame at Israel and its domestic collaborators for the greatest attack ever launched against America on our own soil entails enormous social and political risks.
But such difficulties must be weighed against the reality of three thousand American civilian lives and the subsequent seventeen years of our multi-trillion-dollar wars, which have produced tens of thousands of dead or wounded American servicemen and the death or displacement of many millions of innocent Middle Easterners.
The members of the 9/11 Truth movement must therefore ask themselves whether or not “Truth” is indeed the central goal of their efforts.
Related Reading:
- 9/11 was an Israeli Job by Laurent Guyénot
- 9/11 Contradictions by David Ray Griffin
- American Pravda: The JFK Assassination, Part II – Who Did It?
- American Pravda: Holocaust Denial
- Our American Pravda
Ron, Thank you for posting on article on the 17th anniversary of 9/11!
All one has to do is to notice the successive squibs on the successive floors just below the collapsing line to notice that the floors were indeed wired for demolition:
Slow motion collapse of WTC:
The New Pearl Harbor (one of the best 9/11 documentaries about 5 hrs) (thanks to L.K.):
THE ANATOMY OF A GREAT DECEPTION – How 9-11 Woke Me Up – David Hooper Film: https://vimeo.com/106233510
Pentagon https://youtu.be/rn3A3c_FAOw
Pentagon flight recorder mystery (excellent review of flight 77 flight recorder): https://youtu.be/mmGi5YeQ_Bw
9/11 zero: https://youtu.be/3puhwRQMhZY
21 Recorded Tower/Command Calls, NOT BELIEFS-9/11 World Trade Center Attacks-Drones Intercepting:
30 AUGUST 2018 — Corbett Report interview by James Corbett with Mick Harrison and David Meiswinkle who discuss the First Amended Grand Jury Petition and the follow-up Mandamus filing:
https://lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/video-interviews/
https://www.911tap.org/557-news-releases/736-lawyers-file-doj-petition-demanding-9-11-grand-jury-investigation
http://truthinmedia.com/lawyers-family-members-petition-grand-jury-investigation-9-11/
For every truth seekers considerations….
So, Would anyone like to take a crack explaining the fact of the 99 day long fire on the “GROUND ZERO” site?
Well for nearly 10 years i have been doing just that…
I have seen Zero refutations for my theory.
FDNY called the end of fire on December 19 2001.
Now what could have caused a rubble filled concrete basement to burn for 99 days?
What could have caused reports of boots melting,molten steel,Like a foundry and shit like the ‘Meteorite’?
How do you get 1200 degree temperature measurements from a satellite Infrared thermography a month after the event?
Every single rescue dog that worked that pile is DEAD, Most of the persons that worked that pile are sick or dead.
Sure there was and asbestos part to play,A certain americium touch from the Smoke detectors,and a mercury component…. but do you think the damage from asbestos and those others would be limited to the first responders …??
These two ground breaking worlds tallest buildings both had a device installed on the 110 floor, Floor space of VERY coveted nature for TV and radio equipment.. Space measured by the inch for it’s placement at the top of those towers…
That device was known as a tuned mass damper system… A system that made the very flexible towers work in the New York winds…. With out them working the tower had to be evacuated lest the occupants be made seasick from the swaying. If you worked near the top and had to endure this you would never set foot in this building again from the fear.
Now this Tuned Mass Damper is a well understood thing in very tall buildings, The mass is used to counteract the wind loading and spring back effect of counter loading turbulence around the outside of the square tube structure.
A building like this had to have a very advanced version of a TMD to make the building safe, An active tuned mass damper system. The mass was controlled by a series of connections like Shock Absorbers, These were used to digitally modulate the motions of the damper to increase the efficiency of the system and give it a better damping signature in the environment they worked.
I contend the main portion of those dampers the mass part were made of two parts a concrete box with a steel bottom plating and a filling of Uranium-238 granules for the mass part. With the limited and costly space requirements this would be the most efficient material to use to do this work, And had a secondary use…. After life of the structure had expired.
Uranium-238 is what is known a pyrophoric substance.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrophoricity
If you get it hot enough it will burn until it is totally consumed, Now i have never intentionally burned 600 PLUS TONS of U-238 but i can tell you it will burn in excess of 5600 degrees… And it’s not going to burn fast either…. But rather as a process over time according to the environment it is contained.
Each tower had a TMD system, Each of those systems was over 600 tons i weight. That 600 tons of weight was directly over the top of the express elevator shaft… That shaft having only a few parts of obstruction to the basements. Or to say it another way… Only a few secondary explosions away from a perfect drop chute from the bottom of the damper to the lower parking levels of each tower.
Once burning there is no hope of putting out these fires. And has anyone else noted the symptoms of the men working at ‘GROUND ZERO” have the same traits of GULF WAR SYNDROME???
So you have read the claim i have about the fire that burned for 99 days without any added fuel. I claim these men are victims of a Uranium-238 fire from structural building components.
But the Structural components part is SECONDARY to the main use for all that uranium, Evidence disposal.
Or to say it another way… The twin towers were built from day one with this 9/11 event in mind.
Later on i will let you all in on how they used sheet explosives to do the demo… That too was built in from day one of this project.
#2
Anyone want to hear the other bit?
Fuck it here goes….
Now this theory has had some years work to fit the many claims into a tolerable narrative of the Demo and WHY it was a demo.
I started with the video record, I watched every frame over and over again, All the angles and from all the vantage points.
Then i looked at the things needed to make the video possible, That took some doing.
Then i looked at the gravity of building a pair of towers in the heart of the financial district…. The shit i saw in doing this was stunning…
So to part one.
By now everyone that is thinking and sane can tell these towers were victims of 3 controlled demolition. Much has been said to cloud and obfuscate what really happened, Read (mini-nukes),(Nano-thermate),(Thermite). but all that is just plain Crap. Reach over flip the lever and flush it down.
There has been a gargantuan play book of the towers were weak and near ready to fall bullshit flowing from many angles, Well i will just tell you that is also Crap,Flush #2.
That being flushed into the septic tank we can move on to INSURANCE and the persons that play that game…Now you don’t get involved in something like a pair of 1400 foot tall buildings without having given the matter some serious thought, And given the real estate the were being built on the entire lifespan of them HAD to be dealt with from the first shovel full of dirt to their eventual removal after they had reached their end of life cycle. Many of the structures in this sort of environment have similar regulatory constraints on their construction and many of them fall into the ‘If shit goes bad WHAT THEN’ category.
Insurance fellows are annoyingly like screaming toddlers about liability and who is on the hook if shit does indeed go bad…. They produce scenario after scenario to cover their asses and avoid having to pay out huge sums of cash. These towers are perfect examples of this game theory run amok.
You could not do anything until these forces have a compelling path to fallow from point ‘A’ to point ‘Z’ with them still holding all that loot.
This is where it gets real good. If you want to put this pair of worlds tallest buildings on the WTC site you had to assure them they would never fear about the liability. Being so tall they were a natural for aircraft crashes, So they had to be strong enough to withstand SEVERAL Boeing 707 aircraft hitting them( you may be wrong if you think you know what ‘Several’ actually means. I think the real number was 6, but some say the game scape went to assurances up to seven of them.
Now the regulators demanded that above all the other dangers of very tall structures these ones had to fend off some serious threats.
So fire and terrorism or any other threat the other buildings surrounding these structures might have to endure had to have thick volumes of assurance that none of them would visit… Pucker factor #1 for the engineers. Then they had to deal with the eventual ‘What to do after they are rusted junk and need to be removed’ part of the whole scheme… Pucker factor #2. But wait it gets even better, The common industry method of this part of a building like these would produce a HUGE level of LIABILITY ot the owners of these structures… and here is where you will have to do some life sentences to the men that OK’d this plan… They decided that Yes they will eventually have to be brought down and yes there was going to be some real bank killing damages to their cash flows, So what to do….
Call in the Big gun Lawyers and run the game engine until the whole mess is gravy… so what did they think up? Deflect liability with legislation about ‘Acts of Terror’
Once they had a plan they went to the engineers and said ‘Well, what do you think, Can you do it?’ And the pay loving engineer set said sure thin boss not a problem at all.
Once they had a mandate they started to work out the logistics of covering all the bases in regard what was needed to make it all work, If they but Apollo they will buy ANYTHING. So the put to work, First need was a plan to make the perfect demo job for a building that was not even on paper yet, The problem was that for all the chess pieces to have enough room on the board much of the demo work had to be built into the structure at the initial stages of assembly, but taking a page from the NASA boys they came up with the corrugated floor pans that every single floor would eventually be built.
Those would be made from two near identical sheets formed so as when they were put together there was enough space in between for a RDX charge just thick enough to do the job, then the two sheets and the sheet explosive were induction welded on every seam to ‘ADD strength’ and bond it into one single unit… Then they made the entire puzzle of this building with these units, I don’t recall the number of them but their was a shit load of them. Every floor was started with those pans in a grid, and once the concrete was poured, Nobody would ever know that the towers had a bomb on every single floor hidden away in those units. Part one of the big show was in play, the time was the early days of construction.
The next big deal need was to deal with all the structural steel this pair was built.. This one needed some real intense thinking, but scum bag engineers had a book full of nasty shit to pull for those that pay the bills and supply the power they want… so they went to work and thought up the Asbestos fireproofing. I think the term used was ” I got an angle’ and like that Stern went bonkers and the towers were liberally coated with the then known carcinogenic substance, and just to up the nasty meter even higher they tiled much of the floor work with tiles of the same shit Asbestos… What they wanted was an excuse to later do a bunch of refitting of that material fuck up and do some EXTRA additions…in the form of copper shape charges, once they applied the charges they re applied the new fireproofing and nobody was any wiser and they had part two dealt with, so now on to part three…
What the fuck do we do with all the required records of all this clandestine work done to these towers that they needed to keep that fall going right on target of that foot print… Well like most they shoved it all into the basements for ‘Safe keeping’ as the day drew near they hoovered up a shitload of the bullion stored there and removed it, leaving a token amount to point at.,,
That’s where our previous friend the TMD came in, It’s job was to ensure every single thing used to make the whole sick plan work every drawing every inventory every blueprint every single computer file EVERYTHING that could convict them of this crime was totally destroyed 100%… Sounds like a job for a blast furnace to me chimed one of the minions and the U-238 TMD was GO!
After enough time had passed and the big show drew near they had a power down pow-wow and installed all the logic and detonators, all the delays and other bits needed to do in stuff like the elevators and other large shit like the hat truss and associated gear, into the Free spaces above everyone’s head hidden away inside the ceiling spaces waited a command from building #7 that had similar work done to it’s structure… All that remained was the holy fucking shit of 2 aircraft crashes. and the play was ready to start.
Everyone was a witness to the events, everyone saw the falling man, Everyone saw the smoke and fire… and everyone bought the instantaneous lies that came pouring out of every single yammering bobble head working in TeeVeee land… Bought the lies that came form the highest positions of power. They paid BILLIONS upon BILLIONS to get this show started and they went nuts like no other before them, they blew the shit out of several countries in the Mid-East, they looted every single bar of gold they could lay their grimy blood soaked hands on and sat back and dared you to think about the height of their super crime and do anything.
We now sit here nearing the end of 2018, Not one of the persons with the blood on their hands is even being looked at let alone dealt with…. Because you did not get my memo… Well you cannot un-ring the bell no matter how hard you try… Now do your fucking job America and deal with this event before you all regret not doing so.
Time is short now folks, The ball is in your court…
There are so many fascinating, unexplained things about 9/11. Here are my top three:
1) Follow the money. I believe it is a 100% verifiable fact is that there was insider trading prior to 9/11. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44741.htm
2) It’s been well documented that the WTC buildings were not full that day. Hundreds stayed home. Either you can say it’s subconscious physic abilities at work (which I don’t discount) or people knew something was going to happen. The planes used were also less than half full. And the pentagon section hit was nearly deserted relative to normal sections. Do you believe in luck, reader?
3) A retired pilot, Philip Marshall, who believed 9/11 was an inside job and later committed suicide, tried to re-create the flights using a flight simulator. He claimed he could not do it. The angles and speeds that the planes were supposed to have travelled were beyond expert level flying and beyond the capabilities of the airplanes themselves. The actual film of the WTC planes confirms this, so it’s not debatable. The pentagon plane was supposed to have done a full throttle, tight corkscrew descent right into the target and this proved virtually impossible to redo. Among other questions, it begs the question why amateur hijackers would choose such paths, let alone pull them off flawlessly.
There’s a lot to chew over here. Thank you.
This is the most incontovertible piece of evidence that building 7 was a controlled demolition. I have never heard another plausible explanation for how three television networks can seemingly broadcast prior knowledge of the collapse. The sole plausible explanation being that some reputable party who was aware the demolition would take place and was tasked with informing the networks, got the timing wrong and informed them a bit before the fact.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI
Wow, Ron’s finally woken up.
Welcome to the real world, Mr. Unz!
Fail.
This ‘truther’ schtick is absurd. Remember that Radical Muslims also did a number of other large terrorist attacks outside the US (such as London 2005, Madrid 2004, Mumbai 2006, Kenya and Tanzania 1998, Beirut Marine Barracks 1983, Bali 2002, France 2015, etc.). The notion that the biggest one was a false flag is absurd, because to believe that, one has to ignore the large number of other attacks that Radical Muslims have undertaken.
I‘ve already written quite a bit about 9/11 at UR, so I’m happy to see this article by our host Ron Unz, and since I am fatigued after a long journey, I will gladly take the opportunity to refer to some of my earlier work here:
There are several quibbles. Nano-thermite is a weak explosive. To quote myself:
https://www.unz.com/article/creative-chaos/#comment-2347257
Magic Airplanes:
Michael Hezarkhani, CNN
via 911planeshoax dot com
https://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-911-betty-ong-and-the-mystery-of-black-betty/#comment-2314925
Back to Black Betty:
So how did Betty Ong acquire the additional Chinese name?
https://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-911-betty-ong-and-the-mystery-of-black-betty/#comment-2303125
Here, the last word — for now — goes to George W. Bush:
Another mistake in execution that supports Ron’s assertion that it was not an insider job (Cheney Rumsfeld, etc.)
Flight 93 did not (could not possibly) crash whole into the ground.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/unanswered-questions-the-mystery-of-flight-93-173206.html
” The wide displacement of the plane’s debris, one explanation for which might be an explosion of some sort aboard prior to the crash. Letters – Flight 93 was carrying 7,500 pounds of mail to California – and other papers from the plane were found eight miles (13km) away from the scene of the crash. A sector of one engine weighing one ton was found 2,000 yards away. This was the single heaviest piece recovered from the crash, and the biggest, apart from a piece of fuselage the size of a dining-room table. The rest of the plane, consistent with an impact calculated to have occurred at 500mph, disintegrated into pieces no bigger than two inches long. Other remains of the plane were found two miles away near a town called Indian Lake. All of these facts, widely disseminated, were confirmed by the coroner Wally Miller.”
The plane had to be shot down, and Cheney probably had to give the order. He was not planning on this. This, clearly, was not supposed to be how it happened. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5GgZa9V0A8
There are 2 types of deceptions. 1. External 2. Internal. External is when someone lies to you, internal is when you lie to yourself.
1. Propaganda is an example of external deception, or these days also called – fake news.
2. Conspiracy theories are examples of Internal deception. Conspiracy theories can also originate outside the individual, but quite often, the individual adds to the content that originated outside of him-self.
There are few differences between external deception victims and self-deception victims. The narratives of propaganda are usually very simple – to the point of absurdity – so even the dumbest simpleton can digest them.
The narrative of a conspiracy theory is like from a Tom Clancy novel, it has an exciting plot and can easily make a best-selling grade novel – but usually it’s as truthful as propaganda. I will give credit to conspiracy theorists that they are usually more intelligent than the consumers of propaganda.
The conspiracy theorists are also proactive –as I said, they like to add some content to the stories that they’ve heard, where propaganda consumers are just passive receptors who don’t offer any improvements on the content of propaganda.
The other credit that I would give to the conspiracy theorists is that they are usually well-meaning people. Where the writers of propaganda are some of the most really, truly evil people. But enough of my theories about propaganda and conspiracies.
Do I believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theories? I don’t. Why? Because it wasn’t necessary for the neocons to take such a huge risk in order to “win” Americans’ approval for another war. Why are there inconsistencies in the official story of 9/11? Because they were protecting Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia and their oil are the main supporters of the dollar. If the US public turned against SA – which in turn started selling oil for anything other than the dollar, US economy would be pretty much finished.
Wow. Great work Ron!
About the oil connection. I don’t think 9/11 was necessarily run at the behest of oil companies like Michael Moore suggested, but on a much higher level the control of oil is central to why 9/11 happened and is completely consistent with Neocon ideology.
The key was to keep the flow of oil to Europe under Neocon control. This means Saudis, Kuwait, and Qatar supplying the oil and gas and not Iran and Russia.
Pepe Escobar has written about this a lot and dubs it Pipelinestan. Since these Middle Eastern countries are beholden to sell oil for dollars, it makes sense to push out interlopers like Iran and Russia.
This explains why we are at war with Syria since it is a key player in who’s pipelines win, and thus who gets to print money at will.
This was before One Belt One Road, but the same principles apply only now it is even more important for the Neocons to win there.
I like the way Ron Unz details the journey undertaken from a point of unquestioning acceptance of the official narrative to the point of questioning every bit of it.
Lie to me just once and that’s it, we’re done! The key point here is the awareness that those aligned against the American people are utterly utterly ruthless but should Americans ever respond with equal ruthlessness, well that would be just hatred.
For years now we’ve all heard of “our” brave heroes in uniform but there’s barely been a squeak heard from any of them on this crucial matter.
One question:
If no airplanes flew into the buildings including the pentagon, where did they and the passengers go?
Re the claimed decreases in crime rates in cities with a massive influx of immigrants from south of the border, this is most likely due to the ethnic cleansing of blacks by better armed and organized latino gangs. Hispanic violent crime rates are typically 2-3 times White rates, while Black rates are 5-7 times White rates. Therefore if you just look at rates within these cities you could expect to see statistically significant decreases in crime. As you say, more studies are needed, but I think this is the likely explanation.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=latino+gang+blacks+california+cities+%22ethnic+cleansing%22&t=ffsb&ia=images
Excellent essay! I would like to give you two sources to round this excellent essay off. 1) http://www.debunking911.com and 2) Corbett Reports “9/11 Follow The Money”
If you don’t have time to watch the 1 hour video, please jump to 31:47 mark about Ptech “god like software” and please let us all know what you think. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3xgjxJwedA
In reading the Pravda series, somewhere along the way I got the gut feel that Ron had, perhaps inadvertently set the controls for the heart of the sun. It’s 8 years on, but it looks like he got there.
A question if I may, Ron.
Was your denigration of commenters here (myself included) as “conspiracy nuts” in the past an attempt at misdirection, or did your Road to Damascus moment come very recently?
A 2nd question.
Do you have a security detail?
Nice.
I was wondering when this topic would come up.
My program: constitutional amendments
1. Citizenship: no duals, office holding by 3rd gen Americans ie. loyalty, white only immigrants
2. Sedition: capital punishment
3Campaign finance: public funding
Either America reforms shortly or violent upheaval is inevitable. At this point I’d support a military .junta to reform this country. We need treason trials, executions and expulsions. Neo-cohens are at the top of the list. The betrayal of America by subversives is the murder of freedom not just a nation.
BYOR
Congratulations, Ron! This has to be your magnum opus!
Well, we have established that only Israel benefitted from 9/11 – none else. So, with respect to cui bono, there is only one eligible candidate.
Solving any crime is a combination of determining motive, means, and opportunity. I think you have correctly identified the motive, proving the other two may be a tad harder.
Did Israel have the means? I believe they did but it would be hard to prove. A compliant mass media provided the air cover to hush up any weaknesses in the official narrative. Zionist control of the media is hardly a secret. A number of zionist players were prominent in furthering that narrative, and even Thomas Keene indicated that the 9/11 Commission report was manipulated by powerful forces. Who was responsible for all the evidence surrounding the towers being shipped off to China? Who was responsible for NIST providing a scientifically impossible report of the collapse of the towers and refusing to explore the possibility of explosives, as required by their own standards? Zionists have injected themselves into positions of power everywhere in government, but who is the mastermind?
As to opportunity, how coincidental that a drill simulating an aerial attack on the towers was happening exactly at the same time as the actual attack. Who was responsible for organizing this drill and who knew about it? This was a diabolical way to have air traffic controllers, and perhaps even NORAD stand down. I seem to recall that drills of the same nature as the “terrorist attack” were also in progress during the London Underground bombing as well as the Boston Marathon event. So many coincidences boggle the mind!
An honest investigation would rip the veil off of this deception, but the probability of that happening decreases with each passing day. A venal political establishment, blackmailed or bought by Israel (as they like to boast unashamedly) ensures that our downward spiral will not be arrested by those whom we have elected to protect us.
It remains for us to save ourselves.
Ron, I commend you on your extraordinary website, and on the clarity and persuasiveness of your many articles. What remains is providing a means of organizing and uniting our fellow citizens to gather their pitchforks and torches and bring down the infernal castle and set ablaze its monsters within.
You have done a yeoman’s job of raising awareness of our plight and more Americans are awake than ever before. We understand the problem – now we need a solution. We need to organize and unite.
” The entire purpose of terrorism is to allow a small organization to show the world that it can inflict serious losses upon a powerful state ”
Nobody seems to realise that these serious losses nowhere ever were inflicted.
I will not go into detail, with examples, but it is not very difficult to hit a complicated western society into, in any case, disruption for several days.
3000 USA deaths, if my information is correct the USA has 30.000 traffic deaths each year.
As to conspiracies, the denial of conspiracies, any serious history book is full of conspiracies.
The Dutch Orange who succeeded in becoming king of England, a master conspirator.
The Ribbentrop Molotov, conspiracy, the 1956 Israel, GB and French conspiracy against Egypt, the Liberty conspiracy, McNamara with Israel, the pre 1914 conspiracy between GB, France and the tsar, examples galore.
C. V. Wedgwood, ´William the Silent, William of Nassau, Prince of Orange, 1533 – 1584’, London, 1945
Mario Toscano, ‘Designs in Diplomacy, Pages from European Diplomatic History in the Twentieth Century’, 1970 Baltimore
This last book, nothing but recorded conspiracies
WTC 7 is destroyed from bottom to top, consistent with controlled demolition. On the other hand, what I see looking at the videos of the fall of the Twin Towers, in the visible parts, the South one collapses from impact to bottom, the top part isn’t visible due to smoke and dust, afterwards the North one collapses from impact to top and from impact to bottom. That’s one heck of an engineering feat for a controlled demolition imho.
https://www.google.fr/search?as_q=tower+collapse+9%2F11+video&as_epq=&as_oq=north+south
Such mass free falling to the ground is, again imho, not unlikely to provoke a mini earthquake, and send a shock wave shaking the foundations of WTC 7.
I don’t have enough knowledge to forge a definite opinion. I think that just as in the case of the assassination of JFK, we will all long be dead before the truth comes out. Just saying that how I see those buildings fall is not inconsistent with the official version.
The next step for unz.com. The pre-selected core of readers, honed over these last years will take heed. The sorting out, will be a pain. No big data searches that can be automated to fish for meaningful nuggets. The work method should be systemized. If not abused as at Wikipedia, this should become the asset that gets unz.com into history. Glad you picked my bone and ran with it. Another way of putting it, relevant comments belong in the article. Paul C. R. and no comments is the too easy way out.
As for 9/11, a case of measuring the distance between deaf as in the public domain, the street and dumb as in the grandiose silliness (use a bulldozer instead of a spade) of the elites. Or if one prefers, in absolute, “our elites are not up to the game, but well tuned into cajoling to the under-world”.
Resulting in the above, a question not taken up by any of the intelligence writers at the Unz blog so far, what matters proportionately more in designing and implementing policies, the average, mean (or any in-group for that matter) of society (protracting in the elites comparatively,) or pulling in outlier talent into decision making. The cathedral or the space ship.
Thank you Mr Unz. You are doing a great service to mankind whether you are right or you are wrong.
It is very easy to demonstrate that the ability to analyze is given to the few, not the many. The adherence to the dogmatic beliefs of religion, despite being contradictory among their variations is sufficient testament to an individual’s ability to passionately believe in concepts that contradict an equally passionate belief held by another individual. Both cannot be true. I do not think it at all unreasonable to assume that some very bright people are capable of understanding this predominant human failing and exploiting it.
How else can we explain the deployment of snipers firing into an unarmed crowd of demonstrators through a security fence being spun as “defense” and a majority of other wise reasonable people buying it? I cannot imagine a World in which this can occur without the cynical manipulations of interested parties well versed in the extent of the general public’s gullibility.
Holmes’ “dog that did not bark” is exemplified by the media’s treatment of 911. All the Israel boxes get a tick – capability, track record, motivation, opportunity and even some direct evidence (the dancing Israelis) – yet nowhere did the media even speculate (even just to dismiss the possibility) that this could have been an Israeli op. I find that quite curious.
Rationalization for Kristallnacht of the 21 -st. century had to be way more spectacular than one by German Nazis.
Sheeple were exposed and gotten used Spielberg’s Star Wars FX.
The coup succeeded beyond organizers wildest imagination.
Majority of beings living in the USA, their colonies and countries under various neoliberal fascist regimes are kept obedient by instruments of mass indoctrination.
Mr.Adolf and his partners are smiling from above or bellow.
Excellent article.
I found this part of your article to be the most fascinating.
Another fascinating part of the article below.
As for Dick Cheney, he seems to be a fairly devious character. According to Phillip Giraldi, Cheney ordered the forgery of the Habbush letter, which falsely showed an Iraq-Al Qaeda link and an active attempt to buy nuclear weapons grade uranium from Niger. Cheney also seems to have played a role in helping Haliburton to secure $40 billion in no-bid contracts and avoid prosecution for accounting fraud.
Does this mean Cheney was behind 9/11? Not neccessarily, but I don’t see him as a sedate figure. He seems fairly extreme in some respects.
Richard Clarke claims that on 9/12/2001, Bush asked him to find evidence that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the attacks. It’s interesting that Bush would think about attacking Iraq so quickly after 9/11.
America began to expend enormous oceans of blood and treasure, because America is a Christian nation that believes the Bible.
“For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.” Romans 15:27
Dear Mr Unz,
You are very much in the right track attributing the 9-11 attacks to Mossad, and even to Ariel Sharon who had command over Mossad. I would suggest that you extend your inquiry further to who would have control or at least persuasive power over such a wide arc of countries, institutions, and government administrations. The broadness of the concerted action to discredit or to be blind to alternatives to the official US 9-11 narrative points to a more powerful organization than the Israeli government under former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Some have speculated that a powerful, secretive banking dynasty which has been strongly involved in the avancement of Israel is the only group strong enough to have managed the 9-11 attacks and it’s subsequent cover up.
You know Ron, you don’t have to take everything that the last person told you as gospel. In fact, you’re better off looking at the evidence on both sides, thoroughly–including the evidence that bores you and the evidence you don’t like–rather than just accepting one side’s ideas because they look like they’re more exciting or more fun. Sometimes those ‘exciting’ new theories are just plain wrong.
I just really hope that this thread doesn’t become engulfed with endless arguments for and against controlled demolition. This is what always tends to happen on 911 articles
It would be great to focus on how and why this was allowed to happen and I agree with Ron Unz, that it was an attack aided and abetted by the Neocons and Mossad. In my opinion they were real planes and real jihadis that hit the towers. I’m happy to accept that they collapsed due to the damage from the planes because ultimately all of never ending discussions about controlled demolition diverts most of the attention away from what I believe should be the focus of the discussion; who was ultimately responsible?
While I considered dangerous thoughts of “LIHOP” from time to time, an article of this kind might have shattered my hesitation to abandon the merry flock for good.
All 9/11 theories converge to a single, difficult to parse question: What are the consequences? After all, and ignoring the occasional Mossadi reprimandation by bullet, it is still deemed okay to conceptualise all kinds of conspiracies, if only to debunk them. In other words, even dyed-in-the-wool anti zionists are incapable of following through with a rational, coherent policy plan for the tragic aftermath of such a relevation. Maybe on an unconsicous level, the sheer amount of toil, spite and spiritual readjustment seems entirely too herculean for mortal blokes and bureaucrats alike.
Like a bad marriage where the victim cannot ever conceive of a different life, no matter the abuse and humiliation.
The ultimate through-the-looking-glass theory of 9/11 that I know, is that Iraq was the primary sponsor of Al Qaeda terrorism against America from 1993 to 2003, and that the CIA and the White House knew this all along, but they covered it up, and tried to deal with it covertly.
How long before they hang 9-11 on Putin? Surprised they haven’t tried already.
As always, a nice collection of resources and a storyline that plausibly ties them together to hint a suggestion of the truth we are not allowed to hear.
BTW, the term “free fall” is meaningless in this context: Whether or not any of the towers was brought down in a controlled demolition, the falling mass started falling at a speed of zero and accelerated to a speed approaching so-called “free fall.” The acceleration would have been consistent with the force of gravity unless something else impeded it, and in a modern steel & glass tower, there isn’t much to slow the rate of acceleration. The “fact” of the “free fall” is a red herring.
” Well, we have established that only Israel benefitted from 9/11 – none else. So, with respect to cui bono, there is only one eligible candidate. ”
Already on the day itself, when I, with anybody else, still believed the Muslim terror attack, I did not understand why Muslims would do such a thing, it just would harm Muslims.
So I said to my wife ‘just Israel benefits’.
At the time I, of course, had not the slightest idea that Bush jr would use the attack as pretext for wars.
Anatol Lieven also did not foresee this, his article New Cold War, in the Guardian, not yet a Soros property.
Putin’s got MH17, as an American remarked ‘the Dutch Sept 11’.
I fully agree with him, the propaganda, the show, the memorials, almost an exact copy.
And, of course, last but not least, no motive, on the contrary, also as with Sept 11.
Is there any proof that a terrorist organisation El Quaida ever existed ?
The name is said to be the name of a house in Afghanistan.
A lot of us have suspicions but none of us have badges and the ability to arrest people or subpoena evidence and depose witnesses. Getting confirmation is impossible when the state is complicit in the cover-up.
This poses a dilemma. We tend to believe in our country, but as long as the cover-up continues, we can’t believe in our country. We can’t really trust anything our government says.
America is stuck, while the world goes on around us.
American Pravda: Flat Earth
You don’t think it’s coming? Unz once published an article by a guy who claimed that the mass Muslim rape at Cologne was either an inside job or it never happened.
https://www.unz.com/article/the-muslim-rape-army-is-coming-to-getcha/
Relevant quote from the article:
“In particular, the only feasible explanation of why there is no video of anybody being sexually assaulted in Cologne inside or outside the train station on New Year’s Eve is that it never happened. A tree can still fall in the forest without it being caught on camera, but hundreds of women cannot be assaulted in public in the middle of Cologne in 2016 without there being any photos or video. If this had happened, we would have the corresponding visuals and we just don’t.”
Look, Ron is clearly a brilliant guy. He can make the case that high rates of Hispanic crime is a “myth”. He can deny the holocaust, and he can say that 9/11 was an inside job (a unique combination of views to be sure!). He knows more about these issues than I ever will, but…. but it doesn’t make him right. The fact that he saw fit to publish that Cologne article–which, to be fair, he did not write–makes me take everything he says with more than a grain of salt.
“An honest investigation would rip the veil off of this deception, but the probability of that happening decreases with each passing day. A venal political establishment, blackmailed or bought by Israel (as they like to boast unashamedly) ensures that our downward spiral will not be arrested by those whom we have elected to protect us.”
Agreed. A thorough independent investigation is what is required. However the chances of that ever happening are about zero and anyone else involved has gotten away with it.
It has been really sad to watch an obviously bright and well-accomplished man descend into abject lunacy.
I’ve not seen it happen in real time before. I don’t like it. I struggled to even open the article. Please at least chat with a professional – why not?
In the week after 9/11, in the Washington, D.C. area, the news stands ran a special 9/11 photo magazine issue at the checkouts. I bought this issue from Giant Food and looked through it thoroughly. I recall at the time that there was some outcry from the Arabs/Middle East over magazine deciding to run these pictures of Arabs in the West Bank cheering on 9/11. I remember at the time how politically incorrect I thought it was for them to do this.
When the news came out about the first death from the anthrax attacks, which was Robert Stevens, a photo editor at National Enquirer/AMI, Inc. in Florida, I was baffled why this guy would be targeted. So out of curiosity I went to get my 9/11 magazine special and turned to the back where the credits were. I saw that the magazine was published by AMI, Inc., and the photo editor for the issue was Robert Stevens. I realized that either he was targeted by some Middle East/Arabs in retaliation for running the photos of the West Bank, or, someone wanted people to make that connection. Then after two months when this didn’t get traction Barbara Hatch Rosenberg started accusing Steven Hatfill and making connections to white racism and his time in Rhodesia.
Also, another attempt was made to link it to Arabs/Arab country in the Middle East because of the box writing slanting downward from left to right on the address on the envelope. Suggesting the person who wrote the letter was an Arab and writes from left to right (which would naturally slant upward as you write). Arabic and Hebrew both go from right to left.
I meant to say Arabic writing goes from right to left.
Look over there, a squirrel!
Astonishing.
I hadn’t considered that the buildings would have had a mass damper, and not only for counteracting winds but also earth tremors.
Interesting implications..Thanks for posting.
Instead of traumatising yourself speculating over Ron Unz’s mental health, why not just fuck off yourself? That way everyone would benefit.
9/11 was an inside job. The fact that the Jews and their shabbos goyim were “inside” doesn’t change that. The body did what the parasite commanded.
It’s a matter of semantics, I guess.
Yes, that is why. The author makes it very obvious. Anything wrong with that?
Greg,
The insider trading based on prior knowlege is a simple fact, evident from stock market records of the time.
An investigation was announced at the time, but seems to have never proceeded.
The owners at the time, ‘Larry’ Silverstein and ‘Frank Lowy’, both made ridiculous amounts of insurance money from it. It seems a little like just a much more complex version of the old ‘hire someone to do arson on your own building’ stunt, as far as they are concerned.
From my reading, such incidents were or are quite common in the largest city in Lowy’s nation of residence (sometimes for the insurance, sometimes to remove the reasons of a stubborn owner), but the arsonists at least would generally try to be sure that there was nobody in the buildings at the time they were burning them.
That Lowy’s share of ownership is almost never mentioned is also a minor point of interest.
Cui bono?
I am noting that Mr. Unz is pulling his punches on the subsequent anthrax-ridden mail incidents, may be worth a future AmPra, although the investigation was quietly ended after the framed men were proven to be innocent and the real likely culprit identified, but neither prosecuted nor persecuted.
That also was very strange.
Zionist Israel and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911 and murdered some 3000 Americans and got away with it and every thinking American knows that Israel and the deep state did it.
There were 7 WTC buildings destroyed on 911, WTC buildings 3,4,5,6,7 and the twin towers and they were destroyed by directed energy weapons, see drjudywood.com for the details.
America went to war in the Mideast for the Zionists over a lie.
The conspiracy theories about 9/11 started flying within days after the attacks. There was no careful analysis, just instant gut excitement over the prospect of exposing a vast network of evil that the theorists always knew had to exist.
Many of the initial arguments were blatantly idiotic, but over the years the worst arguments have been discarded and the remaining arguments refined and elaborated in a sort of Darwinian process that has increased the fitness of the theory, making it more and more plausible sounding and difficult to refute. All theologies go through this process — our libraries are full of books of Christian or Communist apologetics which, if you were to make the mistake of taking them seriously, would take a lifetime to fully unravel. But the goal is never truth; the goal is always to confound the unbelievers, and prove that the believers were right all along.
The Truthers knew instantly and intuitively that 9/11 had to be a conspiracy, but it’s taken them years to decide exactly what the conspiracy was going to be, and to craft a narrative sophisticated enough to suck in someone like Ron. I am so, so sorry that Ron has made the mistake of taking this seriously. It’s going to be bad for his reputation, bad for the site, and bad for everyone associated with the site.
True as far as it goes, but Hispanics have been brought up in Hispanic culture. The offspring of those immigrants, having been brought up in American culture, make for a better genetics to genetics comparison. So far, it seems they assimilate in an increasingly negative way with every generation. It’s called Downward Assimilation.
You should talk to Ryan Dawson.
Dunno. Same place as Malaysian Airlines MH370?
The Brothers Kurzberg crew in their zeal “to document the event” did not fail to hold aloft a lit cigarette lighter (https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Paul_Kurzberg).
Will the goyim ever be permitted to learn what the other photos contain?
For the most comprehensive collection of taboo facts, see Israel did 9/11 – ALL THE PROOF IN THE WORLD – http://theinfounderground.com/smf/index.php?topic=5367.0
Juval “They Could Have Planted a Truck Bomb AS WE DID” Aviv slips up – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5EFzG7eVoc
It’s called “jewish lightnng”–destroying your own property for the insurance proceeds.
On a much smaller scale, a successful chain of department stores in the Detroit area succumbed to “jewish lightning” one store at a time.
The jewish owner of this business was so brazen that he actually took out television ads with himself holding a fireman’s helmet, declaring that “we would have a fire sale this week, but we didn’t have one”…
Ron woke up some time ago.
He has been battling the matrix fearlessly for many years.
But it staggers the imagination that this subject is completely buried within the hallowed halls of the MSM.
Doesen’t anyone want to win a Pulitzer prize?
This is the most important story of our time–perhaps any time given the threat of war with Russia– and no one talks about it in the MSM.
Sometimes people get caught off guard, accidentally follow the ‘What are the consequences?’ question to it’s logical conclusion and then promptly hit the panic button and shut down all further thought processes.
Personally I don’t see the problem. Yes, they did. Yes, they could do it again. Yes, they probably will. But who cares? Statistically, even big false flag terrorist attacks are still less dangerous than crossing the road or drinking beer.
Surely the remaining lower parts of the tower should have impeded it? By inertia at the very least, if not by strength.
I forgot to add the source for the quote: https://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/21/us/nation-challenged-detainees-dozens-israeli-jews-are-being-kept-federal-detention.html
“Remember that Radical Muslims also did a number of other large terrorist attacks outside the US (such as London 2005, Madrid 2004, Mumbai 2006, Kenya and Tanzania 1998, Beirut Marine Barracks 1983, Bali 2002, France 2015, etc.)”
Bro, wake up! Mossad did all of them too, also killed JFK and Patton, tried to get Truman too. Islam is the religion of peace.
Even if one does still believe the official story, that Muslims hiding in caves in the middle of nowhere Afghanistan managed to hijack and fly planes into the WTC and Pentagon. Why the hell is our Govt. and Military now defending with American lives and money we don’t have the same people that did it? Perhaps because they didn’t?
One Year After Calling Idlib “Al Qaeda’s Largest Safe Haven Since 9/11,” the US Govt is Trying to Save it.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/one-year-after-calling-idlib-al-qaedas-largest-safe-haven-since-9-11-the-us-govt-is-trying-to-save-it/248828/
This is textbook treason, unless they’re lying…….
U238 TMD: Pure speculation, zero evidence. If lots of U238 really was released, it should be the easiest thing in the world to find. Why even bother with such an expensive material when lead or steel would have been fine?
Built-in explosives: I don’t buy it. The asbestos ruled out the explosives being used for a legal clean demolition job, and planning a false flag terrorist attack 30 years ahead is difficult to believe.
tl;dr: Nice story, top marks for inventing it, but way too far out to be believed.
So Ron’s theory is that Israel framed *Saudis working for an organization in Afghanistan* to get the USA to invade Iraq, the foreseeable result of which would be giving its main enemy Iran a free hand innthe Shiite half of the nation.
Makes perfect sense!
My familiarity with 9/11 trutherism is bounded at Loose Change and a few articles discussing it.
My impression is that most of the technical arguments (e.g. jet fuel can’t melt steel beams, the missing engine at the Pentagon) have been debunked. If it wasn’t the Saudi knifemen who hijacked the planes, who was it? As far as I know hacking them is out of the question – all planes need to have manual overrides. Is Mossad capable of scraping together 19 Zionist fanatics hardcore enough to sacrifice themselves for the cause?
The main unexplained suspicious factor is the unusual trading in the hours preceding 9/11. This would be consistent with certain people knowing about (or hearing rumors about) the impending events and keeping quiet about it, while making a buck on the side. Feasibly, that could been Mossad agents… and/or any number of other people.
With respect to this particular topic, this is Ron’s first foray. Until recently, he made a point of generally keeping neutral yet occasionally allowing his skepticism to leak out.
Do you remember the exchange between him and Jonathan Revusky?
Dear Ron,
What you write is interesting, but if a “missile” hit the Pentagon, than what happened to Barbara Olsen, wife of Constitutional legal scholar, Ted Olsen, and the other passengers on American Airlines Flight 77? It seems to me that that plane had to have been what struck it.
Second, Israel’s Likud and their NeoCon allies certainly were beneficiaries of what happened on that grim day, but that does not prove that they launched or planned it.
It also seems irrefutable that the New York towers were struck by the airliners. I cannot say anything about the actual causes of their collapse, but they were struck by those planes.
Sincerely,
Edward Dorsey
Even Don knew explosives were used…..too bad he is subservient to the perps.
Donald Trump Calls Into WWOR/UPN 9 News on 9/11 Bombs used
The Notorious Banned FOX 9 11 2001 News Footage Israeli Mossad Links
Can anyone who believes Israel did it explain why they didn’t frame the Palestinians?
Lets not forget our Israeli friends caught filming the planes hitting the WTC, dancing and celebrating, if they had time to set up cameras in a good place to watch the “event” unfold. Now why wouldn’t our #1 ally warn us???
The same #1 ally that attempted to sink USS Liberty and blame the attack on Egypt to draw us into their war in 1967, hmmmm sounds a lot like the 9/11 false flag attack. Not suspicious at all huh?
But surely our #1 ally would never kill Americans to trick us into fighting their enemies……..
How stupid or ignorant does one need to be not be able to see this?
My question, if the Pentigon was hit by a missile not a plane, what happened to the plane and it’s passengers including Barbara Olsen?
I replied to, but, as often happens if there is any waiting time, the link was lost. Post number 42 (auspicious!), assuming that it is approved.
BTW, I recall your point two having been widely reported at the time. Not so sure about point three, don’t know about the flight sims pro. pilots use at home, but even before that, flight sims. on game consoles and the well-regarded MS sim. (also well-regarded by some pros), were tending to block attempts to just crash into things.
Agree with you in the case of the Pentagon. Bizarre claim from the start.
I can’t see how the flight path into the WTC would have been terribly hard.
Mystery, why weren’t they being buzzed and eventually shot down by fighter planes? Though that may be put down to indecision, the one downed in Pennsylvania was almost certainly shot down. Sure, brave passengers acted, but in the end, it was shot down.
I’m a student of history of sorts, and especially the world wars.
With a sad horror, I’ve come to glimmer the spine-numbing evil of those contrived wars for the Satanic evil that they were.
It was with a quiet and earnest prayer that I made to providence (God, the Gods, etc..) – that as the 21st century dawned upon mankind, that it would not resemble the previous one- as far as contrived zio-wars (and the attendant horrors).
America was dragged into WWI on behalf of Zionists, (this is a proven fact). And everyone with an IQ above room temperature knows of the Jewish supremacists/Zionist’s treachery in foisting WWII, and the slaughter-fest that ensued.. the result of which, was Israel, rising out of the ashes of Europe, and with Russia and Eastern Europe and China and beyond.. enslaved by the Siamese twin of (((Zionism))) = (((Bolshevism))).
But the Soviet Union died at the end of the 20th century, and I had cause for hope.
Then came 9/11, and I knew Satan (the Fiend) was still very much with us.
And so it has unfolded. (((They))) have managed to turn this century as well, into an orgy of mass-atrocities, racial genocide, horrors writ large and suffering unimaginable, while getting spectacularly wealthy in the process. (just Google ‘Lucky Larry’ for starters)
It isn’t only Jewish supremacists, or even brain dead ‘Christian Zionists’, but none of this would go anywhere without the legions of venal Gentile whores willing and eager to suck their thirty shekels (rot in hell McStain) from the mangled bodies of men, women and children – slaughtered all over the globe – in pursuit of Rothschild’s psychopathic nightmare of a planetary Orwellian dystopia.
[ranting.., I know ; ]
Anyways, so yea. It didn’t take me long to put the pieces together, and see that my nation, and indeed my civilization, has been hijacked by fiends. ((They)) caused the horrors and death of untold millions of souls in the last century, and 9/11 was their pretext to do the same in this century as well.
It has been my raison d’etre for posting here at Ron Unz’s preeminent site for truth~ the Unz Review, lo these many years now, specifically to oppose these fiends, and do what I could for the cause of truth and peace.
There is a fiend in this world, that revels and profits on suffering. It is as insatiable as it is cruel, and will never, ever stop seeking the enslavement of mankind, unless we collectively figure out a way to stop it.
End the Fed!, and put a stake through the black heart of this ignoble and Satanic menace.
Please!
Thank you again Mr. Unz, for your courage, integrity and simply human decency. My hat is off to you yet again Sir, and all who love truth and peace, are in your debt.
It is not a matter of semantics, but a matter of the origin of the orders. The Mossad is not an agency of the United States of America. The orders came from Israel.
“Can anyone who believes Israel did it explain why they didn’t frame the Palestinians?”
You mean frame the Palestinians ‘yet’?
It took israel around 70 years for them to try and pin the blame of the holocaust onto the Palestinians:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/benjamin-netanyahu-blames-holocaust-on-palestinian-leader-haj-amin-al-husseini-a6702091.html
I’m sure they’ll get around to it at some point, when they find time during their extremely hectic ethnic cleansing schedule
What other groups had motive and means to carry out an operation of this magnitude? It has to be a state actor with significant inside assets. Who has significant assets and influence in the USA government and media to derail investigation?
As he said “there isn’t much to slow the acceleration”.
October 08, 2016 Video: Afghanistan: Fifteen Years of Invasion and Occupation
Now the truth about oil and gas, mineral wealth, opium and naked imperial ambition are all that remain. The ambitions of Empire.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/video-afghanistan-fifteen-years-of-invasion-and-occupation/5549973
Sep 5, 2016 9/11 Suspects: Rudy Giuliani
Mayor Giuliani oversaw the illegal destruction of the 9/11 crime scene and is criminally liable for the deaths of hundreds of emergency workers for not passing on prior warnings about the collapses of the Twin Towers.
You must be the least paid Hasbara gerbil in your cubicle.
Almost every Israel’s enemy (and Palestinian friend) was framed and attacked afterwards. It’s an open-ended “war on terror”, remember?
“Is Mossad capable of scraping together 19 Zionist fanatics hardcore enough to sacrifice themselves for the cause?”
Why would the pilots have to be zionist fanatics? This could have easily been a covert Mossad operation and those jihadi pilots could easily have been a bunch of patsies
Real jihadi pilots and real planes hit the towers which collapsed due to the damage. Whether or not there were parallel internal explosions to help the building along is irrelevant (in this theory). But it’s the subject of controlled demolition which normally subsumes most articles about 911
This is the only theory that makes sense to me. The focus should be on those who aided, abetted and allowed this to happen. Might be an idea to start with the dual passport holders
You don’t have to ask someone who believes Israel did it. You just have to start thinking it through from the questions 1. Why would Israel want to do it? and 2. How would they then plan it?
Obviously they have to feed a plausible narrative and Al Qaeda and ObL are your conveniently Arab villains.
I woke up here on the west coast with the sight of the airplane crashing into the second tower on my bedroom TV. The day began with astonishment at the audacity of the attack, and I cursed muslims everywhere. The day ended with the sight of building 7 collapsing into its own footprint at free-fall speed without having been hit by a plane, and my astonishment turned into skepticism and woke me from my stupor.
Now, 17 years later, 9/11 is the litmus test that separates the shills from the rest of us. They are apparent by their posts here on UR. Here is a quick filter:
1. Point to muslims as terrorists – these are invariably Israelis and their sayanim
2. Violently defend the official narrative – shills for those who perpetrated the crime
3. Skeptics and challengers of the official narrative – most of us on UR and elsewhere
4. Silent acceptance of the official narrative – most Americans, but many are waking up
There is “unusual trading activity” every single day the market is open.
My question, if the Pentigon was hit by a missile not a plane, what happened to the plane and it’s passengers including Barbara Olsen?
I am not ready to throw in the towel yet. A petition has been filed for a grand jury, and as outlined in the video below, it cannot be denied. So, an investigation will happen. What happens afterward is unclear.
Given Ron Unz’s specious attempt to clear Secretary of Defense Donald RunsfeId of having foreknowledge about 9/11, I am disappointed.
… Of course, the day before 9/11 attacks, Rumsfeld appeared to act responsibly and announced Pentagon’s missing trillions of dollars! Uh, did Rummy know about the day after events, and it’s expense?
… Nonetheless, as far as I know & along with an admission as to not having read his top selling memoir, Secretary Rumsfeld did nothing to offer reasoned evidence for a terrorist passenger-plane having struck the Pentagon.
… Am very sorry, but although Rumsfeld’s business acumen impresses, one cannot deny his enduring political ties with wealthy & international Zionist Jew interests.
… Below, for review, is a photograph of young Congressman Rumsfeld’s letter appeal to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy which suggests lobbying for the Justice Department to back off forcing the AZC to register as foreign agent. (Note: This posting is approximately my 3rd here at the U.R., with no follow-up comments)
http://www.israellobby.org/AZCDOJ/congress/default.asp
… Had Donald Rumsfeld & V.P. Cheney been excluded from foreknowledge about 9/11, it appears that their advertised American conscience/patriotism did not activate, and such inaction paved the way for the stinky Zelikow Commission Report’s pyrrhic success.
… Ron, very respectfully & always grateful for your work, don’t you see that stalwart Corporate CEO’s & Republican vanguard’s, Rumsfeld & Cheney are given too much credit for what they did not see coming, September 11, 2001 and it’s diabolical (preplanned) Patriot Act and GWOT.
… Thank you!
… P.S.: I do endorse consideration that President G.W. Bush, while reading a duck-story to kids, was one of the few administration “Deciders” who were left out-of-loop.
…
Goody goody, endless fun while waiting for my hair to dry. Thanks Ron
Seriously I believe AIPAC, Israel and Larry Silverstein collaborated on the biggest Jewish insurance fraud ever.
But it’s fun to read the endless theories based on TV coverage of the planes going into the buildings and the 3,000 plus people who never died because they never existed.
Please see jamesperloff.com/articles for clarification of this.
Great work, Mr. Unz.
Sound stuff. Let’s hope Ron gets on to the material where he could deploy his real intellectual advantages, namely the physics of what happened.
For one example….
Since it is pretty hard to see where WTC7 fits into any truther version as part of a plot it might clear the air a bit if Ron were to deal with the technical arguments.
Once you get to the point of saying that WTC7 probably came down for the reason given in the NIST report that heat induced steel expansion caused the rupture of joints and then the failure of Column 79 etc then you remove one pillar of truthers’ arguments.
Why blame the Palestinians if the goal was to destabilize the countries that were supporting the Palestinians financially and cut of that support?
Watch these videos, pay careful attention, you can see the building exploding outwards as the explosives go off streaming down the building, these explosions are going off a good 15 to 20 stories below the collapsing debris, how can this be possible if the debris is what is what is crushing the floors below? Its not.
9/11 South Tower Collapse Video Compilation
9/11 WTC1 North Tower Collapse (NBC & History Channel)
9/11 North Tower Collapse
Watch WTC 7, watch on the right side of building, you can see the windows blow out in a straight line, this is one of the columns being taken out with explosives.
9/11: WTC 7 Collapse (NIST FOIA, CBS video)
Anyone that can watch these videos and still doubt explosives brought the buildings down is lying to themselves. Steel framed buildings could never “collapse” in this way. Period.
your impression is due to an insouciant (nod to PCR ; ) intellectual apathy. (bovine disinterest in subjects of existential exigency)
At comment #5, The Scalpel posted videos of news outlets reporting on building seven collapsing – before it did. That would be impossible without advance knowledge of the controlled demolition of that building. Something that Osama and his 19 henchmen would not have been able to accomplish even if they could have done the rest, which is beyond preposterous.
The reason I make this comment to you, is because you seem to harbor an affection for all things Russian, and yet are apparently too daft to connect the dots here.
When the chimp looked into Putin’s eyes, and saw a good guy, that was when Putin was aligned with the nascent ‘war on terror’. Something Vlad was all too familiar with, and happy to help out the West with, in any way he could.
But then Vladimir figured out, (what apparently you’re unable to) – that all of these wars – (following the *obviously* lied about 9/11 false flag), are intended to destroy nations, not save them. Duh.
The people who did 9/11 (Zionists and their lackeys in the West, NATO, CIA, etc..) are the exact same people who are trying to menace Russia today. Someone has already pointed out the glaring parallels of 9/11 to the *obvious* lies about MH17.
And yet a fellow like you hasn’t bothered to look into this event. The event that will be ultimately responsible for the clash of civilizations to come, when the Zionists demand Putin vacate Syria so they can steal the Golan Heights.
How can a guy like you, ruminate over, write about, postulate and pontificate… over a (((Western))) foreign policy that maligns and menaces Russia.. and yet fail to see the obvious?
For you to have little to no curiousity about 9/11, is like Bashar Assad believing the war he’s been fighting was a home-grown event unaffected by foreign interests.
It all started with 9/11. That was the pretext for Gen. Clark’s “We’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.”
– Retired General Wesley Clark
Have you ever seen that video?
Do you understand how that agenda might have effected the (((West’s))) relations with Russia, once Putin put his foot down over Syria?
Or are all of these things completely independent of each other, and the war on Syria is actually being waged by disgruntled Syrian Muslims who want a less secular state, with help from NATO only when Assad uses chemical weapons against his own civilians?
Why are otherwise smart people unable to comprehend, (or even contemplate) the big picture?
That plane was missing also:
I hope these several great and lengthy articles of late come out in a book.
They warrant a sit down with a paper copy, I think, for those of us electronically challenged.
Afghanistan? You crazy…
Sep 11, 2013 9/11 In A Nutshell
James Corbett presents this 5 minute parody of the official conspiracy theory of 9/11.
is there an Unz reward for the stupidest question of the year?
‘any suggestion that Israel subverts our government to fight wars on their behalf and extort untold billions of dollars from our treasury – is just a wacko conspiracy theory!’
All anyone has to do is ask themselves… why would Israel want to loot untold billions of dollars from the US Treasury?!?!
How does that benefit them?!
Why would they want the dumb goyim to do their killing and dying for them?!
How does it benefit Israel to have Americans dying in their place, so that ((they)) can sit back and count the billion$ in extorted lucre?
It just doesn’t make any sense! Huh wiz?
Western civilization is now well beyond the stage where revealing the “truth” of the matter would make the slightest difference. Even if the jooies came out and admitted responsibility, the narrative would be spun endlessly by the lugen media, and the confused ovine public would just return to watching fagball and porn on their living room flat screen jooie boxes…and buying cheap amazon crap off the internet The official narrative would morph into something like “a small group of misguided American patriots, now long dead, knew of the plot hatched by a few renegade izzies but ignored it for the greater good as it was necessary to wake America up, kind of like the Reichstag fire…..er Pearl Harbor”. In a short period of time, the subservient goyim would be exclaiming even deeper respect and adoration for the small magical tribe capable of pulling off such a feat as the destruction of the WTC and then being able to avoid detection for so long…….
Judging from the way the plan was allowed to unfold, assisted and subsequently covered-up by the US (((establishment))), Mossad might as well be the most powerful agency in the US.
For me, it will always be both an inside job and a Global Jewish Cabal operation. The two are not mutually exclusive.
but how did they know it was going to fall, before it did?
and why wiz, did this shocking and unprecedented collapse of a modern steel skyscraper into its footprint at free-fall speed- due to a few office fires- not have every beam and rivet poured over for forensic evidence of how it happened?
Why did they immediately haul off and destroy all the evidence of, not just the worst crime in US history, but also of a engineering failure of such import that it defies every known tenet of physics and structural engineering?
Shouldn’t experts and professionals, somewhere.. had an interest in studying the collapse, to make sure office fires don’t cause buildings to implode into their footprint at free-fall speed all over the planet?
But instead, they shipped all the forensic evidence off to China to be melted down. With no investigation.
Hmmmm….
If Trump was really fighting the “deep state” first thing he would do is start or at least call for a new and REAL investigation into 9/11.
With arrests and prosecution, all the way from Saudi Arabia, Tel Aviv, back home to Wall St, Langley, and the Pentagon.
A real 9/11 investigation would drain the swamp 100%. Trump is in bed with the “deep state”. Along with every traitor in Washington not calling for a real investigation. and all of the media!
Sad!
Why would is need to be someone else? The most obvious alternative — one that is far more liekly to be true than the official story — is that those 19 did do the hijacking, but they had inside help to get them past the security structures designed to stop such things. How did they get through airport security? Why weren’t the hijacked planes shot down?
There was no drill in London, a company was running a practise emergency drill to evacuate their offices, happens all the time.
Ron, you have certainly sampled a much bigger part of the published material on 9/11 than I have but I say, with respect, that you have gone off prematurely, if not half cocked.
Certainly Israel is the country whose leaders might have seen benefit in getting the US angry with Arabs or Muslims. And maybe Sharon was a big enough gambler. But the case for ObL seeing benefit is simpler and clearer. Nothing could have suited him better than to get his evil American enemy mired in war in the country where he had seen the Soviet Union suffer. And would you not normally regard it as naive to put any weight on his actual or alleged denial of responsibility? The most likely explanation for that denial is that he was backing up the lie to Mullah Omar whom he feared would no longer harbour him while he hadn’t yet arranged to hide in Pakistan. But it is also likely that the destruction of the Towers and killing of so many people wasn’t expected so sounding piously decent was conveniently easy.
Your hypothesis works best, I think, if Mossad convinced the Arab hijackers that everything was being done as part of an Al Qaeda operation. One can rule out ObL knowingly cooperating with Mossad because he would have disclosed that quite soon after the event. More likely is Mossad managing to introduce facilitators into the operation, and maybe even inspiring it, or aspects of it.
If you get round to focusing your scientific knowledge and intellect on quite a few critical aspects that is where you could really earn the gratitude of UR readers. In the course of doing that you would, one hopes, tidy up some matters of fact; e.g. was there really no aircraft wreckage at the Pentagon? I remember a photograph of an American Airlines tail apparently on the lawn outside the hole in the Pentagon. And what happened to those flights and all the passengers and crew?
Different subject but you did say that you expected Obama to be a very bad President and that he was even worse than you expected. Would you mind indulging your readers, ready to be fascinated, with your one paragraph pithy version of why that is your opinion? More paragraphs, better still.
I remember the attempted attack on the Mexican parliament building. Contrast that the Mexican attack was thwarted by ordinary security guards but our extensive federal security apparatus couldn’t prevent the Israeli destruction of 4 planes and the Towers.
Further damage is that many of the construction workers that worked on the removal of the debris are now seriously handicapped from breathing asbestos dust. Instead of the millions some of the families got, they are unable to work and getting a thousand or less a month disability.
And what are the construction unions doing about that?? Absolutely nothing. Maybe they’re too busy agitating for more illegal alien worker rights.
I have enjoyed seeing the reports of Ron Unz’s rather delayed education, and I do appreciate his capacity to be undeflected from the important foci of the issues he covers, and of his bravery. That said, this particular piece did unsettle me for the insulting treatment of Christopher Bollyn’s contribution. Not even David Ray Griffin has done so much to uncover and piece together the true story of 9/11. I am sorry to say that I get the impression that Ron Unz, who has been duly appreciated by woke people, is quite unnecessarily quietly pinning someone else’s medal to his chest, albeit sharing the honors with Guyenot who too is after all only summarizing the discoveries of others.
You may have noticed if you took the trouble that I was proposing a way in which Ron’s scientific knowledge could be deployed with meaningful result.
And please don’t bother with that childishly naive argument about the BBC supposedly knowing in advance about the WTC 7 collapse. Just talk to someone who has worked at the front line in the media for a few years – or merely has some imagination and understanding of human error or crossed wires. BTE Silverstein hadn’t updated the insurance on that building….
What follows from that?
Clearly, if Israel did it, they also know what Sabrosky said is true.
That means Israel has to go all the way! It has to destroy America or be destroyed because sooner or later all Israel’s attempts to keep the knowledge that they did it under cover will fail.
Does that bring certain attempts at fomenting war between Russia and the US into focus now?
Have you ever had an accidental close encounter with a very famous person? One where you caught them exposed somehow for being who they REALLY are inside (maybe not as nice as their public image)?
Once I was a musician at a swanky event that had some secondary political connection. I wandered into the wrong green room for my breaktime, and encountered Ariel Sharon there, by himself.
I wasn’t nearly as ‘woke’ then I as I am now (this was probably around 1980), but I knew who this was. I had walked in on him, surprising him while alone and vulnerable. His expression looking up at me was unforgettable: “Are you the one sent to assassinate me?” was what it seemed to say. Naturally, since I was just a guy in a tuxedo carrying a saxophone, this seemed absurd, in a way. Yet I knew just what he meant, or felt.
I was chilled to the bone from the feeling that I’d encountered a person whose soul had been turned over entirely to evil.
You remind me that I didn’t quite get the relevance to 9/11 of the anthrax story unless it was just another example of MSM (disordeeed) priorities of the most general kind. Have I missed something?
The whole dancing Israeli spies gave it away, the Jack Ruby element. Best case passive onlookers, more likely facilitators and participants.
The official report on 9/11 erodes all trust in official explanations. It is as useless and incomplete as the Warren report.
I pretty much hold the view that a few selected and Israel were behind both deeds. I do not believe the US government did these heinous act, but there were government officials that participated in them.
I doubt we will ever learn the truth, perhaps for the better, for if my theory is correct and it is proved it was so, we would get Armageddon. America would be torn apart in a civil war and Israel would be nuked.
But when you look at both “incidents” why is it key witnesses die in weird accidents? Why is it that key witnesses are not evn called to give testimony?
And why is it that in every single “in-explainable” incident since 1945, Israel somehow can be connected ? It is really thought provoking, but it is nevertheless true.
I am part Jewish myself, but I cant distance myself further from the blemish of the world : Israel.
Everything went down the toilet with the Naqba and it just became worse the following decades.
Israel today is a more menacing terror state than the Third Reich ever was.
“Ceterum censeo Israelinem esse delendam” a quote mad more up to date.
A long post exercising weak logic that can be refuted by just a few lines with
numbers.
And it’s definitely not in your interest to let Numbers talk. So …
You can’t restrain yourself from coming across as a semiliterate fool. I did not pose the question “Why would Israel want to do it?” in the way you portray those words from my comment.
In UR threads’ overused currency I could brand you as dishonest and a liar but alternative explanations such as stupidity, carelessness and incontinent excitability offer themselves.
Wow. Touchy, today. You couldn’t just ignore that? It was that important that you respond? And in such an infantile manner?
Some people are ready to stretch elementary logic beyond the point of rupture to support the narrative they believe in.
BTW, for clarifying, I was saying ‘LOL with’ and ‘LOL at’, should have separate buttons, knowing that would be difficult, would require at least, separate icons.
It is a bitter truth, after spending some time in a place where such lightning was, it is sickening.
BTW, ‘Lowy’ used to call himself ‘Loewy’, have no idea of his real name.
Really, LOL may be entirely redundant since that Vietnamese girl with the LOL shirt and her Indonesian pal nerve-poisoned the seemingly cheerful Kim Jong Nam. Sure, possibly neither knew what they were doing, the fact that neither died is making it easy to doubt that. Their controllers must have given them atropine, and special detergents for washing after the attack.
Sry, off topic, but LOL perhaps should be abolished.
Thanks so much for the information. When the WTC was being sprayed with asbestos every other building in America was being refitted to remove asbestos. There were TV documentaries about workers dying and disabled from asbestos.
But the WTC used it.
Putting the sway prevention things directly over the elevator shaft had to be against code. I know NYC is notoriously corrupt but JHC.
The WTC was very cheaply built. The area was a crime ridden black ghetto when the plans were made. It was part of the great society plan of putting stadiums, government and other big office building in high crime aka black areas in hope the blacks would leave.
I vaguely remember articles even they started building that it would rejuvenate the area. Probably the inspectors were told by the city to go easy on code violations as well as observing the NYC custom of taking bribes to over look violations.
And those plans obviously were approved. But builders often file a set of plans that satisfy the code but actually build some crap that falls apart.
Thanks so much. This is the most informative comment I’ve ever read about the demolition.
trying to deflect here wiz?
‘Ron, can you please take over for me in trolling your article, by writing something completely off topic?’
Poor, poor wiz..
what an unthankful job it is to shill for Zion, 24/7
‘but NIST said …!’
here’s a video of the missile hitting the Pentagon, which shows the vapor trail of something that obviously isn’t a commercial passenger jet.
but where are all the other videos of the Pentagon being hit?
that is perhaps the most surveilled property on the plant, and yet all we have is this one video. Where are all the rest?
What are they hiding wiz?
And what about the plane wreckage at Shanksville? Did the jet plunge into the ground and get melted in the earth’s core?
I rather doubt that.
No wiz, your puerile efforts notwithstanding, it is obvious to any thinking person by now, that they lied about 9/11, and that it was a ‘USS Liberty’ style false flag to get US to fight Israel’s wars for them.
Duh.
But keep on shilling, I find your effete and doddering tenacity rather amusing.
Ron woke up long time ago.
the difference is that the ‘wizard’ in the video is amiable, whereas the Unz ‘wiz’ is not.
Nice try Troll.
Unz publishes articles by many different authors including Fred Reed and that ridiculous guy who claimed that scrabble prowess proves that blacks do not have lower IQs, on average.
They wouldn’t need any hardcore Zionist fanatics. Islamic ones will do very nicely and aren’t hard to find. Mossad simply found some unwitting dupes and shadowed them for years while monitoring their progress toward 9/11.
As for the “debunking” of jet fuel melting steel, when did that happen? National Geographic TV did a supposed debunking by suspending steel I-beams over barrels of flaming kerosene and even they had to admit that no melting took place or was even possible.
There are some very enjoyable theories about that. They fall into 2 groups.
I. Those people never existed but birth certificates school and employment records were created decades before the demolition.
2. They and their families are all in a witness protection gulag somewhere.
More fun than a Tom Clancy movie.
But you forget – Americans don’t care until something happens HERE.
I don’t know that they are the Religion of Peace (more like Piece), but that does not mean 9/11 was not a Mossad action. Some, several, or all of those others could be as well.
One thing that always seemed odd to me – all three looked like controlled demolition. I would not expect a building smacked from one side, unevenly, to fall into its own footprint. The direct impact side would most likely fail before the “exit” side, and it would at least twist/bend a little and fall unevenly.
Ask her brother. Harry Ong can be found at a CVS pharmacy in the bay area. Or look on people finder for the sisters.
I’m sure they can tell you. Or maybe they and Betty were CIA actors from birth.
Xiabo becomes Bob. Liu becomes Lee.
Rurik, I think you are misreading Wiz.
I remember that article. Ron Unz publicly disagreed with the author’s theory in the comments:
So, can you offer something more substantial to challenge this article? Something other than a deceptive, guilt by association, smear?
Chag Sameach!
yes you did
your suggestion being that a person interested in figuring out what happened on 9/11, and who might have been responsible, if they’re concerned with the possibility that Israel had something to do with it, should first ask themselves…
“Why would Israel want to do it?”
your (presumed) suggestion (considering you’re a shameless and contemptible shill for all things Zion ; ) being that one would find a dearth of motivations for Israel to perpetrate such a heinous, cowardly and treacherous crime.
But we all know that Israel is more than willing to murder Americans in cowardly and treacherous crimes, don’t we? Even committing acts of war and atrocities against the United States and its citizens, when they believe they will somehow benefit. Huh wiz?
From the Balfour Declaration, to the second world war, to the USS Liberty, to 9/11 and Iran’s ‘nuclear weapons program’, Israel is a lying, murderous, criminal pariah state. The central sponsor of terror in the Middle East, and a stain upon every decent human being who fails to condemn its serial atrocities and genocidal affronts to human decency.
That they perpetrated 9/11 is glaringly obvious today. The only question now is how do the rest of us treat that fiend on the world’s stage, now that we all know.
That IS the explanation. As anyone who lived through black crime in big cities and noticed crime went down after the Hispanics drive the black orcs out.
I don’t mean official crime stats that can be manipulated.
I mean noticing that people can park their cars in the streeet and walk home a block at night without getting raped or robbed. Or that no one has been burgled. Or stores are no longer being held up regularly.
I don’t think we can do anything at this point. All we can do is check the black box on applications and go underground. Whites have betrayed Whites. There will be no nationalist movement. Take care of yourself and your family. The military leadership is more anti White and liberal than most government agencies.
50 year anniversary of the affirmative action act.
From “hip,” sarz wrote: “That said, this particular piece did unsettle me for the insulting treatment of Christopher Bollyn’s contribution. Not even David Ray Griffin has done so much to uncover and piece together the true story of 9/11.”
… I agree, sarz!
… Ron Unz knows such near brush-off treatment of Bollyn’s seminal “Solving 9/11” would catch “woke” readers’ ire. Why do this?
… And his anointment of Guyenot did the article no favors.
… As Ron Unz has signaled more work to be done, maybe other discoveries will unfold?
… Thanks, sarz!
Make that “most people”. And the Powers That Be clearly rely on it – or otherwise they would be more careful with their cover-ups.
Glad to see this article…
Mr Unz then proceeds to start speculating on the WHODUNNIT part…
Now, I’m glad to see that he has outlined his thoughts here in a quite readable and engaging way, also providing a wealth of sources at the same time…a very good article…but, and here is the big proviso on which I diverge from the author’s conclusion…that we must now begin to speculate on just exactly how this event was [presumably] engineered…and going even further out on a limb to try to nail down the secret party [or cabal] behind it all…
Here’s why I disagree with this vector…first is the fact that there is no way at this point to do anything other than speculate…the classic WAG [wild ass guess]…I think that speculation even on the technical aspects of how the events may have been consciously orchestrated puts us behind the eight ball and gives ammunition to the ‘debunker’ camp…
There is nothing there for us to work with…it’s that simple…even as to discussion of burning debris etc…that’s all gone now…it is impossible to prove anything now, even about the ‘how’…
However…what we can do very effectively is to completely bury the official ‘hypothesis’ under a mountain of rigorous scientific analysis…involving a number of specific disciplines including not just the structural engineering aspects and the flight physics questions regarding the airplanes etc…but also areas like thermodynamics and heat transfer…since fire is fingered officially as the main culprit…
Already the ‘truth’ movement is in the lead and gaining ground all the time…if sufficient public opinion, ie a vast majority, is convinced by reasoned arguments resting on sound science and common sense, then it will eventually become impossible to sweep it under the carpet any longer…the case would have to be reopened and there are many legal ways to force evidence that exists right now but is being withheld…
A prime example of this is Flight 93…surely the most glaring bit of bullshit in the entire saga…an entire passenger jet swallowed whole by the earth, like Jonah in the stomach of the whale…
Now the fact of the matter is that the government claims that they have in fact recovered 90 percent of that wreckage, but access to it is denied…as is access to any of the ‘recovered’ flight recorders of any of those airplanes…
So culpatory evidence does exist…it is a matter of forcing the issue…and we can only advance towards that if we continue to build public support…and the only way to do that is by sound science…ie picking apart thoroughly every single bogus explanation in the NIST report…which is a technical document that CAN be debunked…
We must stay away from navel gazing and WAGs…that is only giving ammunition to the so-called debunkers…and it must be noted that the debunker camp is a total joke…Popular Mechanics…?…not one of those clowns is qualified to assemble a cardboard box, never mind engage in a technical discussion at the expert level on questions of actual physics and mathematics…
I have seen only a couple of the 911 ‘documentaries’ out there including ‘Loose Change’ which I found interesting, but nowhere near what I have subsequently found…’The New Pearl Harbor’…
This is in my view the best film on the subject…featuring extensive and precise discussion of the many technical issues by means of interviews with credible experts…the storyline is based on a debate style narrative, pitting the ‘debunkers’ and laying out their positions and ‘answers’ to what the ‘truthers’ have brought out…and then posing reasonable ‘bottom line’ questions after each side has been given its arguments…it is up to the viewer to decide which side is more believable…
An absolutely astounding piece of work by respected Italian filmmaker Massimo Mazucco…
The film is nearly five hours long, but is certainly the most professional piece of documentary cinema on the subject…and also the most thorough and absolutely devastating to the ‘debunker’ narrative…a must see for anyone, whether interested in the subject or not…
The whole American revolution was a conspiracy between wealthy American masons, the governments of France and Spain the Grand Duke of Hesse and the French armament ship building and military equipment industry.
Absolutely! Israel and its Zionist assets in the United States have to be dealt with or they will destroy us. Where is the trillion dollar military who take an oath to defend the United States of America from all enemies…foreign and domestic?
61% black to 17% black in that time.
City of East Palo Alto [bayareacensus.ca.gov]
1970 Census … Negro [sic] 60.8%
1980 Census … Black 61.1%
1990 Census … Black 42.9%
2000 Census … Black or African American 23.0%
2010 Census … Black or African American 16.7%
Trying to wake up other people is still possible and worthwhile, even though that does not immediately change the world.
how so?
this was his post:
if the wiz were a person of good faith, and was sincerely asking a fellow to investigate by asking ‘who benefits’, then perhaps he could be given the benefit of the doubt.
But the wiz is not a person of good faith, but is rather a lying scoundrel, who uses every opportunity here at Unz to deflect from Israel’s serial crimes.
So how exactly anyone could interpret his words differently, is quite beyond me.
When the wiz asks..
‘Why would Israel want to do it? ‘
what he’s suggesting is that there is a dearth of reasons, because the wiz always, without exception, shills for Zion. (I know, I’ve been mocking his dishonestly for years now ; )
Just read the bullshit he spews. ‘There’s nothing untoward about the BBC or Fox News reporting on building seven’s controlled demolition before it happened. That kind of screw-up happens all the time in broadcasting.’
Well, no it doesn’t. Advance knowledge of building seven’s collapse is PROOF that Osama and his nineteen Arabs didn’t do it, and that rather it was wired for a controlled demolition by agents in the West. (Lucky Larry and co.) Duh.
I personally do not find any of the arguments for a controlled demolition or that the planes didn’t really hit any of the buildings convincing. In fact I think they may be something of a red herring, much like the “inside job” narrative.
The evidence for Israeli involvement in the attack, on the other hand, seems much more compelling, and much harder to refute.
Suppose things did happen according to the official narrative – the planes were hijacked by Arab terrorists, they were crashed into the Towers and the Pentagon, the Towers went down due to damage from the plane strikes.
The only difference is…Mossad was behind it. Mossad built a false jihadist network and recruited the nineteen hijackers, Mossad came up with the plan of attack and coached them on how to carry it out, Mossad set up a support network with its agents in the US to watch over them and try and keep them from falling into the hands of the US authorities before they launched their attack.
This is what makes the most sense to me, and I believe this is the most promising path to pursue politically. The who is what’s important here, not the how.
You’re a chauvinist Israel Uber Alles Jew incapable of objective thought about Jews or Israel, just as Al Sharpton is incapable of objective thought about black crime .
Oddly enough, I find myself agreeing with you. Not entirely, mostly. Let’s say Mossad had prior knowledge. Let’s say they did nothing about it. The ‘jet fuel can’t melt steel beams’ so discredits the conspiracists that I believe the conspirators themselves planted the argument.
On the other hand, I’m not as sure that hacking can’t override the manual override.
Well, obviously, ObL managed to find some Muslim fighter pilots who also knew how to fly commercial jets and extract the most performance from them.
The cigarette lighter was probably a religious burnt offering symbol.
Jeeze, what a tedious load of muddled thinking and arse-backward reasoning this article provides. So hopeless as to be pointless to make further comment.
Fun fact: Netanyahu is a habitual, bold-faced liar:
https://theintercept.com/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-crying-wolf-iranian-nuclear-bomb/
Question: how many times did “the boy who cried ‘wolf’” lie to the villagers before they took him to the woods and disappeared his sorry ass (that’s the true story – “he was eaten by wolves” was an inside joke)?
Half the Bronx section of NYC was destroyed by Jewish lighting when the black tenants were organized into rent strikes by government funded Jewish tenants rights foundations.
It was Jewish red diaper baby conspiring with the Jewish bourgeoisie. Both benefited. The bourgeoisie got out of the Bronx with plenty of money The Jewish red diaper baby tenants rights attorneys went on to run the government for the benefit of Jews and Israel
QUOTE Such mass free falling to the ground is, again imho, not unlikely to provoke a mini earthquake, and send a shock wave shaking the foundations of WTC 7. END QUOTE
So why then was no such earthquake signatures recorded by NYC seismographs? It’s one of the major indicators that the buildings turned into dust in mid air. If the buildings “fell” they would have produced a signature somewhat akin to an earthquake.
And yet they didn’t. Because the buildings and everything inside the buildings turned into dust.
Agree that The American Pravda should be published as a book. I think the time for it to be influential is ripening, also.
Exactly. The truth will set us free, eventually.
Can we please let Mr Adolf rest in his grave for once? Lenin/Trotsky/Stalin would’ve all been more suitable comparisons for what the zionists are doing to the US. For all the evil Hitler and the Nazi’s did, they did not represent a minority group subverting and attacking the majority group of their fellow countrymen. The Bolsheviks on the other hand were. Again, not defending Nazism but there is also a direct line of descent from Bolshevism to US Zionism which cannot be denied. You calumniate Hitler quite unnecessarily by bringing him into this when history has already provided a much better prototype for what has happened here.
I should probably further clarify a few points that I tried to make in my article…
Until quite recently, I’d devoted very little time to investigating the 9/11 attacks, and hadn’t read a single book on the subject. Since 2001, I did occasionally read various articles here and there, but I doubt that totaled much more than just a few hours per year, say three or four weeks of total effort across 17 years. I’d certainly grown more and more suspicious as the years went by, for exactly the reasons I described. But until you’ve bothered actually reading a book on so important and complex topic, suspicions, however strong, are still merely suspicions.
So I finally decided to spend the last couple of weeks intensively reading and researching the issues, with this article representing my conclusions. Unfortunately, I ran out of time before it was fully finished and polished, so for the first time ever, I think I’ll probably end up releasing a somewhat extended version within a couple of days once I’ve had a bit of a rest from my very long hours of the last two weeks.
For these sorts of reasons, I’m absolutely sure that many, many of the commenters here are vastly more knowledgeable and informed about the 9/11 events than myself, and if their opinions conflict with my own, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if they’re the ones who are correct.
> I can think of no documented case in which the top political leadership of a country launched a major false-flag attack upon its own centers of power and finance and tried to kill large numbers of its own people.
Smaller scale, but what about the 1999 Russian apartment bombings. False flag?
Zhirinovsky even confronted the Duma speaker over alleged advance notice of the bombing in Volgodonsk.
That’s a good white flight city. Palo Alto is 6% Hispanic. The California Average is 38%. That gives it 1/6th the Hispanics per capita compared to the California average.
You can open a map of the Bay Area and trace a path from San Jose to San Francisco and imagine a CEO looking for a place to locate his headquarters.
I will list the cities he (or she or xe) will pass by riding the BART and list their Hispanic percentage:
1. San Jose, 33%
2. Santa Clara, 19%
3. Sunny Vale, 19%
4. Mountain View, 46%
5. [***] Palo Alto, 6% [***]
6. East Palo Alto, 65%
7. Menlo Park, 18%
8. North Fair Oaks, 38%
9. Redwood City, 39%
10. San Carlos, 10%
11. Belmont, 12%
12. San Mateo, 27%
13. Burlingame, 14%
14. Millbrae, 12%
15. San Bruno, 29%
16. South San Francisco, 34%
17. San Francisco, 15%
Now lets cross the bridge and return to San Jose on the other side of the bay:
18. Oakland, 25%
19. San Leandro, 27%
20. Hayward, 41%
21. Union City, 23%
22. Fremont, 15%
23. Milipetas, 17%
24. Los Gatos, 18%
25. Campell, 18%
1. San Jose, 33%
A smart CEO would choose, out of 25 cities in the Bay Area, the one with the least Hispanic percentage.
Some commenters here claim that it would have been impossible for Cheney and Rumsfeld to either not have known about 9-11 or not have been active participants.
It might be outlandish to some say but it was entirely possible.
Years ago I was watching TV (C-SPAN I believe ). The program was an interview with the very well respected historian Robert Dallek who had just written a very thorough history of the Nixon administration and Henry Kissinger.
During this interview, the very garrulous (and Jewish) Dallek blurted out something that maybe he later regretted. This definitely stuck in my mind at the time.
He mentioned how during the Arab Israeli War of 1973, Israel was at one point on the verge of losing. Then, according to Dallek, something very interesting happened . Active military forces in Europe (and maybe even the USA) were commanded to surrender virtually all of their military tactical supplies (including aircraft) and transfer them to Israel even though this would haven then made them very vulnerable to a Soviet attack during the time that these supplies were missing.
Who ordered the military to surrender all these tactial supplies to Israel? According to Dallek it was none other Henry Kissinger. Kissinger did this without even bothering to tell Nixon. Kissinger later claimed he sidesteppped Nixon because Nixon was “too drunk” because of Watergate to make a decision. Kissinger, according to Dallekand very tellingly also diverted these military supplies without bothering to tell Secretary of State William Rogers about his plans either, despite the fact that Rogers certainly wasn’t “drunk.”
If Dallek’s claims are true this is a revealing episode because at the time Kissinger wasn’t even a cabinet member at the time , just a presidential advisor. How was an unelected advisor able to go around other cabinet members to put such a huge operation into effect. It was as if there was an entirely parallel government in Washington that allowed Kissinger to be able to impliment this plan apparently without any input from from either other exective department officials or from most of Congress.
Who else exactly would have been involved to command these military forces to follow Kissinger’s directives to strip their installations of supplies and divert them to Israel. Did these people also tell the generals involved to command American pilots to fight on Israel’s side in their newly trasnsferred planes because Israel’s supply of pilots was already greatly depleted because of battle losses. Who exactly flew these newly acquired planes in this war?.
What then was Watergate, the simple break-in that ended up removing a president? Did the disabling of an American president occur because Israel had gone to Nixon as far back as 1971 or 1972 (or possibly even earlier) after finding out from their very effective Mossad sources with intelligence contacts in the Arab governments that these Arab country was planning to attack Israel to get back the lands Israel had acquired in 1967.
Did Nixon hesitate about promising to support Israel in its desire to retain these illegally obtained Arab lands it had acquired in its deliberatedly planned Six Day War in 1967? If Nixon had refused absolute fealty or even hesitated slightly about backing up Israel, Nixon would have then, in effect, signed his own death warrant and plans to take him out would have immediately commenced. These plans for the already hated Nixon’s elimination culminated in Watergate and did in fact end up saving Israel. (Cui bono) Had Kissinger originally been deliberately planted in the Nixon administration to facilitate this plan?
Something that hasn’t ever been mentioned about an additional reason for this hatred of Nixon involves who exactly lost money when Nixon single handedly pulled the rug out from under international spectulators by ending the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1971. This agreement had previously allowed the convertibility of American dollars into gold. When Nixon ended convertibility some people ceretainly suffered large losses of money which they then directly blamed on Nixon.
Something else: Who was Watergate’s “Deep Throat”? It could only have been none other than Henry Kissinger, the only member of Nixon’s close advisors who knew everything but was never was fully investigated and was never charged with a crime.
With reason & poetry, FB wrote: “A prime example of this is Flight 93…surely the most glaring bit of bullshit in the entire saga…an entire passenger jet swallowed whole by the earth, like Jonah in the stomach of the whale…”
Hey FB,
… Prior to an InZitatus clog-entry here, have a question.
… Satellite images of USA. Could such be available in US (NASA) archive that might display the Shanksville, Flight 93, incident?
… Suppose such visual access is subject to citizen “Right to Know” law, but assume ZUS would classify its release.
… An exculpatory, fig-leaf thanks!
All anyone needs to know about 911 is that the buildings, and everything inside the buildings turned into dust. There is no natural force on earth that can cause this to happen. And I am not the one making the claim that the buildings turned to dust. That would be Detective Commander James Luongo, NYPD Fresh Kills Incident commander. Fresh Kills was were all the debris from 911 was sent to.
You can watch some of the people that were there describe that the buildings and everything inside, including the people, disintegrated into dust.
I read somewhere in the comments that ‘kerosine cannot melt steel’, has been debunked.
How, I wonder, kerosine burns at some 1000° C, steel does not melt till over 1300°C.
None of the kerosine cookers my grandmother, and also my mother, ever melted.
Even my camping kerosine pressure cooker never melted.
Then the Pennsylvania plane, did anyone see wreckage resembling Lockerby ?
The coroner there explained the miracle by ‘atomisation’, a local correspondent wrote me.
The Pentagon plane, an engine and a wheel was found where something hit the Pentagon.
Passenger planes do not have engines in the middle, except a WWII Junckers.
On top of that, any fool sees that a big plane would have caused far more windows to be demolished.
Ron, you are greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Jews are long term planners. Aside from the explosives that may or may not have been installed when it was built just the incredible cheap construction and the asbestos spray and code violations lend credence to a Jewish lightening plan.
The WTC, like a lot of 60s 70s buildings and stadiums were built in high crime areas with the idea of transforming the areas. It was easy to fill the givernment buildings. The workers and agencies had no choice. For instance, after the Rodney King riots dozens of local government agencies were quickly relocated to the Koreatown Wilshire area. The city knew no private business would move back in after the riots The government rents kept the neighborhood stable.
The WTC was a real gamble for the owners. The owners gambled that enough private businesses would choose to move into a high crime area to make the building viable.
What if private businesses didn’t move in. The owners would be left with a half 3/4 empty building and not enough rents to pay mortgage utilities expenses.
So why not make sure Jewish lightening would strike a half empty building 1976 or so?
Please let me understand how the Israel-did-9/11 theory accomodates some known facts. I’ve read some of the 9/11 articles on this site and they don’t address obvious objections:
1. Israel is not known to conduct false flag attacks that deliberately kill Israelis and Jews, in places full of Jews such as a New York City office tower with offices of Wall St firms (e.g., Canter and Siegel was wiped out). Why wouldn’t it target someplace that doesn’t have the highest concentration of Jews in the USA? The losses at WTC were potentially much higher than was actually the case, since the towers were hit relatively early in the morning. An hour later and there would be lots more dead Jews.
2. Israel gets money from the Pentagon (red) and the US Congress. Why make those (or the White House, if that was the Flight 93 destination) the targets, and not blue agencies such as the State Department or CIA?
3. Wall St is supposed to be highly Jewish, pro-Israel and another source of funding for Israeli/Zionist causes (e.g., AIPAC). Why attack it at the WTC?
4. The USA is the big financial and military sponsor or even life-support for Israel. At a minimum, this would end if an Israeli 9/11 plot were uncovered, and at worst what happened to Saddam happens to the Israeli government. Why take this kind of existential risk, which would cost Israel much more than the benefit of a US Iraq war (that can anyway backfire against Israel in all sorts of ways, such as making Iran stronger)? What guarantee is there that none of the US intelligence agencies or non-government investigators would figure out who is responsible?
The most potentially plausible version of an Israeli 9/11 plot would be Mossad secretly financing and training Al Qaeda. Is there any evidence of that?
When you spend a long life studying human narratives/storytelling, and observing the psychological (which is to say biological) tendencies these are designed to exploit, certain things start glowing around the edges.
For me one big example of this was, as you put it:
And boy, did you put it well to make my point.
Mr. Karlin, my mind reads that line in the “movie trailer guy” voice. Replace Zionist with Islamic. Hell, plug in Sisters of Mercy or Girl Scout or Roller Derby or Birdwatching or Railfan or Ham Radio.
How did that line get in your head? To my eye it appears rather like a mnemotechnic shaped charge.
My immediate instincts watching television that day were two:
1) Those buildings are being demolished.
and
2) The “emerging facts” of the story as they were fed by “government” experts/agencies/PR flacks to MSM outlets were mythically pre-lathed. Going back and viewing real time broadcast streams underscored this for me–watching the morphing of reportage, from reporters passing along actual observed facts on the street or in the newsroom to the Official Version. Which soon became the only allowable one.
As for the trading in the days (not hours) preceding the attacks, the point isn’t that it was unusual. Unusual trading happens all the time. I recall a quant analysis showing that the patterns of puts on American Airlines and United were way outside normal distributions of “unusual options activity.” Only one near the tip of my tongue is UIUC prof Allan Poteshman’s piece in the Journal of Business, maybe 10 years ago now. As I recall he ran a quantile regression model of the data and showed that if you removed American and United from the set of both airline stocks and S&P and NASDAQ index stocks, they, and only they, showed highly unusual activity in the prior day or two.
There were other studies as well, but that’s the one that sticks because it was the “holy s–t” moment for me. Also IIRC he got plucked from being a college professor to being a quant for some big financial house, presumably in a security-analysis capacity.
And yet gentiles have called me anti-Semitic on many occasions. What evidence do you have for your claim against that?
Ron, thank you for your efforts, your website, and your towering intellect. If we survive, we owe truth-tellers like you a tremendous debt for helping to bring down the gangsters that run this world.
I forgot about Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco. He was due to fly somewhere that day. His office got a call the night before warning him not to fly 9/11.
8/am EST is 5/am PST so CA airports were closed before most flights started that day.
Brown publicized the warning call pretty well.
What a shnork…
Very curious to hear about any particular technical ‘debunkings’ you have experienced…eg flight physics…thermodynamics and metallurgy…’missing’ aircraft engines etc…
Nice list, but BART stops at Millbrae on the Peninsula, so your putative CEO would have to be riding the imaginary BART from San Jose.
https://www.bart.gov/stations
I’ve been reading about and discussing Sept 11 since the day itself.
Already on the day itself USA airline controllers said that it was impossible that the Bush version was true, but their arguments at the time did not convince me.
But about three years later I could no longer fool myself, the inescapable conclusion was that Sept 11 was made by USA.
This led to the question, how could ‘our saviour in WWII’ have turned into a bunch of criminals ?
The solution: Sept 11 indeed was the ‘new Pearl Harbour’, that PNAC of AEI demanded.
The problem of course is that the Bush fairy tale debunked, we do not know precisely what actually happened.
That the three buildings were demolished by explosives, the towers by thermite, for me hardly any doubt.
But I still wonder if Sept 11 was a big failure, the four passenger planes not used, or was this planned ?
In both cases, where are these planes now ?
But, if it was a big failure, I must congratulate on the improvisation, and leading the general public down the garden path.
How well orchestrated the show was I saw live on tv when the rubble was cleared to ground level, and huge quantities of still molten iron were discovered in the cellars.
The tv pictures of this molten steel quickly disappeared.
I agree with you. Thanks for the video.
Excellent point. Not to mention that those 6% are unlikely to be gangbangers.
Watergate’s “deep throat” was none other than Mark Felt, who was “next in line for the job of FBI director. When Nixon appointed L. Patrick Grey instead of Felt, the “game was on”.
Ever since 911 I’ve been terrified to go camping. Since 911, I am now certain that if I light up my Coleman Campstove , tents 400 yards away from me will collapse and kill everyone inside.
I’ve only skimmed the article so far, but this paragraph jumps out at me.
Aren’t the “well-connected” and “elite Establishment” designations, which are supposed to bolster this individual’s credibility, nullified by the last clause, which indicates that he holds his views not because of his position but in spite of it? His well-connectedness is probative here only insofar as it allows him access to information supporting the conspiracy theory that is unavailable to the public. Without that, he is no different Ron Unz or any man on the street on this question. Perhaps he just has a taste for conspiracy theories. The same could be said about the French defense minister.
Being in construction, the Donald would know. My families in construction. Recently worked on the SF Salesforce Tower bedded in granite, not landfill.
I remember articles about how the cheap construction of the WTC wouldn’t be harmful in the construction trade magazines. It was praised as wonderful innovation to save money but build a solid safe functional building It was a big deal at the time.
This admittedly is the one of the oldest and most effective techniques to silence anyone. Threaten them with their reputation and social status if they keep at a particular topic.
I don’t think this is going to fly anymore regarding Israel. Too many people are angry about the control Israel exerts over the USA. By the early 1990’s 75% of Americans no longer believed in the lone gunman theory of the JFK assassination. Despite plenty of reasons to at least consider Israel as a suspect for the crime and to further investigate it, these leads were censored by the main media organs of the US and especially by Hollywood.
As of last year, 51% of US residents don’t believe the government’s official 911 story. Thanks to the internet and all of it’s visual footage of eyewitness testimony to the events of 911, something the JFK episode lacked, there will over the next couple of years be a quick conflagration of the government’s cover story in the eyes of the public. People will want an explanation and as Ron has convincingly argued the “Israel Did It” theme will overwhelm all other possibilities due to it’s relative plausibility: The mental picture of the government spending vast amounts of resources trying to find the other Muslim conspirators yet coming up empty handed all the while hundreds of Mossad agents were being arrested, some with bombs in their vans, and being quietly escorted back to Israel, all courtesy of the dual Israeli citizens at the helm, speaks a thousand words.
The media cannot contain this.
The Israelis have really overplayed their hand this time. Even assuming they did not do 911, they really should have turned the hijackers in to the authorities and helped to prevent the disaster so that future administrations could tout this as an example of the importance of continued cooperation with Israel and its raison d’être. Instead, Israel will forever be suspected as the culprits.
this is all the argument anyone should need
Since they reported the building falling, before it fell, that means someone knew the building was going to collapse, (at free-fall speed right into its basement in neat little sections to be immediately shipped to China to be melted down).
I’m sorry, but it would require massive efforts of cognitive dissonance to ignore all that.
They framed other Arab and Muslim nations specifically Saudi Arabians Iraq and Afghanistan.
They probably didn’t frame Palestinians because most of the world sympathizes with the Palestinians and wouldn’t believe it. So they framed other Muslim nations.
When it comes to the more radical conspiracy theories, I remain unconvinced — although I have to admit that as presented, the collapse of Building Seven is mystifying.
However, I am firmly convinced that the Mossad knew this attack was planned, didn’t warn us, and watched it occur. I’d be curious to know to exactly what extent they facilitated it.
Finally, the whole issue of bin Laden’s supposed death is only tangentially related but also extremely suspicious.
What we all know, is that at the very least Netanyahu knew the slaughter of thousands of Americans was coming, and didn’t warn us, and yet look at how all these sniveling, treasonous maggots applaud that sinister, murderous Jewish supremacist – with the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands.
Tyrion 2 like so many Jews you think your superior intellect and reasoning will convince the dumkopf goyim to believe your frauds and lies.
Not on this site. Your not so clever questions don’t impress us at all.
Funny side note. The firm wiped out at WTC was Cantor Fitzgerald, not “Canter and Siegel” which was the (presumably Jewish) husband-and-wife law firm that pioneered Internet spam.
Nope. How difficult is to accept that a member of the “elite” might have witnessed, overheard or dug up the truth due to their position in the pyramid?
Motive is not an element of murder (although it may be mentioned that the sellotape sealing of the envelope plus the letters identifying their contents as anthrax and telling people to take penicillin suggest the murdererer(s) did not intend anyone to die. Ivins worked with anthrax in a lab, while there is much unexplained about the case and in particular the weaponizing of the anthrax in the letters with silicon, I think saying he had nopractical means, or opportunity is going beyond the evidence. If one sought to hire someone for the job of sending anthrax letters, Ivins might not be headhunted, but I suspect he would make a shortlist of qualified candidates.
That is a real possibility, even though infection with Toxoplasma Gondi has recently been suggested to be what sets entrepreneurs apart, yet the immune system of an organism can also overreact in the style of “destroy the village in order to save it” to a myriad of organisms. The gene variant with the greatest correlation with schizophrenia spectrum disorders out of hundreds that are linked to the disorder is a C4 allele that confers an particularly intense immune or inflammation response.
One characteristic of schizotypal personality disorder (which I have read up on and suppose I have a touch of myself) is intense interest in the supernatural (Religion, Spirituality, and Schizophrenia: A Review). Prof. Graeme McQueen is a retired professor of religious studies and that does not mean he is wrong about the FBI having made a mistake about Ivens of course, but it is no less plausible that McQueeen is the one who is mistaken. Differing assessments of the evidence may be due to the fact that C4 a is unusually variable across individuals. Another retired professor of religion is David Ray Griffin (I have Debunking 9/11 Debunking and I think in it Griffin makes a very good case in early chapters that the Air Force were very, very slow and had certain officers shown the manliness of the civilian Scroggins the planes could have been stopped from hitting their intended targets. I think a good definition of manliness is “decisiveness without complete knowledge”. In his Supercooperators Martin Nowak recalled Harvard numbers theorist Charles Taylor asking “Do you have a mathematical proof for this statement or only a physicist’s plausibility argument?”
One would wonder why the author of this post invested so much of his time and substance in his original business idea if he was as objectively critical about it as the matters he discusses here. Objectively speaking, there must have been much against the business model he thought up and then decided on putting into practice; many experts considered it foolishly risky I’ll wager.
The French have an intelligence service that, in addition to being aghast during DeGaulle’s US visit by the vulnerability to a sniper that JFK’s bodyguards allowed him to be exposed to, were according to Unz author Alfred McCoy transporting tons of heroin into the United States. France also has philosophers, Jean Baudrillard’s essay The Gulf War Did Not Take Place emphasizes that the first war against Saddam was a huge massacre of brutally conscripted peasants by America, a country a only interested in having Operation Speedy Express style wars. The invasion of Iraq was certainly not that, and at present is indeed a strategic foreign policy disaster, but is reversing course and pursuing a neutral Middle East policy going to help America’s total situation, or is it now more reasonable to finish the job and smash Iran?
Continuing with a battle that incurs critically heavy losses can be justified if it achieves final victory. The main charge against overthrowing Saddam was it achieved nothing. While history teaches us the primacy of foreign over domestic policy, the Israel Lobby/ neocon enthusiasm for immigration can be dealt with by holding Israel’s hand as it transforms itself into an explicitly integral nationalist state via transfer of the West Bank Palestinians. The sole remaining deterrent to those transfers is Iran. Saudi Arabian leaders are very far from being adamantly opposed to an American attack on Iran and are making every effort to encourage it, made all the easier because Zionist interests rather than those of the oil industry have dominated the Bush Administration in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Anyway, the oil interests, including the Russian Federation and Saudi Arabia, would financially benefit from a war to put an end to the Iranian deterrent. It would only be necessary to inconvenience Jordan.
I don’t see how calling for a new investigation would result in anything at all. It was covered up at the time
I’m convinced Israel murdered JFK with Oswald as triggerman and that quaker trotskite couple helping . Especially as Jew agent Johnson enacted the 3 most powerful antiWhite laws in the 5 years of his presidency.
I was in college at the time. I was very very aware that immediately after wards liberal Jews proclaimed that right winger Nazi KKK killed JFK for a variety of reasons. Then came the thousands of books and thousands of theories.
12/30 pm Dallas time is 10/30 am Pacific time. By my 11 and 1 classes both my proudly commie professors proclaimed it wasn’t communist Oswald but right wing anti civil rights Dallas conservatives who did it.
The 9/11 investigation was as bad as the JFK non investigation. The government of Israel and the Jewish Lobby just won’t let even a suspicion of the truth be known.
Ron Unz is a treasure. When the Emperor rides by in his new suit made of lies, and all the people are afraid not to clap, Unz is the child who cries out, “Mommy, the Emperor is naked!”
“My impression is that most of the technical arguments (e.g. jet fuel can’t melt steel beams, the missing engine at the Pentagon) have been debunked.” Anatoly Karlin
This may be your impression, but your impression is wrong. You should ask yourself where does your “impression” come from?
1) Jet-Fuel fires can’t melt steel.
Even NIST(The National Institute of Standards and Technology) which was tasked with the official investigation into the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 acknowledges that the fires did not melt the steel. The idea that the fires did melt the steel was popular earlier on but was quickly disbanded by more scientific minds. I believe the “fires melted the steel hypothesis” was something meant for public consumption so they could have an explanation in their minds and not question the collapses any further. From the NIST FAQ on the investigation: “In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit).”
p.s. Jet fuel can maybe burn up to 1500F, however, that is not nearly close enough to melt steel at roughly 2750F or so.
Thank you Mr. Unz for the website and especially for your articles that are always well researched and clearly written.
My husband, a Persian who lived in Iran from 1935 to 1980 and still reads the local news in Persian, says that nothing in your piece would surprise a Tehrani since Iranian newspapers from 9/11 itself have claimed that Israel was the instigator of the attack in league with a few Jewish Americans and the Saudis. The Persian press also persistently opposes the view that the U.S. government had anything to do with the event.
They got through airport security because 4 inch blade knives were allowed at the time.
There are reports of a gun on one of the planes that hit WTC. That’s simple. Go through airport security and someone who works at the airport slips a passenger a gun. The real danger in airports isn’t the passengers. It’s the low life foreigners who work in the airports.
One clerk in I believe Portland Maine airport was very suspicious of 2 of the hijackers. He really wanted to pull them aside for secondary screening but didn’t for fear of being accused of racism. He’s white
A 20th hijacker landed at Orlando international and wasn’t allowed to enter the country because customs suspected him of not being a tourist on his way to Disneyland.
But those agents were mostly Hispanics and could get away with sending a suspicious Arab back.
Both those incidents were on the internet.
This topic is so unbelievable that, though I am confident I know what happened (generally), I somewhat can’t admit it to myself.
It is odd to know that one is experiencing cognitive dissonance as it happens.
Let the author’s hesitation and “inadvertent” application to the non-involvement of Bush-Cheney (i.e. denial of inside job) be more thoroughly explained, instead of so quickly dismissed, in further analysis. Why is it these probing authors–Unz, Cockburn, Parry, Chomsky–want to rush away from the inside job question, or allow it to fall into a demonized “conspiracist” meme?
We might start with Griffin on this same issue, and the contradiction of Bush’s behavior at the pet goat episode. I watched the video of Bush lingering for many minutes after Card informed him of the second attack. As Griffin indicates, this behavior was revised to he got right out afterwards, to clean up his act.
Of course, a doctored story he got right out might be motivated by presenting him as acting like a commander instead of in a funk or a daze. But that doesn’t explain his lingering, including into a news conference, while he and the school might be targeted in an impending attack. The jet standing on its tail to get him up and away in a hurry is a nice story, but indeed contradicted by his previous delaying, as Griffin indicates.
Moreover, the jet fuel is consumed pretty quickly. Most of it was consumed in the fireball, but the rest would have burned off quickly.
Interesting, but somehow not surprising.
In this article, Ron Unz mentions a previous American Pravda post detailing the connection between Zionists and Nazis in the 1930s. This has relevance to the false-flag 9/11 attacks.
George W. Bush was obviously emotionally unstable, having grown up as the son of a man who frequented the services of a pedophile ring, and a woman who was one of the daughters of Aleister Crowley. He was in the White House because his last name was Bush. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, deep state operators since the Nixon Administration, were the power behind the throne.
Mr. Unz is correct in stating there was Mossad fingerprints on 9/11, but the Israelis needed support in all sorts of ways from indigenous actors. Cheney and Rumsfeld are the prime suspects for being the American management team of 9/11.
It seems most of the commenters here realize the motives of the Israelis and the American traitors, so no need to get into that. It is worth mentioning that the system that the Israelis and non-Jews like Cheney and Rumsfeld ultimately serve gave birth to Zionism, and originated in ancient Babylon.
Yes, you’re so smart. You are quite superior. You know the real truth…of everything…everyone else is a dumb sheep.
Or maybe you’re a lunatic?
Pick one.
That was fairly common knowledge at the time. The internet is full of articles about American participation in Israel’s wars.
Among other things, every single American tank in Europe was airlifted to Israel and of course never returned. You can still find in the internet comments by American soldier who’ve fought in Israel. Supposedly there are American bases in Israel.
Imo you hit the key with ‘why this was allowed to happen’.
Let it happen has been my theory.
Someone(s) knew something and cleared the way for it to succeed.
If you want to sabotage a bridge for instance all you have to do is remove or weaken certain critical supports and wait for heavy enough traffic to collapse it.
That every single US agency and check point failed on the same day at the same time is another mystery.
Him being qualified doesn’t mean that he had motive, practical means or opportunity. I know nothing about that case but your claim is meaningless on its own. What “evidence” are you talking about?
The photo you refer to was a hoax, or more accurately the caption was a hoax. There were no Palestinians cheering the WTC bombings. Its not much of a mystery (((who))) would want Americans to believe Palestinians were cheering the WTC bombings, and own the media outlets that could rig the hoax. Also, the grocery store is called Food Giant, if you’re in Haifa pretending to live in Houston, at least make an effort to get the name right.
“The Alarmist claimed: The acceleration would have been consistent with the force of gravity unless something else impeded it, and in a modern steel & glass tower, there isn’t much to slow the rate of acceleration.
Anonymous answered> Surely the remaining lower parts of the tower should have impeded it? By inertia at the very least, if not by strength.”
Anonymous, you are quite correct and Alarmist is quite incorrect.
In
http://www.911myths.com/WTCONC1.pdf
there is an effort of a supporter of the official theory to calculate how much energy breaking the structures demanded (steel and concrete). He comes to the result that it required a bit over half of the kinetic energy of falling upper part. I find the calculation reasonable and it shows Alarmist wrong.
In the second Quora answer in
https://www.quora.com/Did-WTC-buildings-1-2-and-7-actually-come-down-at-near-free-fall-acceleration-on-9-11-How-significant-is-the-difference-compared-to-precise-freefall
you find a simple calculation verifying that WTC2 came down with almost exact free-fall acceleration. This means that there was practically no energy spent on breaking structures.
But the previous calculation demonstrated that a bit over half of the energy was spent on breaking structures. The conclusion from these two is that gravitation cannot explain both the acceleration and breaking of structures. External energy is necessary.
The calculation that concrete could be pulverized and steel structures could be broken by the kinetic energy of the falling upper part ignores the unavoidable affect that breaking structures below necessarily breaks (pulverizes to a cloud) the floors above, i.e., the collapse cannot continue much over half of the building in this way. Thus, the believer in the official theory, who made the calculation, must have some blind spot. He simply ignores what would have happened to the upper floors and focuses on at the start of the collapse, just like NIST did. That is dishonest from a debunker.
It is very depressive to read the efforts of people who try to debunk the demolition theory. Either they have a brain damage or they are consciously lying. I cannot believe that they could be so stupid not to notice the problem, yet make quite reasonable calculations for the energy required to break the structures.
Just simply try to break concrete and you will notice that it is rather heavy work. Work done in a time is energy. Breaking requires energy. This energy is away from accelerating the mass. Therefore the mass cannot fall on a near free-fall speed. This is basic physics and does not require expertise in structural engineering. Alarmist could be correct if this energy would be a small fraction of the kinetic energy of the upper floors, but it is not a small fraction, it is a bit over half, or at least one fourth if we consider breaking only of one floor, not two as in the article above.
There are debunkers and debunkers. Those cases that I have checked the debunkers were as a rule incorrect, only trying to confuse people who cannot follow calculations.
Giuliani, consigliere to President Trump, was on the American management team of the false-flag 9/11 attacks.
Wonderful comment.
I too wondered why liberals destroyed Nixon after he did everything they wanted with affirmative action section 8 endless programs for black grant hustler poverty pimp NGOs.
I always thought it was use him and dump him and revenge for his exposure ofAmerican communism in the late 40s. I always thought Nixon went along with Kissinger and ordered the help to Israel. Watergate was minor in 73. It didn’t really get going until 1974. As far as I remember
Deep Throat was Mark Felt a high ranking FBI officer angry he had not been appointed FBI chief.
With all due respect, no. More in a bit, but 1st:
WTC7 was control-demolished, ‘proven’ by ~2.x secs of free fall [as measured from the video evidence, say, by Chandler], which can only occur when the supports below are as good as ‘instantly’ removed. Instantly here is ‘relative;’ if just the one [lowermost] floor is ‘removed’ using explosives [the only ‘practicable’ way], then the next floor above can also be ‘removed’ in the time the building above takes to fall the height of the ‘removed’ floor. Repeat, noting that the time available per floor decreases as the collapse above goes on, due to – ta ra! – the building above now being in free fall = accelerating downwards due to the now unopposed force of gravity. Long but as necessary. The videos show it.
As for WTC7, ditto for WTCs 1 & 2, although the methodology was necessarily different; 1st stage beginning at the points of alleged aircraft impacts. There, 45° cuts across the full width of the core, plus explosive cutting of the perimeter walls at the same height, begins the collapse above as for WTC7, and allows for sequential floor-demolitions downwards, all enabled by the gravitational *unloading* achieved in that 1st stage.
The above in turn required ‘privileged’ industrial-style access to introduce and install the explosives. *This* is where I declare ‘inside job’ – else the CIA&Co should all be prosecuted for negligence [admittedly a less serious charge than ~3000 murders]. It does not matter, and never did, who flew any planes [assuming planes were employed], and I just don’t care. Of course, the ‘standard narrative’ requires jihadist hijacked planes, how/why else could they light-off the GWoT? And so, led by the corrupt&venal MSM, the proles all recite: Collapse due to office fires, started by plane impacts; basta!
Now, back to
It’s not just America, most of the West is infested by the same parasite, with the same effects. Indeed, today it is reported that Mme Merkel&Co are thinking of joining the Syria franchise of the GWoT. rgds
PS It’s now been 17 lo-o-ong, bloody years. Those who cannot ‘accept’ control-demolition as fact are ‘lost’ to the rational world. Oh! Only and as always, IMHO.
Agree. That’s the only part of the article where I’d strongly disagree with Unz.
The clean up crew expected to find chunks and pieces of various sizes. All they found was dust.
Wade said: “The media cannot contain this.”
…Agreed, Wade!
… But the talented Jewish Corporate Media could control and “spin” new & improved lies that will serve to diminish old & worn-out lies.
… Thanks!
Yes, You are correct… Speculations are at EVERY turn in any explanation about these towers, BUT ! How many offer ANY explanation in regards the fire that burned for over 3 MONTHS? How many even deal with this fire in any way? And the other speculations…
Well i have seen on 16mm film in my science class moving pictures of this TMD system, A huge concrete box with yellow and black barber pole tape on the corners, red shock adsorber devices hooked to the surrounding walls… Having been a very keen follower of every thing about the progress of worlds tallest buildings i learned on that day about the requirements for such a structure and it’s requirement.
So far after SEVENTEEN years i have heard exactly ZERO about these systems i know were there, the only way everyone missed them and never mentions them is they did not know anything about them. If you care to look up how a structure like this could be built and the requirements to make it habitable for office workers you will eventually come to the need of a motion control system, after that you will come to the need to have an ACTIVE system due to the complex windscape all the different buildings produce in the air this building set was to operate.
Now i don’t know anything about your level of knowledge of very tall building construction, so i will go with general level, that said What makes the idea of all these floors being built with a demolition charge built into them? The men who built this mega structure would have had to deal with the end of life issue some how, I can assure you anything like this would be very secret…
But here is anther zinger… These towers are NOT the only structures with this built in surprise. I have reason to believe Many high structures in the dense packed urban high rise canyons have similar parts to their make up….
Here is the thing i found out, High level construction projects like this one have very strict requirements in construction in regards whole life and liability.
I also think the Sears tower (Willis tower) was the final destination of flight 93, But folks in the know decided not to lose their iconic structure and had the plane blown out of the sky.
If that Speculation is true, Then there is a huge building sitting in the heart of Chicago with floor after floor of evidence just waiting for investigation of this claim of mine.
In your reply you say the asbestos ruled out explosive demo, I say they knew the building was eventually going to have to be removed AND they knew the regulations would be completely against the demo 100% on many grounds, So What rules did they follow? Only rules i found adhered to on this subject was operational requirements of this event and nothing more, Just look at the damage done to the health of everyone involved, I see plenty of disregard.
Now as stated above i have seen and have used a very considerable amount of time working out the details of the how and the why of many things nobody dared rationally explain… The problem with using logic to explain some secret planned event like this is you tend to expose the truth in ways many find uncomfortable.
As mentioned way up there above, I have seen nothing that does a better job of explanation of the fire and the CD foot print collapse. Those that know much of the accurate detail of all this have a very secure gag in their mouth, a gag you will never remove and continue to breath air and do work in your field.
Now you say the U-238 theory is pure speculation, Well i wish it was. Fact is they fires that burned until the nineteenth of December HAD to have fuel, logic demands this fuel HAD to be of such intensity to produce MOLTEN steel and HAD to burn for a duration of 99 days! go through the list of possible fuel to cover those bases and the list is small and lonely.
Uncomfortable truths tend to give one a bad taste, tend to cause ridicule, I know… i have been dealing with this for a very long time…. But Not one explanation comes anywhere close to mine about these things.
We are degenerates, incapable of assuming responsibility, after all, ethics equal supreme opportunism. The “bad guys” own genetic drift and opportunity in the short term. We, the degenerates are left with the priests.
Keep consuming, opium, religion, never achieved what a consumer cocktail from Amazone, Goooogle and Feces-book can provide.
The Romans, …mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
“It is in the following categories of newspapers that the most powerful levers of my power would be found. Here the official or unofficial tone would be completely lost — in appearance, of course — because the newspapers of which I speak would all be attached by the same chain to my government: a visible chain for some; an invisible one to others. I would not undertake to tell you what would be their number, because I would assign a dedicated organ to each opinion, in each party; I would have an aristocratic organ in the aristocratic party, a republican organ in the republican party, a revolutionary organ in the revolutionary party, an anarchist organ — if need be — in the anarchist party. Like the God Vishnu, my press would have a hundred arms and these arms would place their hands upon all the nuances of opinion throughout the entire country. One would be of my party without knowing it. Those who believe they speak their language would actually be speaking mine; those who believe they were acting in their party would be acting in mine; those who believe they were marching under their flag would be marching under mine.”
Maurice Joly, The Dialogue in Hell.
The WTC was not in a “high crime area”, unless by ” high crime area” you mean Wall Street, then you would be correct.
Sorry if I’m missing something, but I didn’t see that either in the original articles on the effects of Hispanic immigration on crime rates, or the current one. A pointer would be appreciated. In the current article Ron Unz says
I think that’s incorrect, but I can understand the result if the methodology was to compare crime rates before and after massive Hispanic immigration into particular cities, without taking into account the displacement of black populations. I’m working from memory here, so I’ll happily stand corrected if I missed something.
https://www.presstv.com/ the persians have this web in english
https://www.hispantv.com/ and this one in spanish
information fron a persian point of view , frequently more reliable than the New York Lies
Now here is another path to think, Perhaps these towers were not intended to be destroyed in this manner, Perhaps those in our time took the secret information they had access to and USED that info to plan their attack? I cannot prove the intent was to do this from day one of the WTC project, i only claim the overall planning for this structure had requirements of logistics to contend with to satisfy the lawyers…. They being a vert rigid bunch.
Just the video record can prove the fact of every floor pan being a demo charge covered with concrete, The record of modifications to those floor units is a very good clue to the hidden explosives. You could not do ANYTHING to those floors, every modification was done with much paperwork and those doing the work were not the ones that could have done the work.
I heard tell of a data center having need of a few Holes to run CAT5 and fiber lines from one floor to the next, That need was followed by a shit storm of paperwork and the work was later done by another company with long ties to this structure.
I have zero doubts about other buildings having these same hidden charges lurking in the structure, The things i learned about lawyers and their craft demand this sort of installation to ensure a clean and complete demo.
One question i have never seen is ” Where is all the steel floor pan steel?’ Having looked for even one of those initial floor structures and failed in all the recordings and photos of this vent i have seen tells me that they are gone, Well being so close and containing a substance like RDX it’s not too hard to fathom their absence.
What makes you think they are “squibs” instead of simply blowout from the air compression from the “piston” of the collapsing section above.
Yes, it was Cantor Fitzgerald. The ceo, Howard Lutnick, who was normally in the office at that time, just happened to be delayed at his child’s kindergarten that morning. The firm lost around 650 employees
I understand that Ron Unz has gone full conspiracy idiot, but why do moron Truthers always repeat this nonsense:
None of these towers collapsed at free fall speed. If you can’t get your heads around this indisputable fact then what hope is there for anything else?
Actually, the articles on Scrabble did not at all claim to demonstrate that blacks have equally high IQ’s, on average, as whites. The author was arguing that the Scrabble results were not consistent with Black Africans being two standard deviations lower, i.e. 30 points lower, i.e. an average IQ of 70, a datum (rather dubious IMO also) that the IQ-ists love to trot out.
So, either:
(a) you did really not read those articles
(b) you read them and did not understand them.
(c) you are engaging in a dishonest straw man.
I thought he made his argument quite well. As for Freddy Boy Reid, he wrote a couple of articles on 9/11 that, I believe constitute pure intellectual fraud. And I feel strongly that Unz should not have published them.
The idea that Mark Felt was “Deep Throat” was simply put out to divert attention.
By the time that Felt’s name was finally revealed, he was already in the later stages of severe old age dementia so he was incapable of either supporting or denying such a claim.
Convenient huh!
Concerning Chomsky,
If you want to see Chomsky in a melt-down, look at his comments when questioned on 9/11. After all, his life long activism was based on “the system is not to be questioned, there is only a few rotten apples to be denounced”. His legendary “detachment”, of the supreme intellectual pose (his perks were never in danger over the course of his long career as a public “intellectual”) was lost on these few occasions.
Thank you, I am very aware of the guilty parties and it is the two party mythology by the Banksters.
“However, I am firmly convinced that the Mossad knew this attack was planned, didn’t warn us, and watched it occur. I’d be curious to know to exactly what extent they facilitated it.”
Agree. Mossad and dual nationals/traitors
Compare:
Here is the NYS prison population broken down by race as compared to population.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/graphs/image003.html
Thank you for the clarification. Henry Kissinger IS the personification of evil, right there with Soros and company.
Regards,
Thanks for posting the video. This is indeed a ray of hope I wasn’t aware of
I wish those lawyers the best of luck with their efforts. They’re going to need it but gives me hope when you stumble across good people like this
But he sure loves to hide behind his Aussie crypto-jew mask. It is just another indication of how disgustingly perverted “down under” australia has become. It is almost as tragic as what the jews and luciferians have done to Canada. Both countries are lost to ZOG.
We must recognize that the jew take over of the budding social media companies really started after 9/11 and the patriot act. The slow but steady rooting out of any platform for non kosher narrative to be discussed has slowly been eliminated across the planet.
Has anyone else seen the new ZH commenting system? They now have limited replies and an “flag as offensive” button. It looks like ZH has been kiked. The question is how long will Ron Unz hold out?
Ignore Sean insinuation that Ron Unz is schizo but read carefully his last paragraph in which his idée fixe is expressed for the umpteen time. This is: Let Israel ethnically cleanse Palestinians and everything will be OK.
To do it we need to destroy Iran first but that is OK because some countries will make money on oil. And when Israel becomes a real ethnic nationalist state secure in its news borders it will be nice to us and will let us keep undesirables away form our countries.
SUPPORT THE YINON AND PNAC PLANS FOR REFURBISHING OF THE MIDDLE EAST FOR ISRAEL. This is the essence of all Sean’s comments.
Very interesting theory, not accredited to comment upon it. Are there individuals who have the expertise to comment on these takes?
Scanning the list of victims
http://www.toledoblade.com/nation/2011/09/11/list-of-2977-victims-of-sept-11-2001-terror-attacks.html
some 20-25 percent of the dead from Cantor Fitzgerald are Jewish by name, and some of those names appear to be Israeli. If even 10 percent of the total WTC dead were Jews, why would Israel organize, supposedly in the name of Zionism and ZOG, an operation that kills hundreds of Jews and possibly (if the towers were full) a few thousand? Is there any precedent or ideology for doing this, ie, sacrificing a large group of Jews for the greater Zionist good, anywhere in the history of Israel?
Shlomo’s baaack. Now we get to learn once again how jews never lie and can do no wrong.
A con can only work for so long. History attests to this: the Persians sold the chinese their own silk. This went on for several cen turies.
The Neo-cohen and the Israel con will not last. Biologically Europeans are producing breiviks. Nature abhors a vacuum. I don’t have to do anything except be patient and wait. Nature will produce whites who will fight fire with fire and drive inferiors back to their hellholes. In fact, they will simply leave…out of fear. When Jews fear for their personal safety they will leave as well. The best in centive is seeing another tribesmans brains on the sidewalk.
The real exodus is coming…very soon.
This is my prophecy. Take if to the bank. Do you actually believe the most successful race in history will just wither and die? It’s not about having nothing to lose but the converse.
Larry Silverstein in his own words stating that they were designing a new WTC already in 2000.
Thank you. Very informative.
Some are more equal than others.
Also, you have to break a few eggs if you want to make an omelet!
“That every single US agency and check point failed on the same day at the same time is another mystery.”
Yes. All their ducks were lined up in a nice neat row and all fell into place perfectly for them. I don’t believe in such coincidences. These guys had lots of inside knowledge and they must have had a lot of inside help too. The timing of the event to take advantage of exactly when NORAD were carrying out training exercises is just one example
https://www.google.co.uk/m?q=norad+training+exercises+911&client=ms-opera-mobile&channel=new&espv=1
Flight #93 was apparently supposed to return to hit Building #7, thus providing cover for explosives to bring it down like the Twin Towers. Why it failed to return led to Cheney being forced to order it being shot down over Pennsylvania to prevent the possibility of it landing intact.
Yes.
Besides, pretty much any country is willing to sacrifice some of its people for the “greater good” – policemen, spies and soldiers being the common example. Am I missing some extraordinary moral virtue that only applies to the chosenites?
I don’t believe Mr. Unz mentions in his article (or if he did I missed it) the role of Rabbi Dov Zakheim in the conspiracy. Zakheim, a dual American-Israeli citizen and a hardcore Zionist, was Comptroller of the Pentagon on 9-11. On 9-10, Rumsfeld announced that 2 or 3 trillion dollars was missing from the Pentagon, and on 9-11 the missile that hit the Pentagon allegedly hit the offices where the trillions went missing, and killed a few clerks and office workers. Congress has never investigated this missing 3 trillion. It can probably be found under Netanyahu’s bed.
Watch Kissinger too in this 2 min video from McCain’s satanic funeral. They are all Lucifers agent’s on earth:
Ad hominem attacks like Freddy boy Reid are a well worn path to take,
Why not try REFUTATION of my claims?
Afraid you may learn something?
Or do you just have a job to do in this sort of attack?
Anyone wanting to learn some more might email me at pxdadwsg (at) mail(.) com
Perhaps the reality is far more rational than the many dis-info agents have led you to believe.
Jews have a closed “message notification system” similar to “Twitter” called “Odigo”, that was used to tell subscribers (jews) who worked at the WTC not to report to work on 9-11-2001.
A similar event occurred at the Murrah Building (OKC) when FBI and ATF agents were told to “stay home” and not to report to work…
Sorta tells you something…
Absolutely. I have zero doubt about the vast pool of accredited individuals that have all the expertise to comment with authority and at length about every angle to my claims….
BUT those persons don’t say a damn thing, and have been silent for the entire timeline, so we can assume they have a keen interest to keep the pay coming, a hearty interest in not becoming another suicide with a bathrobe belt around their neck, A prominent wish not to have their final ends read ‘Shot himself in the head three times with a bolt action rifle”
Yes there is many out there with the real info in detail, No you will not be told these things by them.
It’s like going to the N.Y. Times with claims of concrete proof of Hillar’y criminality, You just endanger your life and the lives of any you may happen to care about.
Learning the hard stuff of this event is up to your works and diligence. The help you hope for is never going to shit in the pool lest they become coffin filler.
Of what importance are a few hundred claimed dead jews at WTC compared to the supposed 6 million jews murdered by jewish cabalists during the holohoax, all in order to provide a sword of damocles of perpetual guilt to hang over all Christianity until it is eliminated?
Kabalists don’t care about jews, because jews are far stupider than goyim. They like to use jews as their kommissars because jews are so inbred and depraved that the luciferians know that jews will make the perfect Uruk-hai to keep control over their totally enslaved goyim (orcs). Lets face it, jews thrive on the ritual murder of Christians. This blood lust is the same reason the Tsar and other divine rulers made the fatal mistake of allowing jews to be tax collectors or government bureaucrats.
Of course, jews don’t care who they work for if the sheckels are paid on time. Just ask those supposed jewish victims at Cantor.
Those 6% are probably domestic servants.
Okay, if we accept Ron’s thesis that it was the Mossad that did 9/11 then who flew the planes? Who were the Mossad able to convince to go on a suicide mission? And even if the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition, were the planes we all saw just holograms?
Interesting comment, but by depriving truthers of any “organ”, not even a controlled anarchist one, satan is forcing them to march outside of the rest of his minions and their propaganda rags. When he does this, these souls become far more vulnerable to the messages of virtue and logos coming from God in heaven.
“Is there any precedent or ideology for doing this, ie, sacrificing a large group of Jews for the greater Zionist good, anywhere in the history of Israel?”
Err… Yes. Plenty of that happened in ww2 around the holocaust. A British Jew, Tony Greenstein, wrote very extensively on the subject. He’s not a denier but is an anti zionist. I can’t find the articles right now on his blog but found them here if you want to read them. Many others have written about this too.
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/mideast/greenstein/zionism2.htm
Also zionists planted bombs in Baghdad in 1950-51 in order to force the Jews (including my parents) to leave Iraq and agree to settle in the newly formed state of Israel as manual untermensche workers. This is a fact
Nothing is off limits with that mob. They have and will continue to sacrifice anyone in order to further their zionist dream
Seriously? A rabbi and dual Israeli/American citizen was comptroller of the Pentagon? In what other country would someone that potentially disloyal be considered acceptable for such a sensitive position?
Damn. You guys are too smart. Unz, you figured it out. We did it, man. You caught us. We took a plane and killed everyone on it, then shot the Pentagon with a missile. All to start a war in Iraq that was used to..well, you know all this already.We payed off everyone and yet you figured it out because you are obviously an expert in figuring out stuff. I’m kind of disappointed. We spent all that money on paying off the witnesses to say they saw an airplane. We didn’t think a bunch of geniuses like you would figure it out. ARGH! I’m a bit irritated, but, you know, what can I do? You guys are too bright, too good at doing science.
My bosses are not going to like this, but I’m ready to come forward.
Oh, I skipped that part. Looks like we’re dealing with a third shift hasbara operative here. It’s a late hour in Tel Aviv after all.
“Doesn’t anyone want to win a Pulitzer prize?”
They obviously value their lives over the prospects of winning a Pulitzer.
This also shows why virtually all of the mainstream alleged “investigative reporters” are themselves deep state. If Sy Hersh, Bob Woodward, and their ilk are honestly so interested in uncovering nefarious activities in and around the government apparatus, why not go here? Even a cursory examination shows how much there is to run with.
Because there was pulverized concrete and shards of steel being ejected horizontally at high rates of speed. This is the product of explosive demolition, not air compression. As well, you would have to establish that there actually was top section at the time you saw all the squibs and that it was acting as a piston. This no one has done yet, because there is no evidence for it.
“None of these towers collapsed at free fall speed. If you can’t get your heads around this indisputable fact then what hope is there for anything else?”
World Trade Tower 7 did collapse at free-fall for the first 2.25-2.50 seconds or for about 8 stories. NIST has conceded this. World Trade Towers 1 and 2 fell at about 2/3 of free-fall acceleration. However, the debate is not if free-fall then demolition, if not no demolition. The fact the towers collapsed at all and were thoroughly pulverized is evidence of high-order explosive damage.
Yes there is a precedent for “sacrificing a large group of jews for the greater zionist good”. It is called the holocaust.
Its clear there was Israeli, Saudi and insiders involved in the operation. How was it possible there was no air defence over DC almost 30 minutes after the 2nd plane hit WTC knowing there were other planes unaccounted for, and with DC an obvious target at the top of the priority list of areas to be defended. Impossible for an outsider to arrange that.
Not to mention the ensuing coverup.
If you know another country killed 3000 Americans and still protect them and give them almost 4billion a year and fight their wars at a cost of 6 trillion, what do you call that?
How were all those Saudis allowed to fly away without interrogation? Same thing with those Israelis who upon return gave a TV interview in Israel saying they were there to tape the event
Also, the anthrax attacks were clearly an inside job designed to push through the Patriots Act and scare off any conspiracy theories from MSM and congress. The Patriot Act was written long before 9/11
Obviously, its unpleasant to contemplate insider involvement. I do like to think Bush was not in on it though.
Yes, you should talk to Ryan Dawson. He’s one of only (maybe) five serious people in this space, he is universally respected. He is also in regular, personal contact, and greatly respected, by all of the major holocaust revisionists (Cole, Hunt, Zundel, Goodrich, etc), to the extent that they are still alive.
Yitzhak Gruenbaum during Holocaust:
Well, most of this article doesn’t make the case for 9/11 truth. Rather, Unz argues for the credibility of *other* people who have made the case for 9/11 truth and questions the credibility of those who would refute them. I am questioning his discernment in judging the credibility of others by referencing the Cologne conspiracy article, which he may not have agreed with but found reasonable enough to publish nonetheless. The “guilt by association” is between Unz and the content of his own site.
As for specific claims, many people far more qualified than I have taken on the task of debunking 9/11 truth. I’ll just address Unz’s claim that it would have been implausible for the passport of one of the 9/11 hijackers to survive the attack. Actually, it’s often the case that personal effects–such as driver’s licenses and various documents–can survive a direct plane crash/collision. There was plenty of other similar debris from both the planes and the buildings that survived 9/11.
Here is an old anti-truther website which addresses this claim in more detail and quotes several newspaper articles in relation to other personal effects which have been recovered from the attacks.
http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html
(8:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Larry Silverstein Doesn’t Go to WTC Due to Doctor’s Appointment
WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein is supposed to be working today in the temporary offices of his company, Silverstein Properties, on the 88th floor of the North Tower. However, at his Park Avenue apartment, Silverstein’s wife reportedly “laid down the law: The developer could not cancel an appointment with his dermatologist, even to meet with tenants at his most important property.” [New York Observer, 3/17/2003; New York Magazine, 4/18/2005]
He is therefore not at the WTC when it is hit, and first hears of the attacks when an associate calls him from the lobby of one of the WTC buildings. [Real Deal, 1/2004]
Two of Silverstein’s children—his son, Roger, and daughter, Lisa—work for his company and have been regularly attending meetings with WTC tenants at Windows on the World (the restaurant at the top of the North Tower). Yet this morning they are running late. According to the New York Observer, “If the attack had happened just a little later, Mr. Silverstein’s children would likely have been trapped at Windows.”
Good and presently the issue is to stop the continuation of these crimes
https://larouchepac.com/20180909/will-us-forces-aid-al-qaeda-syria-anniversary-911
Between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.) September 11, 2001: Mystery Firefighters Seen Behaving Oddly inside Pentagon
A mysterious fire crew is witnessed inside the Pentagon, behaving completely at odds with how firefighters are trained to act. [Creed and Newman, 2008, pp. 137] Chad Stamps is a firefighter with Rescue 104 of the Arlington County Fire Department. [National Fire and Rescue, 5/2002] Along with his crew, he has been fighting fires on the second floor of the Pentagon’s outer E Ring. With fires burning around him, he is astonished to see another crew walk past, carrying two packs of hose line, apparently on its way to fight fires elsewhere in the Pentagon.
Describing this incident, authors Patrick Creed and Rick Newman will point out: “Firefighters are trained never to go through a fire without putting it out, since it might seal off your exit. You might as well walk into a burning room and lock the door behind you. Yet there they went.”
Seeing the crew passing by, Stamps thinks, “This is totally disjointed.” [Creed and Newman, 2008, pp. 137] The odd behavior of this crew is perhaps notable because there is at least one reported incident of fake firefighters being caught at the Pentagon following the attack there: On September 12, three people will be arrested who are not firefighters, yet who are dressed in firefighting gear (see September 12, 2001). [Goldberg et al., 2007, pp. 170]
Nonsense.
All you compressed air people are the same. Tell me somthing then….WHAT IS THE COLOR OF AIR(at room temperature?Before you answer, take a deep breath and exhale….did you notice a color?
What comes out instead is PULVERIZED concrete, mixed with other material as can bee seen by its light GRAY COLOR!!!
Even weirder.
10:45 a.m. September 11, 2001: Coroner Surprised by Lack of Human Remains at Flight 93 Crash Site
Wallace Miller, the coroner of Somerset County, who is one of the first people to arrive at the Flight 93 crash scene, is surprised by the absence of human remains at the site. He will later say: “If you didn’t know, you would have thought no one was on the plane. You would have thought they dropped them off somewhere.” [Longman, 2002, pp. 217] The only recognizable body part Miller sees is a piece of spinal cord with five vertebrae attached.
He will tell Australian newspaper The Age: “I’ve seen a lot of highway fatalities where there’s fragmentation. The interesting thing about this particular case is that I haven’t, to this day, 11 months later, seen any single drop of blood. Not a drop.” [Age (Melbourne), 9/9/2002]
Dave Fox, a former firefighter, also arrives early at the crash scene, but sees just three chunks of human tissue. He will comment, “You knew there were people there, but you couldn’t see them.” [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/11/2002]
Yet, in the following weeks, hundreds of searchers will find about 1,500 scorched human tissue samples, weighing less than 600 pounds—approximately eight percent of the total body mass on Flight 93. Months after 9/11, more remains will be found in a secluded cabin, several hundred yards from the crash site. [Washington Post, 5/12/2002
If only everyone who is capable could read Ron’s columns. If they could be distributed to every college student/graduate in America, it would be such a help. Kids are basically forced to read stuff like Tanishi Coates to get a college degree now — if only it were the ‘American Pravda’ series instead (or in addition)
It would be wonderful if our news outlets and educators would expose people to the best of left, right and center. We are in a situation now where the best ideas are actively hidden by those who we’ve entrusted to keep the population informed.
At some point, one way or another, something has got give. The corruption has gone too far.
Thanks Ron, for sticking your neck out and doing something worthwhile with your money and talents.
There is a lack of direct evidence against him for the anthrax letters and the main exculpatory fact is the anthrax in them was apparently treated with silicon to make it more dangerous, which is something completely outside his area of expertise and a technique said to be not something he ever asked about or could have mastered without being trained in it. However, he had access to the particular strain used and was in fact an eminent specialist in culturing such pure strains and researching them, which meant he had access to quantities of it depending on how he disposed of the left overs from tests. He could not have been tried for the murders, but it is going to far to say he could not and did not have had practical means. His propinquity and access are circumstantial enough to make him a person of particular interest, even if it is now very difficult to pin it on him. The main thing suggesting he was innocent are the statements of his colleagues about technical things very few people but they are in a position to really understand.
Ron, please check the site of the scientist Judy Wood, it is drjudywood.com and her book Where Did the Towers Go and her videos on you tube, she provides evidence that the WTC buildings were taken down with direct energy weapons.
Also google April Gallup as she was working on 911 at the pentagon and the explosion from preplanted charges blew a hole that she was able to walk out of and she said there was no plane, no missile, it was preplanted explosives and she is a survivor.
It is my opinion that Israel and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911.
According to Bollin, the group investigating the missing funds were the ones who’s offices got a missle at the Pentagon, and they were recently moved there at the time. There was also an element of evidence destruction in the case of WTC7.
Just so much rot here, it demands a thorough (real) investigation. A lot of legwork has been done by independent citizens, but it would be nice if some honest eyes could get a look at some of the ‘classified’ information.
I was shocked at the youtube clip above mentioning the photos the ‘Dancing Israelis’ took were destroyed. Who would authorize destroying something like this? WTF? When things like this are happening, you know there is something seriously broken with the system.
Yeah. My passport and DL and birth cert have detachable wings on them so they will survive the plane smashing into a building and the jet fuel going up in a fireball.
Unfortunately, we may never know what really happened.
So many classified documents have been lost or misplaced..
Terrible.
She shows this slide about a guy who can transmute metals.
I have a feeling that someone is pulling the wool over someone’s eyes, but I have a bunch of lead here that I would like converted to gold!
I wrote a PHP script, which I am happy to make available, that studied the effect of the law of the conservation of momentum on the 9/11 official story.
Science has preciously few laws. The conservation of momentum is one of them, as is the law of gravity. Science is immune to politics.
In brief, the law of conservation of momentum means that if no external force acts on a closed system of objects the momentum of the closed system remains constant. To give a simple example, if one billiard ball hits another billiard ball, the first billiard ball will lose momentum, and the second one will gain momentum, so that the sum of the momentum of the two balls after impact exactly equals the momentum of the first ball immediately prior to impact (since the second ball was at rest and hence had 0 momentum).
My PHP script made some very, overly conservative assumptions about the collapses of WTC 1 and 2, which I will list here just to show how extremely conservative they were:
(1) the full weight of top floors came to bear on lower floors (i.e., as each floor “cascaded” onto the lower floor, the total weight of each floor above landed on the next level below) – whereas, clearly, a great amount of the upper floors was pulverized and dispersed around the buildings, and not contributing to the mass impacting on the lower floors
(2) totally ignore the energy consumed in the pulverization of the concrete, as well as casting the concrete powder horizontally away from the building and even upwards. Conservation of momentum is a conservation of energy principle, and what is really being conserved is energy. But in WTC collapses, an immense amount of energy went into, first, pulverizing the concrete, and, second, blasting it high into the air and away from the building, which left downtown Manhattan feet deep in “dust”. In other words, a significant amount of the momentum went into blasting the hundreds of thousands of tons of cement away from the building.
(3) no – NONE – additional structural support for the floors. I.e., the collapse model assumes that each floor had barely enough structural support to hold its own weight, even though typical design was to provide for triple redundancy or more. This is relevant since it would take additional energy to remove this structural support, since in the pancake collapse theory, the top floors were obligated to crush the support of the lower floors.
(4) The collapse started at the top and the top consisted of all of the floors above the collapse point, which I selected to be the lowest floor of impact (the 93rd and 77th, respectively). This is conservative because, as you will see when using a higher start point, the collapse time is substantially longer. This assumption is also conservative because it assumes the combined weight of all of the floors above the collapse point hits the floor below it (even though that would not actually happen until all the top floors collapsed onto themselves, which itself never happened because of the dispersion of massive amounts of cement).
(5) Each floor is infinitesimally thin. This is a conservative assumption because it maximizes the distance the floors above a given floor accelerate prior to impact – i.e., it maximizes the free-fall zone and hence the momentum of the upper floors as they strike the lower floor. The script assumes that, immediately after impacting a floor below, the entire, full, unreduced weight of all floors above it fall in freefall onto the next floor below. One would have to remove the (substantial) width of the floors from the free-fall zone to be more accurate.
(6) The chunk of floors above the collapse point did not collapse into each other until all of the floors below had hit the ground. This is conservative because it assumes no energy was dissipated in collapsing the top floors until they reached the ground, at which point they were already moving at an incredible rate of speed and their collapse was very quick (i.e., freefall speed after already falling for hundreds of yards).
I also made numerous other conservative assumptions, including the floor on which the collapse started. This is all relevant because, from several sources, we basically know the exact time, within 1/10th of a second, it took each of the two towers to collapse.
One thing to keep in mind, which seems somewhat counterintuitive if you are not a physicist: even a free-falling object follows the law of conservation of momentum (in my script, I posited each floor was basically just starting it’s own freefall as the floors above it impacted that floor – i.e., no structural resistance whatsoever). For example, if you have two skydivers, one of whom is on a parachute (i.e., no structural support, but in freefall, though speed limited by the parachute), and another skydiver without a parachute strikes him, the first will speed up in descend while the second will slow down. This would be true even if there was no parachute and one was just falling faster than the other (say because one was spreading his body horizontally and the other diving toward the first, as in James Bond movies).
The result of the simulation (details below) was that it took 11.65 seconds for WTC 1 to simulate collapse (starting at the 93rd floor), and 10.02 seconds for WTC 2 to simulate collapse (starting at the 73rd floor). The official times for the WTC collapses, according to NIST (no longer available at http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm but available in archives):
The detailed results are as follows:
Collapse time not accounting for conservation of momentum (or, freefall, i.e., dropping a ball in a vacuum from the height of the start of the collapses)
WTC 1: 9.23427
WTC 2: 9.21210
Accounting for conservation of momentum
WTC 1: 11.64829
WTC 2: 10.02089
Showing the complete times per floor for WTC 1:
TIME EVENT
——– ———————————–
0.00000 COLLAPSE COMMENCES at floor 77
0.87834 Floor 77 collapses onto floor 76
1.24216 Floor 76 collapses onto floor 75
1.52133 Floor 75 collapses onto floor 74
1.75668 Floor 74 collapses onto floor 73
1.96403 Floor 73 collapses onto floor 72
2.15148 Floor 72 collapses onto floor 71
2.32387 Floor 71 collapses onto floor 70
2.48432 Floor 70 collapses onto floor 69
2.63502 Floor 69 collapses onto floor 68
2.77755 Floor 68 collapses onto floor 67
2.91312 Floor 67 collapses onto floor 66
3.04266 Floor 66 collapses onto floor 65
3.16690 Floor 65 collapses onto floor 64
3.28644 Floor 64 collapses onto floor 63
3.40179 Floor 63 collapses onto floor 62
3.51336 Floor 62 collapses onto floor 61
3.62149 Floor 61 collapses onto floor 60
3.72648 Floor 60 collapses onto floor 59
3.82859 Floor 59 collapses onto floor 58
3.92805 Floor 58 collapses onto floor 57
4.02506 Floor 57 collapses onto floor 56
4.11978 Floor 56 collapses onto floor 55
4.21237 Floor 55 collapses onto floor 54
4.30297 Floor 54 collapses onto floor 53
4.39170 Floor 53 collapses onto floor 52
4.47867 Floor 52 collapses onto floor 51
4.56398 Floor 51 collapses onto floor 50
4.64773 Floor 50 collapses onto floor 49
4.73000 Floor 49 collapses onto floor 48
4.81086 Floor 48 collapses onto floor 47
4.89039 Floor 47 collapses onto floor 46
4.96864 Floor 46 collapses onto floor 45
5.04567 Floor 45 collapses onto floor 44
5.12155 Floor 44 collapses onto floor 43
5.19633 Floor 43 collapses onto floor 42
5.27004 Floor 42 collapses onto floor 41
5.34273 Floor 41 collapses onto floor 40
5.41445 Floor 40 collapses onto floor 39
5.48523 Floor 39 collapses onto floor 38
5.55511 Floor 38 collapses onto floor 37
5.62412 Floor 37 collapses onto floor 36
5.69229 Floor 36 collapses onto floor 35
5.75966 Floor 35 collapses onto floor 34
5.82624 Floor 34 collapses onto floor 33
5.89208 Floor 33 collapses onto floor 32
5.95719 Floor 32 collapses onto floor 31
6.02159 Floor 31 collapses onto floor 30
6.08531 Floor 30 collapses onto floor 29
6.14837 Floor 29 collapses onto floor 28
6.21080 Floor 28 collapses onto floor 27
6.27260 Floor 27 collapses onto floor 26
6.33379 Floor 26 collapses onto floor 25
6.39441 Floor 25 collapses onto floor 24
6.45445 Floor 24 collapses onto floor 23
6.51394 Floor 23 collapses onto floor 22
6.57289 Floor 22 collapses onto floor 21
6.63132 Floor 21 collapses onto floor 20
6.68923 Floor 20 collapses onto floor 19
6.74665 Floor 19 collapses onto floor 18
6.80359 Floor 18 collapses onto floor 17
6.86005 Floor 17 collapses onto floor 16
6.91605 Floor 16 collapses onto floor 15
6.97160 Floor 15 collapses onto floor 14
7.02671 Floor 14 collapses onto floor 13
7.08140 Floor 13 collapses onto floor 12
7.13566 Floor 12 collapses onto floor 11
7.18952 Floor 11 collapses onto floor 10
7.24297 Floor 10 collapses onto floor 9
7.29603 Floor 9 collapses onto floor 8
7.34871 Floor 8 collapses onto floor 7
7.40102 Floor 7 collapses onto floor 6
7.45296 Floor 6 collapses onto floor 5
7.50453 Floor 5 collapses onto floor 4
7.55576 Floor 4 collapses onto floor 3
7.60664 Floor 3 collapses onto floor 2
7.65718 Floor 2 collapses onto floor 1
7.70740 Floor 1 collapses into the ground
7.75728 Floor 78 collapses into the ground
7.80685 Floor 79 collapses into the ground
7.85611 Floor 80 collapses into the ground
7.90505 Floor 81 collapses into the ground
7.95370 Floor 82 collapses into the ground
8.00205 Floor 83 collapses into the ground
8.05011 Floor 84 collapses into the ground
8.09789 Floor 85 collapses into the ground
8.14538 Floor 86 collapses into the ground
8.19260 Floor 87 collapses into the ground
8.23955 Floor 88 collapses into the ground
8.28624 Floor 89 collapses into the ground
8.33266 Floor 90 collapses into the ground
8.37882 Floor 91 collapses into the ground
8.42473 Floor 92 collapses into the ground
8.47040 Floor 93 collapses into the ground
8.51581 Floor 94 collapses into the ground
8.56099 Floor 95 collapses into the ground
8.60593 Floor 96 collapses into the ground
8.65064 Floor 97 collapses into the ground
8.69511 Floor 98 collapses into the ground
8.73937 Floor 99 collapses into the ground
8.78339 Floor 100 collapses into the ground
8.82720 Floor 101 collapses into the ground
8.87079 Floor 102 collapses into the ground
8.91417 Floor 103 collapses into the ground
8.95734 Floor 104 collapses into the ground
9.00030 Floor 105 collapses into the ground
9.04306 Floor 106 collapses into the ground
9.08561 Floor 107 collapses into the ground
9.12797 Floor 108 collapses into the ground
9.17013 Floor 109 collapses into the ground
9.21210 Floor 110 collapses into the ground
9.21210 COLLAPSE COMPLETE
How long was the Yom Kippur war? It wasn’t long enough to airlift every American tank to Israel. Furthermore, I don’t believe we had the airlift capacity to lift the Main Battle tank at that time. Even in Desert Storm it took at least 45 days to bring in Armor and heavy equipment to be prepared for a potential Iraqui ground assault and much of that came by sea from pre-positioned stocks.
The air combat capacity was built up more quickly
Surely, the US helped Israel,decisively, in 1973. The aid was resupply of Ammo and some weapons systems and most of all recon overflights and satellite imagery. If Henry the K claimed he did it unilaterly and on that massive scale and so quickly, he probably was polishing his image
Or a psychopathic dishonesty and the ability to make excuses for mass murderers.
They destroyed all the evidence. Including the metal of the WTC towers which was blasted with explosives, most likely nano-thermite.
The extremely politicized, abjectly anti-scientific NIST inquiry assumed from the outset that no explosives were used to bring down the buildings, and hence did not test for explosives or try to model the building collapses using explosive theories.
Ron ignores the fact that the WTC towers, owned for decades by the New York Port Authority, were transferred to Jew Silverstein a few months before 9/11, and all the “elevator” work he had done in the WTC buildings in the interim (by Mossad agents), and the massive insurance windfall he got after the event.
Ron also ignores Cheney was clearly involved (as was likely Rumsfeld, as he had to know no Boeing hit the Pentagon). Cheney not only ordered the stand-down, as per credible testimony, he was also responsible for the coverup. But yeah, the op itself was a combined op by Mossad and Saudi intelligence (that supplied the patsies).
But he didn’t find that Revusky’s article “credible”. Are you cognitively impaired?
Instead for sure.
“The sudden total collapse of Building Seven, never hit by any jetliners is also extremely implausible.”
That fact alone is sufficient to render the official story DOA.
It would not be wholly inaccurate to call 911 an “inside job”, as Mr. Unz admits himself that there must have been at least some, and possibly many, people in our own government, quite high up, but perhaps not high enough, who assisted the act. Who they are and who they are not can only be guessed at, but it most definitely could not have been done without them. Were they American? We have millions of people with dual citizenship in this country. Are any of them American?
In regard to the anthrax attack, at the time of 911 I watched no television. I only read theprinted word as I find it easier to find truth when the lie is printed, rather than the lie that only flits across int eh screen in seconds. Harder to put sand on that kind of eel.
One of the things published in the newspapers at the time was that the 911 investigation was “suspended” because of the anthrax attacks as all hands on deck were needed to solve a problem that could continue and persist, rather than a problem that clearly ended on September 11.
The anthrax attacks were done for that very purpose. They certainly could not have some fat, dumb and happy FBI agents investigating and finding out any inconvenient facts..
LOL, dude it’s Giant Food and I believe I bought at the one in Germantown, Maryland. I’m not hasbara and believe if anyone it would be Israel behind a false flag attack. https://stores.giantfood.com/md/germantown/13060-middlebrook-rd
‘This ‘truther’ schtick is absurd. Remember that Radical Muslims also did a number of other large terrorist attacks outside the US (such as London 2005, Madrid 2004, Mumbai 2006, Kenya and Tanzania 1998, Beirut Marine Barracks 1983, Bali 2002, France 2015, etc.). The notion that the biggest one was a false flag is absurd, because to believe that, one has to ignore the large number of other attacks that Radical Muslims have undertaken.
You can turn that around. The other radical Muslim terrorist attacks were crude strikes, with a high failure rate and limited numbers of casualties.
Why should we assume they just got really, really good all of a sudden? I’ll grant that it’s a possibility — but it’s like the lifetime .200 hitter suddenly hitting for the cycle. Could happen — but the record doesn’t make it likely.
List all the other skyscrapers radical Muslim terrorists have completely leveled.
Let’s assume that the cause of the building collapse was internal explosives, not being struck by planes.
Let’s assume that the cause of the internal explosives was not Muslim terrorists, but a nefarious someone else.
Why bother with the plane hijacking at all? Why not blow up the buildings, and blame it on the Muslim terrorists?
In reverse, why not claim the terrorists weren’t actually Muslim terrorists but clever Mossad operatives? Why this whole engineering discussion on the “real cause” of the building collapse?
Further, the Mossad thing doesn’t work, it has to be an inside job because if it was “obvious” that the building collapse was internal explosives, you have to have investigators who are part of the conspiracy to pin it on the planes.
My particular theory is that Allah was behind the 9/11 attacks, and buildings collapsed in Allah’s miraculous concurrence with the verdict passed on the decadent West. It seems simpler and more plausible than Ron Unz’s pet theory.
Thanks for the insider trading link. I have only glanced at it but it has made me realise that there are many markets around the world which could have provided the means for insider trading and it would therefore be a big data collection and statistical analysis job to check for relevant insider trading. Still the recently commenced or some other potential (probably class action) litigation should, via discovery and sub poena, be able to produce the needed information as I presume the SEC keeps more than its own NY and Chicago data. Presumably there would be records of analysis done way back and judgments about it. You have to factor in that real insiders to a plot would be seriously pissed off by opportunists making insider trading profits. You can imagine even the admission that ” my wife got her brother in Singapore to buy some gold” would elicit reproof.
As to people being absent on the day you have to assume that ruthless planners are not going to let that beca feature which arouses suspicion or leads to whistleblowing even years later. So, it has to have been very selective and barely detectable. You might as senior plotter summon a couple of special people to a meeting in DC or maybe organise a plausible breakfast meeting but “plausible” has to be key, and statistically barely a blip. So… can you really take that one anywhere?
Please learn to distinguish explosives from thermite or nano thermite.
Thermite is intensely exothermic and can be used to quickly cut metal beams, but it does not explode like real explosives like RDX or some of the newer stuff.
Zero evidence that TMD was a part of WTC design. Zero evidence that U-238 was used for anything in WTC.
You have created a nice story but it is a story. Just a story. The story is your child so you are in love with it and you are immune to any constructive criticism of it.
I will entertain any crazy conspiracy but my mom’s friend lives in Arlington and saw the plane strike the Pentagon. I posted this on Revusky’s piece on Betty Ong and was immediately attacked. My mother’s friend in Arlington, VA, called my mother (in Maryland) on the phone hysterically on the morning of 9/11 saying she just say a plane fly into the Pentagon. I had been there with my mom watching the TV news coverage and they were reporting that the Capitol had been struck. Only later did they report the Pentagon was hit.
See Operation Nickel Grass
M60 tank unloaded from a USAF C-5 Galaxy during Operation Nickel Grass
One last point. Mr. Unz states that people like President Bush, Condolezza Rice, et al are not capable of committing this murderous act upon its own people, but I he should think more carefully about the matter.
After all, we already know Lyndon Johnson is quite capable of murdering his own people, or better, leaving them to be murdered. And there is no way that anyone could have blown the head off JFK without help from the “inside”, before, during and after his head was blown off.
And what about President Bush, who Mr. Unz somehow believes is a humdrum Republican whose only concerns is about mundane matters like taxes? Did he know there were no weapons of mass destruction before he went into Iraq? I think one can say he did, as did all his “senior officials” involved. Did he care that thousands of American soldiers, and over 100,000 Iraqii human beings (civilians) were senselessly killed?
I think this tape says it all, and please notice that the loudest guffaws come from an audience of media people.
Yes, I think it was an inside job, or better, perhaps an outside job, with plenty of help before, during and after the event from the inside. .
renfro, you are doing a terrific, courageous, & timely job!
… Who else here participating at U.R. comments ever surfaced with the findings of Somerset County coroner, Wallace Miller?
… Fyi, months ago, the brilliant & M.I.A.-commenter, SolontoCroesus, described his journey to the weird Shanksville-memorial & I trust he knows about missing bodies at “Flight 93 crash scene.”
… Also, renfro, the amazing Ron Unz once marveled at the volume & quality of comments on a Philip Giraldi “9/11, Dancing Israelis” focused article.
… I trust Ron shall heed your originals to-date, as his latest “American Pravda” surges along at a 2,000 comment pace, & that is despite The Molten Steel-Star Medal (9/11/2018) being awarded to Laurent Guyenot… uh, instead of the deserving Blackened Betty-Eye Revusky!
… Thank you, renfro!
You forgot to take into account the magic pixie dust infused in the furniture in WTC-7 That alone is sufficient to demolish each floor and cause free fall.
No, that was my mother trolling your mother. She gets mischievous sometimes.
Sorry.
Strange, because my mom’s friend said she saw a giant dildo strike the Pentagon on 9/11! She lives just across the road and she distinctly remembers it was one of those knobbly dildos.
You were a child who did not go to school on that Tuesday?
On the one hand, I can think of several examples of ‘conspiracy theories’ that were definitively proven to be unfounded.
For example, I’ve read excerpts from several British war diaries of units involved in the retreat to Dunkirk describing ‘fifth columnists’ being seen signaling to the Germans. Said ‘fifth columnists’ are then dragged out and summarily shot.
Rather sadly, it turns out the Germans had no fifth column at work in the 1940. The Frenchmen and Belgians the British shot were simply hapless civilians, presumably lighting a stove or something.
So I tend to be dismissive of 9/11 ‘trutherism.’ People used to see the hand of God behind sudden catastrophes. Now they see deep-laid plots. As Freud said in another connection, ‘sometimes a table is just a table.’ I find it hard to believe massive, simultaneous demolitions were carried out, while four aircraft were successfully hijacked by Arab terrorists — and all without a serious hitch or fatal breach of security. It all went off like clockwork, did it? Improbable — and why take such a colossal risk?
On the other hand, as far as I’m concerned it’s a proven fact that the Israelis knew the attack was going to happen, and knew enough of the details to be in position filming as it took place. An interesting claim that went by in the early days was that the Israelis warned us, but we ignored the warning. That tack seems to have been abandoned — I assume the FBI wouldn’t take the fall for that. On the other hand, the very facts that this line was tried out but then abandoned, that the FBI held some Israelis for over two months, etc suggests a lack of perfect, massive coordination.
Then again, I find it improbable that Building Seven could have collapsed because the building next to it fell down, or the fire spread, or whatever. It was a modern skyscraper, not a house of cards.
So I’m open. The ‘official story’ is glaringly incomplete. On the other hand, I neither believe in God nor massive, deep-laid and successfully carried out conspiracies.
Well said.
Please don’t be pedantic with someone leaving comments on a board. And if you so choose to be pedantic, please validate that you are correct.
See this page for a better explication of incendiary vs explosive properties. Plenty of other sources if you don’t like that one.
Controlled demolitions of buildings do not need planes, neither full nor half empty. You only need pictures of planes to make people believe that it was a terrorist attack and not an insurance scam. In fact, you don’t even need pictures, although of course fake videos and phony documentaries of a day in the life of a trainee fire fighter help to create the illusion. All you need is a few people, (not too obviously Israeli) to say they saw a plane, and to add authoritatively “and I know planes.”
17,000 people came out of the buildings. It should have been 50,000 to 100,000 who came out if the buildings were really operating. There were so few people not because people stayed home or because Odino issued a warning to its chosen people. What it says is that the buildings were already mostly empty, not economically viable, and the upper floors with all those “victims” were also empty. (Real people simply walked out of the upper floors above the phony plane explosions and spoke about it.) The fire department’s role was not to “put out any fires” it was only to evacuate. And they themselves evacuated before the buildings were blown up (the propane burners were running out of fuel) by being told “another plane is on the way.” What a coincidence.
If it seems too good to be true, it is not true. When some people tried to collect life insurance fraudulently they were caught in two weeks because the authorities knew that the offices the supposed victims were visiting did not exist, although these offices were mentioned in the newspapers as having been destroyed with all their fake employees inside. The small fraudsters were fooled by the bigger fraudsters. But you do need the collusion of local, state, and federal government to make these things work, so there has to be enough money to go around for everyone, and early retirement for some victims who want to head for the beach. And you need the cooperation of the the free press to know what to say and what not to say. Hollywood studios simulated a train wreck and massive fire every forty five minutes for visitors in their amusement parks. A sucker is born every minute. There were of course some accidents and there were real victims, but their names are not read out on 9/11. They would be in the millions. Ask not for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for you.
No, please Ron, not just a couple of days. This isn’t fading, like 50 Year old events into the realm of the merely surprising. It is seriously important and, with further careful analysis, despite the wilder commenters, your webzine could be very important. So….
Please give us and the Western world the benefit of your scientific background – including your ability to select your graduate students (so to speak – full profs would be better) to help get the science and engineering right.
That said, I acknowledge your top rated BS detector. High, sharp intellect, wide knowledge and a sceptical disposition go a long way, but, given that your readers all have some sort of BS detector that they think adequate, however misguidedly, it is your scientific thinking which could really make a difference.
Are you sure she saw the plane STRIKE the Pentagon? Have you seen the five frames of a video the Pentagon released showing what does not appear to be a plane, and the almost complete lack of wreckage? Do you know why the surveillance videos of the areas are still classified as top secret? I mean, what is so secret about a plane crash? How could that harm national security?
I was also confused about the witness account but there is an excellent video which explains that these people really did see what they think they did – except the plane DID NOT strike the Pentagon, but flew barely over it (i.e., it followed a path as if it were to hit the Pentagon, but at the last moment, pulled up and flew over it). I can’t find that video at the moment but there is an excerpt at
and similar evidence in Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory segment on the Pentagon on 9/11.
On September 8th, Russia Today reported that US jets dropped phosphorus bombs on the province of Deir al-Zor, which I am sure is full of civilians. They denied it. The US military said they don’t even have any phosphorous bombs.
I had wondered if this was reported in any US publication or media site, so I ran a search under phosphorus and Deir al Zor and found that the story was reported by Japan, India, all the countries of the mid-east and even in the Jersualem Post, but it was not reported in any US newspaper or media site.
Phosphorus bombs. What kind of human being does that?
I recall when we killed thousands of civilians in Mosul and the US was called before the UN to explain what happened. It was a week after the event. They said they needed more time to investigate, even though it was their own actors who did the bombing. Yet, Trump knew in 24 hours that Assad used chemical weapons on his own people, even though we had no presence there? Trump then sent out a “tweet” one week before he bombed Syria, saying, “the bombs are coming.” I had wondered at the time how well the Syrian people slept that week, and could only imagine Putin sending out a tweet to us that “the bombs are coming.”
What kind of human being does that?
People in our country are not capable of killing their own citizens, you say? I don’t go to malls or theatres or ballgames, nor do I fly on planes anymore. Do you?
With Sidney Hersh, that question is valid – he has shown some real courage in connection with other stories. Bob Woodward of course is and has always been a CIA tool.
No, Ron, it’s not your ignorance of the facts, however ignorant you may be of the facts. It’s an idiot-savant level of complete tone deafness about political reality. Either that, or you’re attempting to develop a new line of cover for the perps, now that the damning facts about the mode of the WTC Buildings’ collapse, the NORAD stand-down and much else have ceased to be controversial. Here’s the money quote:
So we are to dismiss the idea that the President of the United States the Director of the CIA and sundry other people who direct the political, military and intelligence affairs of the United States actually know what the Hell is going on, and therefore, could have have had no advance knowledge of 9/11, notwithstanding that the US had been given multiple warnings of the impending attack by foreign intelligence services, and the fact that Bush, to his annoyance, had been briefed about what was likely coming down.
I’m sorry, but your Review is either a propaganda operation, or a rather sad example of how high IQ and lots of cash mean damn all when it comes to understanding the human heart in all its deviousness, and especially the deviousness of those who have climbed to the very pinnacle of power.
As for your claim that never in the history of mankind has any state murdered its own citizens for political purposes, so what, even if that claim were true? The disaster of mass democracy is new and the means to ensure that the masses obey the leaders rather than the leaders being compelled, against all reason, to obey the wishes of the masses will obviously be different from the means adopted by all other forms of government that have been tried throughout past ages.
And, since WW2, the practice of government-instigated murder of innocent citizens of democratic countries under the guise of terrorism is not a novelty, but a well-established practice as anyone who has made a study of NATO’s Operation Gladio, the Bologna rail bombing masssacre, etc. would know.
Ok UTU, Hit it… Give it your best shot… go hard and leave no part out, I have a whole bunch of time to entertain heap and heaps of constructive criticism… so throw down for everyone to judge your veracity…
You claim the towers did not have TMD systems, tell us why, and how you know different…. then explain how buildings like these could have been possible without them… As to your claim of zero evidence, well that is not true at all… as i have stated…
Another line of thinking to follow through. Given that the plot has to be one in which the plausibility of it all being fanatical Arabs committing murder-suicide with planes is maintained how can WTC 7 be part of the plan?
Could it be a double bluff? Thus we would be supposed to think “No plotters would be stupid enough to include a demolition of WTC 7 in their plot”?
No, it can’t have depended on fires started by debris from one of the towers so WTC 7 raises a serious problem for anyone trying to argue that it was other than an accident. And that of course has a bearing on those who try to argue that the fires and gravity weren’t enough – though I haven’t noticed many (any) of the UR truthers distinguishing, as NIST did, between the different ways heat acted to bring down WTC7 compared with the Twin Towers.
As a relatively new reader of your site my early opinion has been very positive. You are a well informed man, and an excellent writer who has surrounded himself with cadre of contributors which enhances my early impression. Your archive software was definitely needed, and brilliant. However, I am puzzled at how you, such an obviously smart man could have misdiagnosed 911, and fell for the early cover story. I am not an intellectual, physicist or engineer, but I’m a salesman who can spot bullshit. On 911, like many Americans, I watched with others around our office television as the towers collapse. But, I knew 56 minutes before the south tower fell that it was all bullshit. When the 2nd plane sliced through the outer wall I was already silently doubting what I was seeing, and when the undamaged nose of that airplane came out the other side of the tower, well I knew it was all bullshit, and I began uncontrollably repeating out loud, and over and over that it was all bullshit. Everyone looked at me as if I was a traitor but, throughout the day the news channels just kept corroborating my suspicions with reports like that of the magic passport belonging to one of the (never proven to be) hijackers being found by the NYPD on the sidewalk. We were asked to believe the titanium black boxes disintegrated, but a paper and plastic document survived the collisions and fires. Or suddenly the laws of physics changed, and in less than an hour an 1100 degree fire heated through hundreds of miles of reinforced steel to cause a pancake collapse. And, by the way viewers, don’t pay attention to those 60 ton beams that just launched into space, and disappeared in front of your eyes. That didn’t happen. How about that female reporting for a British TV network? She was reporting live from Manhattan that just moments ago Trade Center Building 7 had fallen, again due to office fires. But there was a problem. Her news hadn’t happened yet. Building 7 was still standing, and clearly visible over her right shoulder. It wouldn’t fall for another 20 or more minutes. I just mentioned 4 of the more obvious, and questionable. There were plenty of others. Too many for a smart man to miss, especially for months.
Another thing bothering me is what you said about Rumsfeld, and I quote. “Both Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were then widely regarded as Bush Republicans, lacking any significant Neocon ties, … “. Wasn’t Rumsfeld part of the Project For A New American Century in the late 90’s, along with all those other in need of new Pearl Harbor , neocons?
Anyway Ron, I do like your stuff, but you are leaving yourself suspect, and open to questions.
Because then there would be an investigation of the explosives, and where they came from, and who placed them there.
Why would the culprits expose themselves? WTF?
And that, my dear, is precisely what happened. Cheney was point man on the cover-up. The NIST, which was the sole group to investigate the building collapses, expressly stated that they did not test for explosives because they concluded, before their investigation (i.e., Cheney told them), that no explosives were used. So they did not even investigate explosives at all, they did not test for explosive residue in the metal or dust samples, they did not do anything to check if the buildings were demolished. Nothing. Nada.
Capiche?
Are you arguing that it was or might have been essentially an insurance scam? If no, I can read on past that suggestion. If yes, you are barmy.
My deepest apologies anon 266, however you should be aware the photo you refer to is a hoax. BTW, Food Giant is a Houston Texas grocery chain.
Wolfowitz has been making his career on anti Iraq agenda fromm1979 His angst hatred against Saddam dates back to 1979 His love for Israel goes back to his genetic code. 1991 he was telling Wesley Clarke abut defeating Iraq Iran Libya Somalia Yemen and Syria . Its not that he was in favor of Palestine He is a sponsor of 1996 PNAC doc which states the peace fr land is wrong . In 1993 WTC bombing he tried to put the blame on Iraq. His friend Perle Lut Scooter Kagan Kristol and Kruthamhher made their intentions clear long ago- remove Saddam ad kill other regimes. They couldn’t say same against Palestine because of Oslo was American policy . They just could not go after directly against PA at that time
They had to wait It was safer fr them to create anti Muslim hatred and engulf the entire region and hope for Palestine get snared.
It doesn’t mean they did not try to blame periodically and later .Sharon was blaming Palestine authority and Arafat to be nothing but off shoot f Al Quiada No one bought it .
May be you should ask the neocons why they did not blame Arafat r PA. Was it because West Bank and Jerusalem and Gaza were very close to Israel , very close to Sharon’s future grave and Netanyahu’s brothel frequented by his son
???
I said nothing of the kind, I merely pointed out that the manipulation by parasites Unz brought up is unlikely to be a good explanation for why people have odd perceptions because immune systems are very very powerful and often too powerful. I happen to think countries can be conceptualised as living things that try to survive by fighting off foreign influences and in the same way as human immune systems are difficult to beat and sometimes do more damage than what they are fighting the idea that one must reject harmful memes is useful, but can be taken too far. Those two professors he cites are both interested in spirituality and ethereal matters and thus their academic repute is in a certain subject, one which may be an indication of their unusual style of processing information.
Griffin in particular has a considerable reputation for original thinking in his area of expertise, and as I point out Unz set up a business under conditions of uncertainty and succeeded in grand style, while others did not dare. Quite possibly Griffin and Unz have superior cognitive faculties, but they also knew what they were doing so well that their gut feelings about the myriad inevitable unknowns in their projects were quite reliable. So all I would say about Unz is he is maybe less secure in taking even tiny leaps into uncertainty about fields in which he lacks a grounding in and his default is thus (so to speak) “Do you have a mathematical proof for this statement or only a physicist’s plausibility argument?”. In other words, I see the post’s train of thought on these matters as highly conservative decision making about things known relatively little about and thus assessed by falling back on explicit formal logic and deferring to authorities such as Griffin instead of an intuition from a broad based understanding.
No, I just think it will act to take the steam out of the Israel Lobby opposition to immigration restriction in the West.
I am not aware of them ever advocating it, and that is the whole point of encouraging something so valuable for Israel and yet so divisive for the beating Diaspora heart of the pro immigration lobby.
[Using allcaps in comments is shouting. Stop shouting or your comments will be trashed.]
I WISH MR. UNZ WOULD WRITE ABOUT VINCE FOSTER. HE DID NOT KILL HIMSELF.
HE DID NOT KILL HIMSELF. READ DCDAVE.COM
Here is another issue i have dealt with in the past…
The story was ‘The melted vehicles of 9/11’ From a forum called Wake Up From Your Slumber…
This forum was the first spot that i went to town on the stupid things said about this event and wild explanations of the event and the weird things that befell the area.
There was over 1200 cars, buses ,trucks and other vehicles Totally destroyed in the area, Many were burned in very weird ways, Much was debated about the causes of those effects and what may have caused them.
My thinking about this EM effect you can see in some of the video post collapse of the afterglow, and weird shit like the ‘Spire” collapse led me to ask for what reason would you want to do such a thing… my thinking was to clean up any residue of those U-238 granules that may be left upon the surface in the area…. Hit the area with enough power to cause them to combust and so be removed…
But all that is a whole 30,000 word tell all by it’s self, But i can still quote the entire thread from top to bottom from that time even though it has been scrubbed from the net by Tom Sullivan. That was the first real workout i had dealing with persons paid to debunk things that they could not debunk.
Anyone that was privy to that post from 2009 was witness to much of the gate-keeping about fires and their causes of this event…. It’s been a long time and i have visited many forums since then and Not one plausible refutation has ever been forthcoming, EVER.
Can you explain the instant messaging service warning Israelis to stay away from WTC 2 hours before the strikes by Planes ?
Can you explain the dancing ?
Can you explain further seizures of maps cardboard cutters in the hands of the Israeli citizen after 911?
Better get rid of those before they (and you) get used in the next false flag school shooting.
Yes, you are quite right. Nothing was found at the crash site in Shanksville Pennsylvania. I don’t even know why they call it a crash site, but they do. Only some garbage brought in from a nearby dump. Except, of course, they did find alleged hijacker Ziad Jerrah’s passport clearly proving he was there. The terrorists always drop their passports at the scene of the crime, both in the US and in France, in order to frame themselves. I guess you could call it their modus operandi.
Not really high crime but getting there and the neighborhood was deteriorating. The WTC was supposed to rejuvenate the area and it did.
I remember the post office parking lot all the vehicles destroyed.
In all fairness, that’s called political cover. He does not want to accuse US government officials of such crimes absent more solid evidence.
Of course, it is well known both Cheney and Rumsfeld, who Unz seeks to “protect”, were PNAC men (along with J. Bolton and the assorted other neo-con filth) who sold his soul to the Satan (Israel) long before 9/11. He signed PNAC’s “new 9/11” wish/prophesy, and drafted the list of countries, including Iraq, to destroy, long before 9/11, and gleefully participated in its fulfillment, including 9/11 (his role, at the command center, was to order a stand-down and release of any Mossad agents caught and to stifle any investigation afterward – i.e., he was the critical piece, the stand-down and cover-up piece, without which Israel would have been caught.
Cheney is such a despicable monster, if I were ever to meet him in person, I do not think I could stop myself from trying to rip out his satanic throat.
But, as General Clark pointed out, Iran itself was to be taken out within 5 years. They were just unable to realize their full plans, so yeah, end of the day it hasn’t worked out completely – yet. Iran is still on the table, in case you haven’t noticed. They are trying to overthrow the government and replace with a puppet one way or another.
anon # 228 asked Katlin: “Can you explain the instant messaging service warning Israelis to stay away from WTC 2 hours before the strikes by Planes ?”
Hi # 228,
… Unsure what Anatoly could explain, but in “Lies and the lying liars who tell them,” the grope-scandalized ex-Senator, Al Franken, explained his weird 9/11 family experience with an “instant messaging service.”
… At any rate, please refer below to a former airport ticket-manager’s expression of guilt for 9/11. (zzZigh) My copy of C. Bollyn’s “Solving 9/11” is loaned out, but I recall how he mentioned the name of an Israeli company which managed to get security contracts at American airports.
… Thanks # 228! Uh, may I call you Two-To-Ate?
Larry Silverstein was offered a settlement by the company. He refused it went to court and won billions more than the first offer. It was just a more elaborate Jewish lightening scam than normal
Did you ever see this video?
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=The+Melted+vehicles+of+9%2f11&view=detail&mid=F19322F5E301B788299BF19322F5E301B788299B&FORM=VIRE
Ron Unz is merely human. As an”early adopter” of the holyco$t hoax (since 1985) I fancied myself above the BS.
But taking the step to believing that my own government was involved in 911 was a bridge too far for me. I didn’t believe it for many years, and I woudn’t look.
Until I accidentally saw the penthouse on WTC 7 committing suicide about 7 seconds before the rest of the building committed suicide. I’m embarrassed that it took me so long, but it did.
Not all of us are blessed with the ability to instantly deprogram ourselves. And not all of us are blessed with Unz’ writing skills. On the whole, I prefer him on our side.
The jewish message service is called “Odiga” and was used to inform jews who worked in the WTC not to report to work.
Thanks for this article, ot contains some interesting information I haven’t considered so far.
However, there’s one thing you need to keep in mind:
Nobody, not even Israel, could have pulled this off without inside assistance. Israel can do a lot of things, but they can’t force NORAD and the Pentagon’s air defenses to stand down. Bush’s secretary of transportation, Norman Mineta, clearly indicated Cheney gave (or at the very least confirmed) that stand-down order. (Don’t take my word for it, search for Mineta Cheney “does the order still stand” on Yandex, DuckDuckGo or the likes.)
Israel could have fed Cheney disinfo to draw false conclusions, but what sort of disinfo would make him issue and stick with a stand-down order? I can’t think of anything there.
Israel couldn’t have told the Secret Service not to rush Bush to safety when he was at a well-publicized event a mere 8 miles from an airport. They knew that Bush wasn’t a target.
Bush lied about how he found out what was going on – said he saw the first plane impact on TV before the second plane hit. But that’s not possible, footage of the first plane hitting was aired a lot later. Israel couldn’t have made him do that.
Israel could very well have “leaked” false intel to cause the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in “retaliation”, but could Israel by itself have caused all investigations to conclude there was no wrongdoing whatsoever except the ridiculous 19 Arabs with boxcutters? Robert Mueller “fixed” the investigations, not Israel.
9/11 may not have been the sole work of Bush administration insiders — but at the very least, some very high up insiders were in on it.
If you look at who had the opportunity to rig the WTC towers with demolition charges, all evidence points at a security company with Marvin Bush on its board.
Israel by itself couldn’t have made sure that nobody involved got punished (not a single military person degraded or so for failing to act? Really, unless they were following exactly their orders?)
If you search the net for “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”/”New Pearl Harbor”, you’ll find that several Bush insiders (including a lot who also have ties to Israel) were calling for invasion of the Middle East, shredding the Constitution (AKA Patriot Act), and massive increases in military spending (all of which happened because of 9/11) — and they pointed out that the public at large would never accept those measures absent a triggering event, like a “New Pearl Harbor”, about a year before the new Pearl Harbor they were waiting for happened. Coincidence? Unlikely.
I think it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that Bush administration insiders and Israel were collaborating on this one.
I’ll go a step further and name some guilty individuals (this list is by no means complete):
Dick Cheney. There’s no other explanation for his stand-down order.
Binyamin Netanyahu. (“This is very good…”, sent the Mossad agents to “document the event”)
Robert Mueller. (Might not have been involved in pulling it off, but he was certainly involved in the coverup.)
Larry Silverstein. (Demolition charges planted, at the very least had advance knowledge so he could commit insurance fraud)
Dov Zakheim (Pentagon comptroller who “lost” trillions, previous job at Systems Planning Corp. developing the very kind of remote controllable plane technology that was likely used to steer the planes into their targets)
Buzz Krongard (Highly involved in the put option trading)
Very likely guilty, but with less solid proof:
Donald Rumsfeld
Paul Wolfowitz
Richard Perle
Michael Chertoff
George Bush Sr.
Geroge W. Bush
Marvin Bush
All members of the 9/11 commission (for the coverup)
John McCain
Bill and Hillary Clinton (Bush was in office for 9 months when it happened. Planning this took longer than that, more likely than not the parts of the plan to be carried out on the inside were in the making during the previous administration. And of course Hillary was a main cheerleader for the resulting wars.)
Indeed. And it is that implausibility that forces anyone with an ounce of intellectual integrity to question the narrative.
Ron should get a Pulitzer for all the investigative work he’s done.
He won’t of course. Instead it will go to a black, female “journalist” writing the one millionth article about her experiences as a black woman in America.
Don’t forget the attempts on de Gaulle and the rumors regarding involvement of Israeli agents in the death of Vince Foster (perhaps as a favor to the Clintons). As to the art students operation, I remember thinking at the time how incredibly brazen it was. They seemed to have no concern about repercussions of exposure.
If Israeli intelligence files were ever publicly revealed much of the history of the last 70 years might have to be rewritten.
Unz commenters refuse to believe anything not on the internet. Personal knowledge is especially scorned and distrusted.
BBC explanation for anticipating the collapse of WT7 by c. 15 minutes
is that they got the info from Reuters.
in another vast (((cohencidence)))
Reuters is a (((Rothschild))) property.
Just watched it. Thank you.
uh – huh…
nonetheless, hundreds of Jews were killed in the buildings, others aboard the planes.
for example, most of the nearly 300 Cantor-Fitzgerald dead in the North Tower strike
were Jews. Interesting, though, that the (((boss man))) of Cantor-F. was not among them.
on 9/11, he was late for work ’cause “he had to drive his son to school”
So there’s the motive for preparing America for war, although of courser it was not terrorists the US was after but the overthrow of seven mid-East governments.
And as the authors* of the Project for the New American Century report: Rebuilding America’s Defenses, put it before the event:
And as Geoge W. Bush dictated for the White House daily log on 9/11:
Yes, Israelis almost certainly played key roles in 9/11, but that’s not because Israel committed an act of war against the United States, it was because, Israel, a dependent of the United States, was a willing collaborator of the US in a US a state crime against democracy. By using Israeli operatives and agents, the trail of incriminating evidence would point away from the US Government, while protecting the criminals who, under Israeli law could not be extradited for interrogation or prosecution — not that the US Government made any serious attempt to identify those responsible for 9/11 (or those responsible for the pathetic intelligence and military failures that allowed the attack to be successfully carried out).
As for the purpose of the crime, that is obvious to anyone with any grasp of geopolitics. The US grip on global power was, by 2001, already slipping as America’s industrial base was being shipped to China and other sweatshop economies. To ensure continued American global hegemony, it was deemed necessary, therefore, to establish full US control over the World’s largest concentration of readily accessible energy, namely the seven Mid-East states, beginning with Iraq, selected for overthrow and US subjugation.
———
* Signatories of this document included: Elliott Abrams, Jeb” Bush, Dick Cheney, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz
I suppose we should trust you to have worthwhile opinions and well researched knowledge. A pity you distract your would be acolytes by calling Seymour Hersh “Sidney”. Ah well what’s the difference between one wordy Yid and another?
This brilliant video does nothing more than sum up the “official” 9/11 narrative that I suppose people like “jb” believe faithfully. It boggles the mind just how anyone could believe a conspiracy theory as outrageous as the official narrative:
‘On September 8th, Russia Today reported that US jets dropped phosphorus bombs on the province of Deir al-Zor, which I am sure is full of civilians. They denied it. The US military said they don’t even have any phosphorous bombs…’
I assume Israel did it. They have F-15’s. They have phosphorus bombs. They like to drop phosphorus on civilians. They like to commit false flag atrocities by pretending to be us.
It’s kinda like if I find raccoon tracks all over the kitchen and somebody made a mess out of the catfood. Presumably, a raccoon came in the cat door.
Lol.
So the Indian, like the Jew, has a stake in making muslims look bad.
So you are willing to overlook heaps of facts just so Americans can help India with its Muslim problem?
Fat chance Hindu Thomm.
Cheney’s morals are surely no worse than those of any other political leader. Cheney is a realist, meaning he believes that raisons d’état trump conventional morality, meaning that citizens are expendable in the advancement of the national interest.
To be more specific, it is difficult to see a moral difference between killing 3000 of your fellow citizens to justify multiple wars of aggression that will kill hundreds of thousands if not millions — the ultimate evil under the principles that emerged from the Nuremberg tribunal, and conscripting thousands or even millions of your own citizens and sending them to the battle front where many will be blown to pieces, gassed, buried alive (as happened to thousands of Saddam’s infantry during the Second Gulf War), or burned alive, with napalm, white phosphorus, etc.
“nothing was found at the crash site…”
that is a lie. Go over to Flight 93’s wiki page, then follow up the sources: the plane augered in and largely disintergrated; DNA from the hundreds of bits and shards of human flesh that were found was linked to about 1/3 of the passengers.
this “there were no planes” claptrap
is a standard (((hasbara trick))) aimed at portraying all 9/11 all Conspiracy Theory & Fact
as tinfoil. And with considerable success.
So?
No surprise that (((Anatoly Karlin))) wants to correct the record on this “conspiracy”.
Also not surprised that he uses something flimsy like “something he heard about steel beams” to try and refute a well sourced article.
No response to the other many arguments that Ron put forth? Quit being such a lightweight Anatoly and think things through before you post.
Thanks. Only if Wikipedia corraborates my post will it be believed. Personal knowledge from a very anti Israel state department FSO who was in the Israel section in 1973 told to me can’t be believed unless the information is on Wikipedia.
Actually, it will probably go to a black, male-to-female transgender “journalist” writing the one millionth article about its experience as a black male trying to be a woman in America.
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Zhao-withdraws-from-SF-school-board-race-after-13219197.php?t=23cf374e59
Ah, the way back machine… love that thing…
Wow 2007… so long ago… please have a real good look.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070329042530/www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/1002/
https://web.archive.org/web/20080513025735/http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com:80/node/1002?page=1
https://web.archive.org/web/20080513025740/http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com:80/node/1002?page=2
You will have to take some time to read this one in full but there is plenty there.
You don’t normally sound like a nutter, especially the sort that sprays the name Rothschild round like confetti as some kind of symbol. Using Wikipedia for timesaving once I had Googled “who owns Reuters” I couldn’t even find one mention of “Rothschild” in the description of its 169 Year history. Standard internet procedure means I label you a sophisticated troll whose purpose is to protect core doctrines like the essential truth of the Holocaust story.
An Israeli was in charge of Pentagon finances?? OMG.
You’re a funny guy.
His mom’s friend is a Nigerian princess BTW. That’s why I’m a bit sceptical.
Right, I really should base my world view on what an anonymous person on the internet writes.
And, obviously, that hearsay report by Mr. Anonymous was also on the internet .
Ron,
I’d recommend reading Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida to add to to your knowledge on the topic. Mohamed Atta was undoubtedly some kind of intelligence operative building a legend.
–Look into modified iterations of the PROMIS software, and it’s connection to 9/11.
https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/oct/12/promis-israel/
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2001/jun/14/20010614-023749-9383r/
https://boingboing.net/2001/10/17/remember-promis-it-w.html
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/jan/6/20030106-083824-4351r/
https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/jun/28/sir-robert-maxwells-fbi-PROMIS/
https://www.kesq.com/news/part-31-secret-government-program-linked-to-local-murders/59404007
https://canadafreepress.com/2006/dastych013106.htm
–Check out the 911 whistleblower Indira Singh, and her comments on a company called Ptech–who had quite a lucrative contract with the FAA prior to the attacks.
https://www.computerworld.com/article/2579234/security0/feds-turn-up-heat-on-high-tech-industry-links-to-al-qaeda.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20040127023935/http://www.seacoastonline.com/2003news/01052003/biz_nati/6299.htm
https://www.investigativeproject.org/1094/ptech-officials-indicted-for-allegedly-concealing
https://www.fromthewilderness.net/free/ww3/012705_ptech_pt2.shtml
Other details worth noting
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hijackers-lived-with-fbi-informant/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-fbi-kept-lips-zipped/
https://web.archive.org/web/20040214143324/http://www.thememoryhole.org/tenet-911.htm
http://www.rediff.com/money/2001/dec/17wtc.htm
http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/05/07/faa_managers_destroyed_911_tape/
This was a well orchestration operation with a lot of moving parts, and one of the keys ways they were able to pull it off was through compromising software.
You folks keep talking about the three buildings that collapsed on 9/11. You mean four.
No one talks much about WTC 6, the U.S. Customs Building, which suffered an enormous explosion just minutes after the first aircraft struck the South Tower. Wikipedia tells you that Building 6 was destroyed due the later collapse of the towers. But the truth is that it was a crater soon after 9:03 am.
So Wikipedia is being used to distort the record. And even in Truther circles, there is little awareness of the Building 6 conundrum. Or rather, the alternative media are also used to suppress knowledge of the smoking gun for evidence of controlled demolitions set in place prior to the crime.
Answer the question of who controls both mainstream and alt media, and you get closer to knowing who did 9/11. The question of cui bono should not be limited to entities which are sovereign countries.
You or Ron still have failed to explain why the Mossad didn’t just frame Iraq or Iran or Syria or the Palis.
Would you be so good to spell out what your observation of the WTC7 penthouse revealed to you with such certainty.
I don’t know everything. I only post what I know. And I don’t depend on wikepedia for my comments.
Our elite press corps does not have the gumption even to question the Sandy Hook school affair or the Boston Marathon nonsense. There is no way they would ever touch a matter as volatile as 9/11. They do want to go on living.
Like you, wandaskudnik, I knew right away that it was all bullshit, that the official story had more holes in it than Swiss cheese, so clumsy was this false flag, but what does this tell us? That those who did it are so arrogantly confident of their power and control of Americans that, like a bullfighter who has so befuddled the beast with his capework that he can flick the rag in the bull’s face and turn his back and walk away while the bull stands stupidly looking after him.
I thank you Chuck!
It was easy to frame OBL and the Saudis because they were complicit in the act themeselves. This allowed them to invade Afganistan and get their foot into the door.
They used Al Quada as a proxy for the rest of the ME because Saudis are in on the game.
Iranians weren’t going to play along so they would be much harder to frame.
Sorry. Not meant to be Troll. I don’t know for sure how that happened.
Why frame just one country when by claiming it was Al Queda or whatever they could frame a large number of Muslim countries that were financing the Palestinian insurrection in and around Israel, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, etc.
It seemed to have worked pretty well since Iraq got destroyed as did Libya and they are working on Syria and Iran.
Hear! Hear! Judy Wood’s book is worth the price just for the photos, but her careful research is valuable, too. She concentrates on what actually happened, does not spend time on who or why, but what actually happened is in itself enthralling. I highly recommend this book.
September 20, 2001: Neoconservative Think Tank Demands Bush Invade Iraq ‘Even if Evidence Does Not Link Iraq Directly’ to 9/11 Attacks; Also Demand Attacks against Syria, Iran, Hezbollah
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), an influential neoconservative think tank, publishes a letter addressed to President Bush and signed by magazine publisher William Kristol, Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle (see September 16, 2001), and 38 other neoconservatives and hardliners.
It is reprinted by Kristol’s Weekly Standard shortly thereafter. The authors threaten to brand Bush as a “wimp,” guilty of “surrender in the war on international terrorism” if he fails to carry out their demand to make “a determined effort” to overthrow Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, “even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the [9/11] attack[s].” [Project for the New American Century, 9/20/2001; Rich, 2006, pp. 28] Any failure to attack Iraq, the authors say, “will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism.”
Invading Iraq is not their only demand. To retain their support, the letter reads, Bush must also target the terror organization Hezbollah for eradication, and retaliate against Syria and Iran if they do not break their ties with Hezbollah. The letter calls Israel “America’s staunchest ally against international terrorism.”
Conservative isolationist Pat Buchanan will later write that the real motive for this letter seems to be tied to Israel: “Here was a cabal of intellectuals telling the commander in chief, nine days after an attack on America, that if he did not follow their war plans, he would be charged with surrendering to terror. Yet, Hezbollah had nothing to do with 9/11. What had Hezbollah done? Hezbollah had humiliated Israel by driving its army out of Lebanon. President Bush had been warned. He was to exploit the attack of 9/11 to launch a series of wars on Arab regimes, none of which had attacked us. All, however, were enemies of Israel.… The War Party [Bush administration neoconservatives] seemed desperate to get a Middle East war going before America had second thoughts.”
Source History Commons News Archive
Don’t forget, too, that all seven World Trade Center buildings were demolished on that day while the surrounding buildings in that tightly-built section of Manhattan were only damaged, not destroyed. Very careful planning, indeed.
“They” would surely have preferred President McCain rather than Bush in office for 9/11. But the conspiracy could not beat a bunch of good ol’ boys in South Carolina.
What was needed on 9/11 was John McCain, not in the White House, but as pilot of a fully armed jet fighter. Only someone as reckless as he could have been willing to act without orders, switch on his afterburners and shoot the planes down.
Yeah well Cheney is guilty of all of the above. And that punk bitch didn’t do it for “the national interest”, he did it for the money.
Remote controlled. Research Dov Zakheim who had this technology.
Exactly. That plane was supposed to hit WTC 7, but most likely some National Guard fighter pilot, not under control of Cheney, who had ordered a NORAD stand-down, shot it down. They had to demolish the building anyway, otherwise how to explain all the pre-wired explosives in the building, so they blamed it all on some small, inconsequential fires.
I was there. I worked at 100 Church Street. I heard the first plane hit and saw the second one. The Towers weren’t full because, except for traders, most people aren’t at work at 9 in NYC.
My wife worked in 5 World Trade. I saw the towers come down. My friend, Dr. Mark Heath, was there and took some of the footage of the aftermath. The simple explanation is Islamic terrorists. Just like the ones who previously tried to blow it up. I’ve read some of the contrary views. They seem quite stretched. But I’ll keep reading.
It’s quite simple if you read PNAC’s document, which was the basis for 9/11.
They wanted to institute a Big Brother police state and destroy all of Israel’s enemies.
The “terrorist” bogeyman was the perfect way to put the Big Brother surveillance into place and to have a never-ending list of targets. If they had framed only one country, there would have been a flash-bang and game over. By framing terrorists (and having continued terrorist events in the future), they can blame whoever they want for financing them and continue building up their Big Brother police state. It’s a blank check.
So many coinky dinks on 9/11. It boggles the mind!
Thank you Ron for fantastic website and great articles.
I am wondering.
Small cell of no-name Islamic terrorists carry out this devastating attack. Motive; revenge! Behind them was no big organization or government. So they were “off the radar” so to speak.
CIA, FBI, and and the rest of them, even Mossad were caught with their pants down. Even expected response during the attack, like scrambling fighter jets – didn’t happen. Everything that was supposed to prevent something like this form happening didn’t! This enormous debacle was a major loss of face for the entire intelligence, defense and gov. apparatus. These terrorists poked a big hole in the narrative – the US is secure and invincible. It wasn’t it was sitting duck!
Think about it:
Bush administration: Neocon infested, close ties to the MIC, not to mention the Israeli angle and interests. How to proceed after this terrible debacle?
Option 1)
Perform detailed, transparent investigation. Probably reveling plenty of uncomfortable details regarding incompetence, malpractice and even corruption from top to bottom of the gov. apparatus; military, intelligence down to airport security. And possibly host of problematic political angles with the Saudis and Israel and god knows who. Last but not least, such investigation could not have been used as pretense for war.
Option2)
Offense is the best defense. This is fantastic opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. We decide who is to blame for 9/11 to suit our own purposes. Osama Bin Laden is recycled and becomes evil genius, the mastermind behind 9/11 and he must be punished. The public emotion is turned towards external enemy (it never fails). And since Osama is hiding in Afghanistan this means WAR! The investigation into what happened 9/11 takes the backseat. The Neocons, MIC and Israel get early Christmas and the the public outlet for it’s anger.
Seems to me option 2 was chosen.
Ps
Regarding Mossad and Israeli involvement:
The enormous risk if they are behind the attack! Attacking their lifeline?
Murphy’s law applies to them too, such a complex plan is bound to fail.
Still they might have known something, but incompetence is just as likely as malice.
Judy Wood’s “Where did the Towers Go?” has many photos of the weird effects the destruction of the Twin Towers had on automobiles quite a bit distant from the World Trade Center site itself. Not to mention that trees kept their leaves and the paper did not burn despite the heat and the fires. Very curious.
Strangely enough, Californians have posted photos of burned out areas north of San Francisco last winter showing houses so destroyed by forest fires that not even a stove or kitchen sink remained while trees at the sidewalk still had their leaves blowing in the wind. Quite a few people are wondering if directed energy is responsible for such occurrences.
So, you’re telling us that conspiracies simply don’t happen unless we’re informed of them by the government and mass media.
Correct?
OK now that you have seen it, Ask yourself this about the cop car that you see in the first shot that the camera shows the interior of… Is there anything left inside other than STEEL?
You don’t see anything else left, Not one wire not one thing left save steel. I have seen many burned out cars over my lifetime and i have never seen one get so hot as to complete disintegrate copper wires, sure you see them with the insulation burned away but normal car fires always have heaps of copper wire left, But look again at that car, Look very close, do you see ANY burned copper left in the spaces there should be much wiring like the dash or behind the computer? To vaporize copper and not steel is telling you about the process doing the work.
Years ago i had a commentary debate about that very bit of video and the claim i heard from the debunkers was “Pryroclastic flows” from the collapsing building toasted those cars…
Makes you wonder why they did not toast dusty lady or the Chevrolet towards the towers seen in the same video.
I suppose when you are a one man coding army with a sky high IQ it is quite a stretch to believe that those responsible for high level security arrangements are actually too stupid, timid and lazy for them to make much of a difference to momentous events.
I won’t go into the ton of stuff that has been discussed here but here are a few nuggets from my experiences: 1) The plane that crashed in Shanksville PA if you have never been to the site you will be amazed at the small size of the disturbance on the ground. I had a consulting contract in environmental work a couple of miles away. I saw the place just a couple of weeks later before they had time to fix it up. It’s unbelievable. Really where did the plane go? The hole if you wish to call it that– is a joke. Where did the engine and all the parts go? I can only assume the plane had to disintegrate in the air by an explosion. 2) I happened to run into a student I had taught in the 90’s at a university a few weeks after 9/11. His dad worked at the Pentagon. He told me his dad told him the plane over Pennsylvania was shot down. 3) Cheney said that they couldn’t get jets to Pennsylvania in the time period needed. So I asked a couple of jet pilots. They told me Cheney was full of shit. I can’t remember exactly how fast the average jet fighter flies but I’m sure it can go over 1000 mph. Furthermore, both pilots stated that the real speed of the jets is never really publicized to the public.
Sherlock Holmes: “When you have eliminated the possible whatever remains, no matter how improbable must be the truth.”
Rumsfeld also had a Freudian slip about Untied 93:
Similar looking crater (the outline of wings) was found in 1994 USGS map shows (coincidence?):
Crazy, rambling nonsense.
OBL and his crew of Saudi misfits had nothing to do with Iraq either. Again, proving that 9/11 wasn’t a framing of long-term neocon targets.
It was not the BBC only. It was 3 major networks who reported the same false event at about the same time. Someone had to tip them off. Interestingly, no one ever investigated that angle. It seems it would have led straight to the culprits.
Ron, in case you’ve missed it, you may wish to read the 2016 article in the Europhysics News (owned by the European Physical Society) about September 11 and the physics of high-rise building collapses.
https://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2016/04/epn2016474p21.pdf
It’s by far, the magazine’s most read article.
Spoiler alert: it was an inside job.
Pretty much. It’s also important to note that this was put into motion at the time when Russia was on its knees and China was still weak.
It was a final push to clear the area around Israel (7 countries in 5 years), suppress possible peers (full spectrum dominance) and put the goyim worldwide into full bondage (anti-terror laws, police state measures and total surveillance).
NWO.
I asked you to pick one. If you think there is a middle ground, please outline it.
I couldn’t agree more. Why do we need controlled demo or magic airplanes when it’s perfectly obvious that our government just let it happen. American foreign policy certainly set the conditions for an attack, at the very least. Yes Israel may have had a hand but like everything they’ve accomplished they couldn’t do it without a willing accomplice in Washington D.C.
Mr. Unz, I think you too carelessly rule out the likelihood of US involvement. This was most likely a joint operation between elements within the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Note that these countries are currently all allies against Syria and Iran.
I remember back on that historic day seeing the footage of the towers coming down on TV and initially thinking they looked just like controlled demolitions. Something about it. After some study I’ve come to learn technical terms like “free fall speed” and “within its own footprint” that I did not know then but sensed intuitively. But shortly after I went along with the usual media explanations.
It wasn’t until I read Mike Rupert’s “Crossing the Rubicon” (2004) that I first became exposed to more details indicating it was an inside job. (Rupert used to run an early conspiracy-related website called From The Wilderness back in the day. He is now deceased.)
A key point that really struck me from that book was the existence of US military drills dealing with airplane hijacking situations on the same day. Yes, on the same day. Of course this caused confusion and a delayed response to the real thing. Now what are the odds of that?
There are 3 possible explanations. 1) coincidence; 2) elements within the US govt. apparatus were involved; 3) dates and details of the drills were discovered by the actual perpetrators.
Which you chose is a matter of opinion but I find #2 rather convincing. Note: it is not necessary for a large number of Americans to be involved if most of the actual dirty work is performed by other parties.
Also, something you should look in to is the “28 pages” that were removed from the original 9/11 report, the following JASTA law, and subsequent court case. It appears that our friends the Saudis gave some material support towards the planning and preparation.
And no discussion of the Jewish angle would be complete without at least mentioning Larry Silverstein, who purchased and insured the buildings shortly before the event.
Best wishes.
No – it was just Afghanistan. You’re making no sense.
Yea,,,it does.
Those who know the truth for certain wont tell it because they did it.
Your post is a great argument for why 9/11 really was an OBL terrorist attack and had nothing to do with Israel.
It amazes me that anyone could conclude otherwise.
Nice fairy tale full of imagination. You see, what was actually installed in the WTC 1 & 2 were visco-elastic dampers giving 3 ft sway in either direction. Do you people think you can just make up fairy tales to lead public in a certain direction–and AWAY from other more substantive ideas (i.e. nano-thermite and explosives)–and that no one will check your claims out and call you on it?
Here are the WTC blueprints starting with the roof (refute using these blueprints):
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/frames.html
https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-this-day-reuters-founder-is-born-1.5256147
This Day in Jewish History / Reuters’ Founder Is Born
He was born Israel Beer Josaphat, in Kassel, Germany, the son of Rabbi Samuel Levi Josaphat and his wife, the former Betty Sanders. After initial education in Kassel, Josaphat was sent, at age 13, to Göttingen to work in an uncle’s bank.
By October 1845, Josaphat was part owner of a German-language publisher called Reuters, and was married – apparently in a civil ceremony – to one Ida Maria Elizabeth Clementine Magnus, daughter of a Lutheran pastor from Berlin. That month, the couple sailed to London, where Josaphat, now calling himself Julius (for his month of birth), sought customers for his firm’s books. It was also in London that Julius decided to convert. He did so on November 16, 1845, at St. George’s German Lutheran Chapel, changing his name to Paul Julius Reuter. Seven days later, he and Clementine repeated their nuptials in a religious ceremony at the same church.
Good comment FB. I’ve said it 100x, the defence is never obliged to solve the prosecution’s case in defending their client.
OBL and his supposed minions were accused of an incredible crime. The public case against them is poorly fabricated rubbish, that anybody with a Gr. 8 education (at least the old-fashioned kind) could demolish in a heartbeat. Demolishing that case, however, does not oblige the defence (so-called “Truthers”) to present a more viable version, much less the definitive one.
Having been stopped in its tracks by the rolling guffaws coming from the gallery, the Prosecution normally withdraws its case. It knows better than to ask: “You got a better idea?” as not even the most naive Defence would fall for that ruse.
Alas, in the wide world, things are different. Having watched all the evidence prove contrary to their beliefs, Believers don’t hesitate to ask the question, and Truthers altogether too often succumb to attempting an answer. In doing so they step onto a slippery slope designed to divert attention from the evidential failure at hand to WAGs where anything goes.
In other words, when Truthers unchain themselves from the facts they become “speculators” and “conspiracy theorists” and so expose themselves to attack as such.
So, here we (still) are. The prosecution has been laughed out of court, but nobody knows what to do next. It’s been sitting at that point for well over a decade. Maybe in the scheme of things, that’s just a heartbeat as well. I suspect it is. Rome was neither built nor destroyed in a day.
Karlin is ambitious and amoral young man. His only core value is a belief that might makes right. That’s why he wants to suck up to those who are in power. Any comment on taboo subjects like Holocaust or 911 for him is an opportunity of ‘virtue’ signaling to the powers that be that he is willing to do a blowjob. He may not like it but if this is what it takes to get connect to the power he will do it.
Good to see you back again JR. I hope we’ll see more articles from you here in the future.
I can only assume you have never researched anything about this building. the fires were all on the lower floors. If a structure on the roof of a 47 story building commits suicide when it is 39 stories away and on the opposite side of any fires, this is compelling evidence that the building underneath has been removed.
And since the building underneath the penthouse has been removed, this is prima facie evidence that the building was artificially destroyed.
Based on your comments you’d both be doing yourselves a huge favour by avoiding this topic entirely.
Ok, first things first… The viscoelastic damper crap i see so much in attempted response to my TMD claims…. The intent of a viscoelstic damper is NOT to reduce sway as is so often used like here by TAC… These claims stem from a full of shit Wiki post and are not true. It’s used to provide movement to prevent damages from motions like earthquakes putting undue strain on joints using them so as to prevent them shattering under excessive loading. … Like an engine mount on a car engine… it allows movement to occur and still remain connected…
How in the heck is a rubber mounting going to do anything to reduce wind induced Oscillation like that the towers were subjected to? If you were to think about it, you would have to admit these would enhance movement not suppress it… Sheesh.
Moving masses have been used for a very long time to control wind induced sway, Some are water column dampers some are suspended counterweight, Some are tuned mass dampers, and the WTC towers had an Active tuned mass damper… A pair of very large masses, Large square concrete boxes, those boxes were placed over a steel plate and a system of oil filled o rings kept them suspended and able to move.
This being just the latest time i have been out and talking about those TMD systems, i can assure you all reading this it is not the first time this crap has been trotted out as some sort of refutation for those systems… Well it’s moronic and stupid to think that a tower this heavy is going to be controlled in wind by rubber mountings…. These towers like many others have much flexibility to provide endurance in extreme situations like earthquakes and hurricanes.. These towers had a normal resonance of over 2Hz… At 1380 feet 2Hz is going to cause some serious motion back and forth… Normal office work is not going to be a reality with the whole place moving back and fourth at that rate…. More like vomiting and sea sickness , but mostly FEAR… if a tower that tall is moving at it’s natural resonance.. Your going to be scared shit less about said movement, You would likely never return to such a tower if you had to endure a hour of that.
Once in the eighty’s one of the O-rings failed and just one of the masses stalled out and stopped moving, the entire tower was evacuated until it was repaired and the TMD was returned to service.
Not one person was willing to remain in those conditions.
Ok so that said… Next the Blueprint thing…
These WTC7 ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS are not blueprints of STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS… so they do not structural things outside the scope of architectural need like drywall and wiring, If you have a source for any actual Structural drawings for these top floors i will happily use them to support my case, But they are nowhere to be had are they TAC?
If you just parrot moronic Wiki bunk and expect thinking persons to buy the heaps of hand crafted misinformation you may look silly.
But please do post any supporting information you might think you have… Quote…
“In March of 2007, an extensive set of detailed architectural drawings of the World Trade Center became public through the actions of a whistle blower.”
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html
Have a good read, they are ARCH drawings not structure. If you don’t know the difference you should look it up TAC. and by ‘extensive’ they mean LIMITED
I cannot put into words how happy I am that the accusation of apparent insanity is so utterly dead. What does sanity look like? Seeing Russians everywhere, seeing Nazis everywhere, seeing WMD everywhere, believing that Americans outside the coastal echo chamber wanted as president the most consistently and violently hated political figure in my lifetime, thinking sex organs are interchangeable, and expecting that a diversity can be a safe society?
I too saw the photos of those wild fires, The one ting i notice was in the malls, I saw a Mc dees all burnt out that had trees and bushes VERY close to the structure…un scorched… I noticed the AC units commonly on such restaurants seemed to be very hard hit, They are just Aluminum and steel.. so why?
Same thing if you took a look at the many fire trucks surrounding the towers, Big pools of aluminum under what used to be an engine , pumps and transmissions.. But the steel was still intact… I have seen much of the record of this sort of thing from the ground zero site, All of it is so odd as to scream directed energy being used for some intent… i claim it was a clean up shot to ensure that nobody found any of the U-238 that could have been left on the site. i saw a car toasted on a 45 degree angle front tires gone engine melted but seats, trunk and rear tires still looking normal… Yeah, We have not been told the entire story.
The photos of all those commercial buildings done in whilst trees and bushes and refuse containers remained ALSO screamed directed energy being used… There is a real good insurance payout in such losses and the wide spread nature of the occurrences in the area support this claim.
Where was Afghanistan blamed? An international network of terrorists was blamed, which could easily be popped up to designate targets (viz the “Syrian civil war”). Afghanistan was attacked, not blamed, because its ungoverned hinterland harbored these people — and probably also because it represented a technological black hole where nobody would release video footage that contradicted us. But in the US the calls were pretty clear to go after the countries specified in the above article. In the military (and out of it, but bumping into still active people) there really was talk that any day now we are going after Iran or Syria, it was a palpable thing, people made career decisions based on it.
There are many types of steel, of various “hardness”. Skyscraper steel is the most fire resistant – melts / softens at a very high temperature.
There is another thing to note about steel – it is extremely heat conductive. Take a steel nail in one hand and put a flame on the other end. You will see the heat travels very quickly. It travels along all steel that is connected. WTCs each had thousands and thousands of tons of steel, to dissipate heat.
The steel beams also had insulation – the asbestos you keep hearing about. Allegedly this was “blown off”. There is no evidence of that whatsoever, pure speculation.
There is another factor too: the fires were almost burned out at the time of the collapse. First, the kerosene was gone within a few minutes, at most (either poured out, or evaporated, or burned). So we had left an ordinary office fire for the next hour or so. The black smoke indicates it was oxygen starved – not burning very hot.
Finally there have been countless fires in steel skyscrapers vastly more intense than the WTC ones – Madrid, Dubai, London, you can see vast infernos that burned for many many hours. In none of those buildings did any steel “melt”, even though the entire building was on fire and there wasn’t thousands of tons of cold steel for the heat to travel to.
You simply have no knowledge of physics, engineering or construction.
I have a few corroborative sources for the Mexican parliament plot.
http://www.rense.com/general17/mossadagentsarrested.htm
http://archive.li/OkmOO
https://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-90774.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20180521211955/https://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-90774.html
http://www.pgr.gob.mx/cmsocial/bol01/oct/b69701.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20011123125618/http://www.pgr.gob.mx/cmsocial/bol01/oct/b69701.html
I think the specific relationship of the Saudi element here would be important. The Israelis obviously were the prime movers and set any explosives, but there still were Saudis involved. Bandar Bush paying the handlers for the alleged hijackers is still important. Wayne Marsden said Mizrahi Jews were used by Mossad to infiltrate the hijackers’.
Lingering questions:
1. Which Americans were involved?
2. Did the Israelis also organize the anthrax attack? See the Boca Raton hijackers anthrax treatment.
3. Did the Israelis profit from insider trading?
By this truly idiotic statement (as Rurik also pointed out) – supporting the NIST bullshit – you disqualify yourself from ever credibly arguing anything in here, ever again.
Because then you added mendacity to your idiocy by trying to dishonestly squirm your way back from that indolent NIST support by:
– more bullshit, this time your very own.
Bah! I bid you “Good day!”
mendaci neque quum vera dicit, creditor
~Cicero; a liar is not to be believed, even when speaking the truth.
I don’t doubt WTCs had TMDs. But, Uranium would leave traces detectable by any Geiger counter. Where is evidence of this? Also it has particular symptoms of radiation poisoning, where have those been observed in the rescue workers who have fallen ill? And why put Uranium in a TMD? Uranium is very expensive and tightly controlled, makes absolutely no sense to use it. According to this article, commonly they are filled with water or made of concrete blocks. http://www.slate.com/blogs/atlas_obscura/2014/11/17/the_tuned_mass_damper_of_taipei_101_in_taiwan.html That TMD is 728 tons. 728 tons of water or concrete is pretty cheap, but 728 tons of U238? Even at $30/pound, that’s almost $50 million. Wasted. With no tenant wanting to move in once they learn there is 730 tons of uranium in the building.
Nano-thermite could melt the steel and keep it hot long enough. And since nano-thermite was actually found at the scene, in huge quantities, that would be my pick.
Gravitational falls do not expel large sections (some of which weighted hundreds of tons) of the outer perimeter supporting columns laterally. Period! Some other force is responsible for this.
Lateral ejections of column sections:
Alternate view of North Tower destruction from the Hudson:
9/11 Mysteries (another good documentary by Sofia Smallstorm):
You would agree that if one makes an assertion it is incumbent on that person to provide supporting material which can be reviewed and conclusions can be made by others on the soundness of such hypothesis based on the supporting material. So I ask you Alan, YOU provide such material. It is not my job to do so; and no whimsical worded hypothesis can stand up to scrutiny absent sound supporting material. Please produce evidenve to support your claims else what remains is simply an assertion–dreamed up fancy of a figment of the imagination.
Moreover, you stated that your TMD is placed right over the only elevator shaft which goes directly to the subfloors? Really? Since the only elevator shaft that goes down directly to the subfloors is positioned at the extreme end of the the 47 supporting core columns AND your TMD contraption relies on equilibrium to BALANCE the towers, it would necessarily have to be in the dead CENTER of the inner perimeter of the supporting 47 columns–which it is NOT (refer to my previous response to the links which contains graphics of all the elevators in the towers.
Yes, but if you totally remove the whole idea of controlled demolition and understand it was real jihadis pilots flying real planes which brought the buildings down, you can then focus on who aided, abetted and allowed it to happen
The whole discussion about controlled demolition always ends up diverting attention away from focusing on those who knew and those who helped them succeed
Good post Ron, and sorry for all the action going on here, But this time of year is a very busy time for me and those like me trying to shed some light on this whole mess..
I do need to be out there in response to the crap constantly being spread about…
Your tolerance is most appreciated, as is the venue to have my say… Thanks Mr Unz you do good work.
Are you dense or are you a troll or perhaps an utterly dense troll???
Look at what
You produced (with you claim of BLUEPRINTS):
And what I produced (with my BLUEPRINTS):
did it escape your fanciful little mind that BOTH WEBSITES ARE THE SAME and BOTH READ: “TOWER BLUEPRINTS”–they only difference being that mine displays a multi-view. Pay close attention now so that I can spell it out for you:
One. that. you. can. select. a. different. floor. plan. simply. by. choosing. a. different. floor. plan. FROM. A. DROP-DOWN?
Do me a favor, Alan, will you? Go to your the page you’ve linked (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html) and then CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK ON THAT VERY SAME PAGE YOU’VE PROVIDED: (“Most of the drawings can be viewed in this multiresolution browser.”)…what is then displayed?: (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/frames.html) THE VERY SAME LINK I’VE ORIGINALLY LINKED shows up magically.
Well, how can that be…it must be a conspiracy theory I tell you. YOU HAVE ZERO CREDIBILITY LEFT!
The thought just entered my mind how much the holocaust and Sept 11 resemble each other.
In both cases, sceptics and believers.
In both cases, believers try to deny any argument.
The university of Iowa investigated what happens when a belief is confronted with facts at odds with the belief: the belief gets stronger.
An interesting example is evolution, the word I consider wrong, there is just change in species, but, whatever, when ‘evolution’ no longer could be denied creationism was the answer, a position thet logically cannot be attacked.
It took me three years before I had to accept the unthinkable, a USA government kills 3000 of its own citizens in order to be able to wage war.
But once thinking the unthinkable happened, it was a great help in understanding other politicians, such as Merkel, whose actions I only can explain by desiring to destroy the German people.
Discussion about the details of Sept 11 just sows confusion.
It is abundantly clear that the Bush story, as was the Warren report, is a pack of lies.
What exactly happened, and how, I do not think w’ll ever know, as with MH17 and MH370.
Churchill had Sikorsky murdered, even in this case the details are not fully known to this day.
David Irving, ‘Accident – The death of General Sikorsky’, 1979, München (German translation)
Remarkable work for one once so benighted as to be on good terms with arch neocon warmonger William Kristol as late as 2000! It could have been a bit more succinct, though, as https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=R6NY8XRUYO4S and http://www.dcdave.com/article4/011216.htm.
‘Your post is a great argument for why 9/11 really was an OBL terrorist attack and had nothing to do with Israel.’
Half right. It was an OBL terrorist attack that Israel had a great deal to do with.
Oh, really? Proof, please. I ‘sidelined’ Bollyn’s ‘contributions’ a long time ago; just did a bit of searching:
Bollyn only gets 2 out of 3 from this veteranstoday quote [a site generally not recommended by me], which goes on to say:
Proposing nanothermite is controversial *speculation* for which there is a) little to no proof, and b) a much better, much less controversial candidate, namely PETN, also in the form of ‘det cord.’ Nanothermite is more of a ‘fizzer’ and stands no chance when compared to:
The latter perfect for cutting core-columns at 45° and the former for blasting concrete floor-slabs into pyroclastic, billowing clouds of concrete-dust mixed with powdered asbestos and the shattered remains of office-furniture and office-workers both. rgds
That footage clearly shows the airline hitting the Pentagon. I suspect the missile canard is a deliberate ruse to discredit skeptics amd waste time.
Sad truth is blacks commit a staggering amount of crime, regardless of environment. I expect Hispanics, itself too broad a category, do commit more crime than whites but that it isn’t as significant a difference.
Mr Unz seems to admire the “greatest public intellectual ” alive. It will be interesting to know if in his final version of this article he will write something about the fact that Noam Chomssky still believes the official story of 9/11 which proves that the “great intellect” isn’t more than a buffoon.
Oh, really? A typical ‘redneck’ response to anybody asserting ‘controlled demolition’ might be –
Redneck: “Oh, yeah?! Says who? How you gunna do that, hundreds of floors, thousands of tons of steel? You must be crazy!?”
Apart from those sorts of idiots and their uninformed [largely spoon-fed by the corrupt&venal MSM-Lügenpresse] objections, is the thought: “I really wonder how they did that?”
Sooo, in my trips through the troll-infested internet wilderness, I continually ask myself: Is that item credible? Any evidence? Any better alternates? Is that the best I’ve seen? And so on.
We could call that ‘conscious conspiracy theory evolution by critical inspection,’ and by proposing alternates and discussing same, we ‘truthers’ may a) make genuine progress and b) salvage our deliberately, premeditatedly denigrated credibility [think UFO-abductions, ‘faked’ moon landings, etc.]. I agree that there are covert black-hats lurking amongst genuine white-hat truthers, and these lurkers should be ostracised whenever found, but to deny all ‘informed’ speculation due to the possibility of a few crazies is [always and only IMHO], quite possibly throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Now, when somebody writes:
and that is picked up and repeated by a 2nd as here, my bullshit detector goes berserk. Consider the phrase ‘damning with faint praise;’ it presumably lies in somebody’s interest to cripple genuine truther inquiries – one never knows when such might turn up ‘gold;’ better perhaps, to surreptitiously suppress any chance of that, eh? rgds
The collapses were recorded by seismographs as far away as upstate New York.
Silly me, I forgot that dust has no mass.
Ron, something that must be kept in mind is that the people who did this are still at work.
Once one accepts that the official story is not correct and that there is a propaganda effort to conceal the truth, one must also consider the presence of an active program of disruption in any forum touching on the subject.
Having read for years the comments sections of articles on this subject, one begins to notice certain tactics that appear over and over again. One example. Someone posts a comment making a significant contribution to the truth. Soon thereafter, a long and tangential post is made. Various other comments will appear supporting and contradicting the off-topic details. Soon the thread is so muddied that the casual reader just gives up.
Is this just possibly the nature of every interaction in an internet article’s comment section? Possibly. But consider some other divisive topic such as drug policy. My impression is that the pattern does not universally appear in drug-related articles but that it always appears in articles which mention the subject at hand.
My suspicion is strong to the point of considering a honeypot for detecting the behaviour.
You made up that last part.
Well said. I agree 100% on (((Anatoly Karlin)))
You’re such a genius that the controllers of the world dedicate highly paid professionals to disrupt your online ramblings. Right…
It’s clear from the hampered military response to the hijacks that the US military was involved in 911 on some level. The US military industrial complex would have the greatest motive for carrying out such a scheme as it would directly benefit from the multi-trillion dollar war spending which would inevitably result from a successful operation. As well as that they would probably be the only crowd with sufficient balls to actually carry it out.
The hard part about 911 is trying to figure how it was feasibly done. By following a deductive chain of reasoning from known facts I arrive at the following theory.
There are (at least) three smoking guns in 911. These are:
1. Collapse of WTC7 at measured free fall speed, no plane hit, into its own footprint etc etc.
2. Clear evidence that the Saudi Arabia govt was paying at least two of the supposed hijackers.
3. Clear evidence that the CIA deliberately allowed the same two hijackers (who were known terrorists) to enter the USA without advising the FBI.
Smoking Gun No. 1 proves that explosives were used to collapse WTC7. It can therefore be assumed that explosives were used on WTC1 &2 as well. Now if that’s the case then the plotters would never use the supposed Arab hijackers to do the hijacks and crashes.
Understand that this is a military operation. If it works there’s a multi-trillion dollar gravy train waiting for you, if it fails you are going to be hanged. Therefore the plan MUST BE RELIABLE**. If no plane crashes into WTC1 or 2, then there is possibly up to hundreds of tons of explosive stashed in a central building core that the NYC Police or Fire Brigade are going to discover. You cannot cover that up. Unlike WTC7 where you can get away with it, you can’t collapse WTC1 or 2 if no plane hits one of these buildings. If that happens the plan fails.
This means that the plan must be complex by necessity. You must have your own special forces operatives (who look and sound Arabic) to do the actual hijacks and allow the passengers to make the phone calls. You must use look-alike drones to do the actual crashes because your mercenary special forces teams sure aren’t going to commit suicide and crash their own planes into the buildings for you.
If you use drones then you must have the planes, the technology and the airfields. You must also be able to subvert the civilian radar system. My guess is since the manufacturers of the civilian radar systems are the same as those who bid for military contracts, there is a layer of software built into the operating systems that allows radar tracks to be switched off and on in real time from a military terminal. This would allow planes on black ops missions to fly in US air space without detection on civilian systems. This is purely a guess, but since we know that the US military is deeply in love with black ops I’d be very surprised if something like did not exist, and that capability was not used on 911.
Smoking Gun No. 2 also strongly indicates that special forces operatives were used. This is the evidence that the Saudi Arabian govt paid two of the hijackers while they were in the US prior to 911. This makes it clear that the SA govt was running its own intelligence operatives and their patsies to look like they were hijackers. The operatives take flight instruction, go on surveillance/practice flights etc etc, but since they’re being paid by the SA govt they’re very unlikely to be suicide bombers. At the last minute these operatives go to ground and are replaced by the special forces hijack teams (Israelis?) who are the ones that actually get on the planes.
Smoking Gun No.3 is clear enough. So if you are facilitating the entry of terrorists into the US, subverting US civilian radar systems, inserting drones, providing secret planes and airfields etc, getting your allies the Saudis to set up fake hijackers for you and so on then you are not Mossad you’re the Pentagon/MIC.
**The need for reliability is why three planes were originally intended to arrive at the WTC area at roughly the same time. Flight93, the plane designated as the spare for the primary targets of WTC1&2, was originally intended to hit WTC7 first. Probably its target for the narrative’s sake was the Emergency Operations Centre set up there by Guiliani. However the bad crap actually happened to the spare. Flight93 was delayed on takeoff and was therefore diverted. Notice how the actual flight path and hijack timing of Flight93 makes absolutely no sense if it was hijacked by actual Arab terrorists..
Suppose this should be ‘Chomsky still SAYS he believes the official story’.
” I can only assume the plane had to disintegrate in the air by an explosion. ”
Both Lockerby and MH17 disintegrated in mid air, Lockerby by an explosion, MH17 either by being shot at by a BUK missile, it fires some sort of shrapnel, or by an Ukrainian fighter.
In both cases there was no disintegration, large sections of the planes fell more or less intact on the ground, most bodies could be identified, in the MH17 just two or three not.
Must add that many bodies were found on the ground in parts.
Nothing of all this in Pennsylvania.
A Vietnam veteran living nearby stated that he heard a air to ground missile fired by an aircraft.
Suppose this missile where it hit the ground made the superficial hole and left some wreckage.
But indeed, correspondent living in Pennsylvania wrote to me long ago, the coroner had concluded that the plane was or had been ‘atomised’.
Wat physical process he referred to, nobody seems to have asked.
Pennsylvania, one of the four Sept 11 blunders, in my opinion.
The other three: no passenger plane flew into the Pentagon, the first plane hitting a tower had a bulge under the plane, looked like something similar on anti submarine planes, the second plane that flew into the towers had no windows.
So again, where are the four missing planes, and why were they not used in the intended way ?
Do not think there were any hijacks.
Already in 2001 modern planes are not flown by the pilots, but by a computer, called director.
When pilots think they fly by hand, in reality they just give signals to the director, that decides if the aircraft can do what the pilot wants.
This made it possible to build light planes.
Modern planes hardly are flown any more by the pilots, a friend flying for the KLM told me ‘just the last few minutes of the landing we fly by hand, sometimes reflections on the ground of the guidance systems cause trouble.
What was hardly known in 2001, but surfaced later, that already then it was possible to take over control of modern planes from outside, instructing the director from outside.
If at the time it was possible to switch off the transponder, I do not know.
Commercial radar does not ‘see’ planes with transponder switched off.
NORAD, where Cheney by chance, of course, was on Sept 11 ‘sees any bird flying over the USA’, it is said.
So, with transponder switched off, either from a distance, of prepared before take off, the crew had no control over the plane any more.
How is was with radio communication, do not know.
Anyhow, in my opinion something similar happened to MH370, the second pilot trying to get contact by his mobile phone, he was connected to an antennae, but could not say anything, a plane simply goes to fast for the software.
Therefore also the Sept 11 mobile phone calls are nonsense, in the movie picture Hollywood, part of the propaganda machinery, took care to use the phones built into most USA airliners.
Where the phone conversations came from ?
Since 1995 or so the USA military has voice cloning software, after recording say a few minutes of speech from anyone this software constructs any conversation you want.
The Arabs, fake or not, taking flying lessons with a Dutchman who had or still has a flying school: several people warned the FBI about pilots not interested in how to land or to start.
Nothing happened.
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t claim that it was both ridiculous for people to use OBL as a reason to invade Iraq and that they framed OBL to justify solving the Israeli-Arab conflict in Israel’s favour.
Hispanics, of any color, are very often categorized as “white” by law enforcement, which is reflected in both the BJS and national crime reports, particularly when the racial status can be and typically is, determined by the arresting officer(s) and/or the department or agency. Zimmerman was just the most public of these examples, but it has been going on for years. I recall the serial killer from Mexico years ago–Rafael Resendez-Ramirez (The Railway Killer), who killed dozens of people in the 90’s and was executed in Texas, 2006.
The FBI classified him, at least at the time, as “White”. Now, this was not a white Hispanic, or a debatable, “probably lots of Indian/Native but still white” type Hispanic. This was a straight up Aztec.
Google a photo of Ángel Maturino Reséndiz and tell me that is a white man.
This happens across the country every day. To say that the crime rate for whites and “Hispanics” are about the same, simply depends on how you define white, or hispanic for that matter. We normally consider “Latinos” to be brown, and Hispanics to be more white.
Either way, American prisons are FULL of Latinos, who most white people and Latinos would not consider white, and who have no appreciable European culture or genetic heritage.
Yes, I got that first name wrong. Thanks for pointing that out, anonymous troll.
If you disagree with my opinion about Hersh and Woodward, feel free to provide actual arguments instead of just attacking me.
Whether planes, drone or missiles were used there was a real damage that was not entirely predictable. What about the damage to the planted explosives and wringing?
Question: When demolition started was the behavior of demolition process different above the planes’ impact places than below them? Did it seem that demolitions began at impact places?
P.S. If I were a planner I would prefer an option of no objects flying into the towers so no unpredictable damage was done to the explosives.
So much for “collapsing into its own footprint.” You truthers cannot have it both ways. The fact that you would issue two exactly opposing statements about the same phenomenon and consider both of them evidence of your theory proves that is really just an idee fixe.
I remember some oddity surrounding Mohammad Atta’s parents. Shortly after 9/11, some reporters found them at their home in Egypt and tried to talk to them about the horrible events, but they were blown off by the father, who maintained that Mohammad was still alive and had nothing to do with it. Only a few days later, when interviewed again, he followed the official script.
Thank you so much, for bringing some stimulation, however puerile/trivial, into the relative darkness of my pitiful life.
nemo iudex in causa sua
Suit yourself ‘skrik’…I’ve previously made my position clear to you on several occasions, but there is no reaching you with logic…
I also think that you may have some conceptions about who believes what in the demographic sense that may be quite misguided…I seriously doubt many ‘rednecks’ tend to believe any kind of official ‘story’…in my experience these humble folk have a pretty good BS detector…
It is more the middle of the road, average America, that is either not interested…hasn’t really explored the issue much…tends to consume MSM and generally looks at issues in the mainstream ‘frame of reference’ in which they are presented…
I would say Mr Unz himself may be an examplar of that camp…and who has come full circle after a personal journey of discovery…
Yes, it is natural to instinctively begin to apply logic and try to ‘solve the case’ and I think Mr Unz has done a great deal of good in writing this article…especially the intimately presented ‘Damascene conversion’ process, which is a feature of the author’s writing in general [eg JFK] that is compelling and effective on a personal level…
Certainly in this article he makes a thought-provoking case as to who DIDN’T do it…and I tend to agree with his logic…it is only when he gets into the part where he tries to pin it on a ‘likely’ suspect that the essay goes off the rails for me…
To his credit…he does NOT go into speculation about the ‘how’…as you have been doing here like a broken record since day one…
Couldn’t agree more. Sometimes it’s useful just to stand back and look at the garbage the (((establishment))) wants to sell. Instant red pill.
You put your reputation on the line every time you open your mouth. If you think this is unfair, and the world should be different, you can write out a formal complaint and mail it to [email protected].
Thnx; a true potential ‘blockbuster!’ Not ‘just’ for the flash-bangs; it shows WTC7 from the ‘other’ side to most shots, i.e. the side facing the twin towers – and shows *no* damage from twin-tower ejecta. Wow!
“collapsing into its own footprint” means that towers did not fall on one side, that the collapse was symmetric including the lateral ejections. The idee fixe belongs to you.
I said nothing of the sort. I started to write out a longer reply, but I realized that I was simply using different words to make the same points you didn’t understand the first time. I have better uses for my time.
In what other country?, Johnny Smoggins asks. In countries, like ours, where the Elders control all the levers of power.
I still believe you’re completely wrong but you are making some interesting and well thought out points so let’s go ahead.
Underground fires can burn slowly for years or decades. This is very common in peat areas and old coal mines. The reason applies also to the WTC – the ground provides thermal insulation to keep the heat in and slows the rate of fresh air diffusion. 3 months is not much compared to a ‘natural’ underground fire.
So you decided to fill the void with a fantastic theory? 10/10 but please label it ‘for entertainment purposes only’
U238’s too expensive, too regulated, absolutely unnecessary, and VERY easy to detect because background levels are so low. Have there been any analyses of WTC dust, or manhattan soil, or first responders that show elevated U238 levels? The half life is more than 4 billion years and it doesn’t diffuse away very quickly so it should be off the charts for decades to come. The lack of any evidence at all says with almost complete probability that you pulled this theory out of your butt.
Just like all the U238 dust that is just waiting for an investigation.
Not really. Most of us have got to the point where we yawn and ask where’s Richard Goodyear every time we see a new ‘terrorist attack’.
The problem is your theory has zero evidence. It’s completely unsubstantiated. An open mind is better than a red herring.
1. Peat
2. Coal
Underground fires, fella. They burn hella long caus the earth keeps them warm and the oxygen can’t get in there so fast.
Most explanations are a lot more reserved about inventing plot elements.
Your thinking is uncritical and jumps way too easily to arbitrary conclusions. It feels to me like the sort of thinking that one gets when they’re stoned on cannabis. Lots of really great world changing ideas that evaporate in their face of sobriety.
Following up a painfully self-important argument with a somehow obtuse yet banal Latin phrase. Well done. You win Pseud’s Corner.
OK, I watched the video. It was incredibly lame; a snide and stupid collection of assertions which, even if I believed them all, are mostly irrelevant. For more detail on this particular mode of argumentation, see Gish Gallop.
In a Counterpunch article, I’d discovered that immediately following the attacks, their supposed terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden had publicly denied any involvement, even declaring that no good Muslim would have committed such a deed.
Years ago, I wrote a letter to one of the writers at Chronicles of Culture quoting bin Laden and asked why he continually made the charge the cave man was behind the attack but disavowed any involvement.
“He is lying…” was the response.
Video: Doesn’t prove anything. We’re still arguing if the planes are real or not.
Paperwork: Don’t get your hopes up. It was probably destroyed in the terrorist attacks.
Well why don’t you go and find them?
China.
What have hispanic crime rates got to do with the price of fish?
That is most certainly not what it means, Utu. No one has ever used the phrase like that before, except you in this construction of entirely instantaneous provenance. I don’t know why you would say such a thing.
Thermite keeps rearing its head in these discussions. To my satisfaction, Jeff Prager has shown that thermite does not have the explosive velocity required to account for the devastation of the WTC buildings, and that thermite was not found in the WTC dust according the USGS:
https://www.veteranstodayarchives.com/2012/09/21/911-dust-by-jeff-prager-final-version/
Please note that attacks on source are a common but fallacious argument. If you take issue or disagree with information at VT or in Wikipedia, then you must provide a counterargument with refuting facts from your own source, which is entirely acceptable, but dismissing any information based solely on its appearance in/at Wikipedia, Veterans Today, Rense, or even The Unz Review is an entirely fallacious argument.
To sum up: Thermite was not found in dust samples collected at the WTC by the USGS. In any event, thermite is not a high explosive.
I totally agree that it would take energy to break a full-strength (below the fire line!) building but that’s only half the point.
The other half the point is even if the structure instantly and without energy input went limp, how did the lower bits accelerate to the speed of the upper bits when the upper bits already had a head start and both of them were accelerating at 9.8m/s^2?
In other words, if the whole thing came down at freefall then that means that the lower floors must have started falling BEFORE the upper floors even reached them.
How does that happen? Does steel get scared?
Same as MH370.
Turn off the transponders, fly them to a private airstrip, kill them all, and then cut up all the meat and aluminum.
It’s a fairly simple operation, it just takes a bit of planning and a ground team of (((complete psychopaths))).
Sabotaging them in advance would have been dangerous and illegal! Yes we can safely discount this possibility.
We could all do with your considered opinion of the demolition issues. There seems to be nothing remotely professional on UR threads. Maybe a start could be made with what can be found by searching for Brent Blanchard implosionworld.com. He may not be a hands on demolition engineer; maybe more like a science journalist, but at least consideration of what he (and his attempted debunkers) has to say about demolition generally and 9/11 specifically would take us a long way ahead of the assertions and counter assertions of enthusiatic amateurs on these threads.
One is
https://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2014/10/an-interview-with-explosive-expert.html?m=1
and
WTC COLLAPSE STUDY BBlanchard 8-8-06.pdf
which can be found by Googling Brent Blanchard implosionworld.com
and
http://www.implosionworld.com/news.htm#3
I hope so too, because that issue has long been settled.
For myself and a few my colleagues, it was settled by lunch on the day of the event. We were all quite surprised to watch the public narrative ignore the obvious and fix itself on airplane collisions and fires as the cause of the collapses. That flew in the face of the empirical facts, and in the face of what an educated person would normally know about how the physical world works. Our general feeling about the switch was that demolitions would overly complicate matters for public consumption, and later that the narrative had been hijacked by those who would use it to go to war and so would need it to remain as simple as possible.
It was some months later that I & some of those colleagues came to much more sinister conclusions. Had I or they been American, we may have never come to them as fear of losing livelihoods and a lifetime of indoctrination would have guarded our preciously exceptional life narratives. However, we’d all had enough experience of America to know that its national narrative is a mendacious idyll, so had little trouble coming to the conclusion that evil forces within and without the national state structure had roles in the event.
I agree that America needs a Truth Commission with subpoena powers and a mandate to get to the bottom of 9/11 or it will probably never again be a normal nation. Never mind “great”. Unfortunately, should such a commission ever be empanelled, its procedures and findings are as likely to tear the country apart as they are to make it whole. Perhaps even more likely. The creation of such a Commission would be a step of exceptional socio-political courage. I doubt America, as presently constituted, has that courage.
As with JFK, I don’t expect anything other than voices in the wilderness eventually dying away….
So where did 1,100 bodies that are still missing go if the building “fell”? You do understand that bodies don’t disappear into thin air in a building “collapse” don’t you?
How did the 14 people who were in Stairwell B survive 220 sets of steel and concrete stair cases falling onto their heads without a scratch if the building “fell”?
There probably was some apparent damage to the postulated explosives in WTC1&2 I believe at the plane impact sites. At the WTC2 impact site for example there was a strong flow of molten metal of some sort down the side of building that may have been due to thermite packages going off prematurely. This flow may have also have alternative explanations. I believe that at that floor or near it there were a huge number of lead-acid backup batteries, so possibly the flow of molten metal may have been this. Some believe the flow was molten alloy aircraft parts.
As well as this, if the impacts were caused by drones (ie remotely controlled look-alike planes) then the impact sites could be chosen with high precision. I believe that this was the case as the impacts in the opinion of some people were designed to cause minimal but sufficient casualties. The first impact (WTC1) occurred high up in the building which allowed most of those under the impact site to escape. If proper evacuation procedures had been followed in WTC2 this building would also have been substantially evacuated. The impact on WTC2 was on a corner two thirds up the building. This allowed the stairway on the opposite corner to remain intact and was used for evacuation.
The impact sites therefore could also have been left substantially empty as far as explosives were concerned. This would minimize premature explosions due to impact.
I would suggest that the explosives were not wired by cable which as you say would be too susceptible to damage by impact. In a job as classy as 911 they almost certainly would have been triggered by some sort of military grade radio system.
The whole point is that jets have to fly into the towers otherwise there is no damage to the towers so there cannot be any plausible collapse, either by explosives or otherwise. If such buildings as WTC1&2 collapsed without warning after suffering no damage or no fire then even our brain-dead media and intellectual classes would struggle to explain this away as a ‘natural’ collapse. WTC7 was a different matter as some damage and fires were present, so the unnatural collapse of this smaller building was/is ‘plausibly deniable’.
Therefore my argument is that if explosives were used in the buildings (and the collapse of WTC7 proves they were) then drones must have been used. No planner of sane mind would attempt to rely on a group of dumb-assed Arab hijackers for the task of hitting the buildings even if they (the Arab hijackers) were real (and the Saudi evidence proves they were not) .
You imply that Russian intelligence is no good and Putin’s slow on the uptake. I doubt both. I think Putin would have known the whole story by the evening of 9/11 and would have considered carefully how to play his cards. In my view, there are two possibilities
One – Putin played along with the War on Terror because it suited his short term goals, but he’s keeping the inside story up his sleeve as a kind of psychological nuclear weapon to use if he really has his back to the wall.
Two – Putin’s on the payroll / they’ve got his balls. We know from the Panama Papers that his man, Sergei Roldugin, who claims not to be rich and doesn’t earn a fantastic salary, holds assets all over the world via a network of shell companies. Assuming this is Putin’s backup plan for if he gets ousted by some Western-sponsored color revolution, it would be in his interests to keep it safe. Assuming the West knew this in 2001, or assuming Putin assumed the West had a good chance of finding out, he may have deemed it in his interests to keep quiet about their big secrets. It’s rather like two neighbors turning a mutual blind eye because they’re both cheating on their wives.
Ah; but you are not spinning logic, rather attempting suppression of speculation [mine = reasonable, observation-based and freely *arguable*]. Note that you don’t address my substance but my person/modus operandi. IMHO, Ron’s ‘likely’ suspect is *most* likely, with no competition anywhere in sight – seems that you don’t pay attention too well. I will now speculate on exactly who I think dunnit: A covert group from within the US/Z rogue regimes. Proof as given before; the explosives pre-loaders of all 3 WTC towers required ‘privileged,’ industrial-level access. No jihadi could even dream of getting such access. Then there’re all the ‘tiny little details,’ like “Does the order still stand?” – or the no intercepts, etc..
But most of all, was and still is the cover-up; from most ‘Western’ but specifically the US/Z politicians of all stripes and locations, the monolithic, ‘West’-wide corrupt&venal MSM to the Stupid NIST effort, and the massive, inclusive and illegal disposal of evidence. As theSaker says: A cover-up is proof of a conspiracy.
I maintain my right to speculate as above, and deny that it ‘harms the cause’ – as your harping clearly does. Jealousy your curse, by any chance?
That’s exactly what it means. Some debris will always cross the footprint boundaries.
skrik wrote: “Oh, really? Proof, please. I ‘sidelined’ Bollyn’s ‘contributions’ a long time ago;”
Hey skrik!
“Sidelining” Bollyn’s contributions was your prerogative. Not a consensus here at U.R. comments.
… Fyi, it is clear that Laurent Guyenot did not, and Rob Unz simply wanted Christopher Bollyn to write more tightly & supply footnotes corresponding to his findings.
… Me? I only have major problem with Mr. Bollyn’s reliance upon Professor Stephen Jones remote (non-representative) sampling of 9/11 dust/debris, subsequent i.d. “fingerprint” laboratory analysis, and the regrettable leap to conclude nanothermite was the primary material that flattened the WTC towers.
… Nonetheless, Mister skrik, I am more objective than you, & thus give credit to the BYU professor for his having the scientific/crime scene investigation know-how (& the balls) to obtain a material 9/11 debris-sample for lab analysis! Uh…, do you know anything about Robert Mueller’s FBI (CSI-arm) having done so? (zzZigh)
… To conclude & speaking now as a veteran, I am very disappointed how ‘Veterans Today” attacked Christopher Bollyn’s support for large quantities of nanothermite “fizzer” as 9/11’s chemical culprit.
… Gordon Duff’s VT team did an equal level of non-material sampling & analysis as did the FBI, but arrived at an understandable dissident-conclusion that nuke weapons brought down the three (3) WTC towers.
… Perhaps the towers controlled demo-engineers experimented with both nanothermite & nukes to do the False Flag?
Whatever — it worked much better than airplane crashes & released fuel having hit its flashpoint.
… Nonetheless, thanks for the opportunity to freely exchange thought, skrik.
I am totally willing to believe that Israel was behind 9/11, actually I did suspect Israel from the very day the attacks happened, on the “Cui prodest?” basis. The case of the dancing Israelis, the PNAC pondering the necessity of a new Pearl Harbor etc. supports this too. I don’t debate this. Also I remember an interview I have read in a Hungarian newspaper quite before 2001/9/11, maybe 1 year before in which an Israeli “political expert” or suchlike has said that Iraq is the ideal candidate to be transformed by a regime change to a pro-western, pro-Israel Arab nation, because as he has said, Iraq is the most secular Arab country. Well, it was maybe, back then… So obviously the Zionists have been planning the Iraq War for long.
That said, the outlandish claims many truthers say make no sense to me. What would be the point of rigging the WTC with explosives and sending a cruise missile into the Pentagon then stage/fake an attack by hijacked jetliners against these buildings? Isn’t this plot unnecessarily complicated? Not mentioning the esoteric theories claiming that there were no planes etc.
Also, killing (or disabling) the passengers can be done on the plane in seconds.
I also asked about the demolition progression. Was demolition progression different for WCT1 and WTC2 because the impact zones were on different floors?
The demolition progression would be determine by the sequence of imploded floors.
Take the valium. Your agitated state has had you mix up what you are replying to.
And I do recommend getting help with that mental illness which manifests itself on the internet as a variant on Tourette’s Syndrome or Coprolalia when the word “lie” keeps on emerging as the patient’s favourite emotive expression.
High IQ and lots of cash can actually retard understanding of human nature, since it allows the subject to soar high above the clouds while the rest of humanity battles it out below.
Two weeks of intensive research wasn’t enough? Actually that’s pretty honest. Two weeks of research deemed ‘intensive’ by your standards would probably be equivalent to two months of research for an average person. Most people have nowhere near that amount of free time so it’s no wonder they stay in the dark!
Need to clear up some technical mistakes in your comment…
That is definitely NOT true…the air traffic control [ATC] radar sees airplanes just fine even if they don’t have a transponder, as many very basic small private planes don’t…the ATC controller sees the transponder-less airplane on the screen and also its bearing [direction] and range [distance]…
What it does not see is the airplane’s altitude…and it also cannot IDENTIFY an airplane flying without transponder…
This identification is a four-digit numerical code that is assigned to each airplane by ATC before taking off…that way each blip on the controller’s screen carries the number identifying the flight…that’s how ATC knows who is who…and it also sees your altitude…
With the transponder switched off, or malfunctioning, the identification number and altitude info on the screen disappear, but the blip is still there…such a malfunction is not highly unusual and ATC will spot it immediately and ask by radio for the crew to sort out the issue…since you must have the transponder operational when flying on a commercial flight plan…[or even a private flight on a so-called instrument flight rules, or IFR, flight plan]…
But those 911 airplanes were tracked continuously on ATC radar from beginning to end, and those flight path records are fully included in the NIST report…[there was some fumbling and switching on and off of the respective transponders at various times…]
Again, this is completely wrong, and it is important…the transponder has nothing to do with the flight control system, or the autopilot or the pilot’s ability to fly the airplane in any way shape or form…shutting off the transponder only affects ATC’s ability to have complete data on the flight, as discussed above…
What you are referring to is known as fly-by-wire…[FBW]
The Boeing 757 and 767 do NOT have that…and it is not relevant to the issue anyway…Airbus was the first company to have fly by wire on the A320 starting in 1987…Boeing did not adopt this until much later, on the triple seven…and even then the system could be overriden by the pilot…
The main purpose of fly by wire in commercial aircraft is to provide a kind of ‘moderator’ between the pilot and the control surfaces on the aircraft…that moderator is the FBW computer…if the pilot inputs a control that is inappropriate or dangerous, the computer will not let the movable control surfaces do that…ie the wing ailerons, the tailplane elevator and rudder, etc…whose movement in the airstream is what controls the aircraft maneuvering…
Airbus has been much more aggressive with fly-by-wire than Boeing in which the system can be manually overriden anytime the pilot chooses…
In any case FBW has nothing to do with remote control of the airplane…which IS a system that DOES EXIST…it’s called the Boeing-Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot…but it has not yet been implemented on regular flights…
The system is designed to take remote control of the aircraft in case of a hijacking and land it on the nearest suitable runway…I have heard rumors that something like this had been installed in some airplanes before 911…but I have no hard information…
However, the technology for doing that has been around for a very long time…the General Atomics Predator unmanned aircraft has been operationally deployed since 1995, first seeing action in the Balkans war…this is in fact a much more sophisticated remotely piloted system, in that it incorporates not only flying the airplane, but operating various data collection sensors like imaging etc…
The size of the remotely piloted aircraft makes no difference whatsoever…the Russian Buran space shuttle was completely remotely piloted and did not have human cosmonaut on board on its successful 1988 mission to space orbit and back, landing completely automatically…
The mobile phone calls are impossible, even today, because of the speed at which an airplane travels…the cell antenna network on the ground is incapable of ‘handing off’ the call from one antenna to the next due to the speed of the airplane…
Putin did apartment buildings in September 1999.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings
Western press and governments did not put accusations that this was a false flag very high on their agenda. There were some mentions and questions but every time Russian would be indignant: How dare you to accuse us that we killed our own people.” And it was quickly forgotten. One year later was Kursk accident which lead to more shenanigans between Putting and the US administration.
It is quite possible that the success of the apartments bombing operation in Russia emboldened the 9/11 planners.
“As for specific claims, many people far more qualified than I have taken on the task of debunking 9/11 truth.”
The site you references is old and has not been updated in years. Their articles on World Trade Tower 7 were written before NIST even released their final report on the matter in 2008. You might want update yourself on the more recent evidence from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. My problem with “debunking” sites is they seem to believe that simply asserting something without evidence qualifies as “debunking”. It doesn’t.
For information on the collapse of WTC7 see this and try to debunk:
No it wouldn’t, because people’s reaction would be to deny the revelations and assert that it can’t be true because the USA is the big financial and military sponsor or even life-support for Israel and, at a minimum, this would end if an Israeli 9/11 plot were uncovered.
Indeed. Everyone knows Muslims lie about their greatest achievements.
Well, if the end-point was to blame some ill-defined Muslim terrorists so you could justify destroying Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya, then you had to have a plausible way for those Muslims to have been involved.
How were they to get all those explosives? Hijacking a bunch of planes was a more plausible approach.
Besides there was already this which had planted the idea of an attack by aircraft on the towers:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0243069/episodes?year=2001
Your feathers are ruffled, eh?
That smells more political than factual. They don’t lose anything by demonising Israel as the sole perpetrator, and they avoid muddying their future relationship with the USA.
Just because it’s truer than normal doesn’t mean it’s fully true!
Haw! Classic troll; you + Tyrion 2 = two nasty little peas in an hasbarat pod.
You are barking at a wrong tree trying to catch people on contradiction that exists only in your mind. You are irrelevant like most of your comments.
Thank you. Interesting. And interesting to speculate whether Haxo Angmark in his latest belligerent internet guise is merely pretending to be one of those frothing at the mouth anti Semites who toss “Rothschild” in like a place holder while they stir a few sick neurons into action.
Donald Trump on the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps he will wait for his second term to open a new commission on 9/11!
https://wakeup-world.com/2016/09/11/what-really-happened-to-world-trade-centre-building-7-on-september-11-2011/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings#Theory_of_Russian_government_involvement
Alexander Litvinenko said Putin was behind the bombing and Litvinenko was poisoned by agents of Putin he went to meeting with. That shows either that Litvinenko was a brave man, or that he did not realise he had skin in the game.
If David Ray Griffin is not only telling the truth as he sees it but actually correct about 9/11 then why is he alive and well, never having suffered a heart attack, auto accident, suicide or any false internet child pornography charges or other frame ups? He has never even faced a tax audit (for example) .
Flight 93 was delayed from its original scheduled take-off from JFK by over 30 minutes. If it had departed on time, it would have hit WTC7 almost at the same time as the twin towers were hit.
The delay meant that some passengers onboard were able to learn about the twin towers attacks and realize what was in store for them if they didn’t take control of the plane. Whether the plane was indeed shot down (as Rumsfeld later let slip) or simply spiraled out of control as hijackers and passengers fought for the controls, the problem remained of a building fully rigged with explosives as you noted.
It took them until the afternoon to come up with a cover story about the plane headed for the White House, and to spread the bullshit story about diesel fuel tanks on the roof of WTC7 causing fires to weaken the structure causing a sudden and total collapse identical to that caused by a controlled demolition.
Your mind cannot conceive anything more effective a ruthless high level cabal can come up with than a few comments on the person’s own moderated site. You must have led a very sheltered life.
Yes the demolition progression was different for both buildings.
WTC1 you can see the TV tower at the top of the building start sinking into the building slightly before the small top block of the building above the impact site starts to travel downwards. This means that entire ‘hat-truss’ at the top of the building and the core of the top block had been blown up first. Then the collapse proceeds downwards. If you look at slow motion videos you can see on the corners of the building below the ejected material that the corners are exploding massively outwards at least 20 floors below the collapse floor. I don’t have any explanation for this.
WTC2 the top 1/3 of the building leans over and theoretically should just fall as a block, but starts to disintegrate upwards. You can just see this start to happen before it disappears into the dust cloud. By the time the building has collapsed this top block has completely disintegrated. This is difficult to accept because this top block is not ‘collapsing’ as such.
The slow motion videos on Youtube of the collapses are interesting to watch repeatedly. You have to make up your own mind as to what they mean. Obviously if explosives were used in WTC1&2 then they did a pretty classy job since on the whole the collapses look more or less natural. They must have done a lot of testing and simulations as things could easily have gone horribly wrong.
If Flight93 had not been late taking off and had flown directly into WTC7 as intended then 911 would have been basically a perfect job. It would be almost impossible to point a finger at anything that was obviously dodgy.
awry tried to go straight & narrow, he/she wrote: “… the outlandish claims many truthers say make no sense to me. What would be the point of rigging the WTC with explosives and sending a cruise missile into the Pentagon then stage/fake an attack by hijacked jetliners against these buildings? Isn’t this plot unnecessarily complicated? Not mentioning the esoteric theories claiming that there were no planes etc.”
… Hi awry!
… Having televised imagery of airplanes crashing into the two towers was 9/11’s RITUAL-subscript; unnecessary, it was a theatrical-component which gripped the American population’s preference for dramatic & violent action, and of course the embedding of pervasive FEAR for suicidal Islamo-Evildoers who “hate us for our freedom.”
… Were the WTC towers not “rigged”with explosives, please let me know what caused clear evidence of explosions? Fyi, a few commenters posted video of such being the case!
… So sorry, awry, but for sound & diabolical reason, Israel’s complicated 9/11 “PLOT” was systemically planned and accomplished!
… Here is why, my Brother awry: Because the “unnecessary” suicidal airplane side-show was guaranteed to distract jingo-patriotic American citizen-believers who want only to be insouciantly secure & shop.
… Then all that was necessary to complete nationwide deception was the Jewish Corporate Media’s providing of “esoteric” cover-up services, and of course the legions of career academic/political phonies who profitably disseminated transparent 9/11 lies.
… Thanks, awry!
It was only a matter of time before Ron would get round to analysing and writing about 9/11 and even if its not his most polished article, its teriffic that, like the Holocaust, 9/11 is now out in the open for discussion on this great website.
The most important thing to realize about 9/11 is that the official story is a pack of lies. Therefore the first and most important achievement of the entire 9/11 truth community (whatever their differences) has been to debunk the official story. As Ron points out the scientific defence of the official story was not entrusted to MIT or Harvard or Cambridge. It was entrusted to a magazine called Popular Mechanics ran by the CIA. While the most prestigious universities will never, because of their government contracts and their wealthy (often Jewish philanthropic backers), put their name to anything against their govetnments, they equally wont put their academic reputations on the line.
Why do so many people still believe in the official story? Yes partly of course its down to the handiwork of the MSM, whose propaganda is a mixture of suppression, excoriation and obfuscation (the BBCs Conspiracy Files program on 9/11 is a very good example). Partly its the whole issue of the Big Lie – the one so big that noone believes it must be untrue. Partly as in the case of the Skripals, the feeling in the US and Britain is that our government does not do these things to us- thats what Putin does and we are ‘the good guys’. And finally as well as being technically accomplished ( the demolitions and the visual fakery) the sight of the kamikaze planes emerging out of the blue sky brilliantly echoed Pearl Harbour and the latter stages of the Pacific War. It pressed all the right psychological buttons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_of_Honor
The idea of using jetliners as “missiles” was older than that.
Jesus, this is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Ron Unz obviously has some sort of progressively advancing mental illness. Most likely late-onset schizophrenia. And all the lunatics from the fringe internet seem to be drawing him further away from reality.
It’s like every new article release is a Russian roulette wheel of madness. Who knows that the next insane conspiracy Unz is going to stumble upon next. Faked moon landing? Flat earth? Satanic cults at the DNC? CIA weather and mind control?
My money’s on shape-shifting lizard men.
The idea of a building collapsing into its own footprint, and the idea of massive pieces of debris being thrown laterally at high velocity (both phrases taken from other’s comments), implies a contradiction that exists in the statements themselves, not in my own mind. I do not know how you could this. It’s an analytical truth that has nothing to do with my mind or your mind or anybody’s mind. It’s all present right there in the definitions.
Do you have some kind of problem with me? That was unnecessarily bilious.
Like Ron , I prefer to look at motive.
Who benefitted? Israel, Silverstein and the professional Jews of America. The atheist Jews of Beverly Hills and Los Angeles were all paranoid and fearful.
“ The Muslims are targeting Jews. We will be blamed. Please don’t blame us. Century City high rises will be next because so many Jews work there.”
There was a 2 hour after noon power outage in October. Hysteria, it’s another attack.
The professional Jews like ADL really raked in the tax exempt “ charitable” donations after 9/11. And of course some Israeli companies got TSA contracts.
Despite 1,000 or so Jewish deaths, it was a win win for Israel, Silverstein and the professional Jews
Who cares. Even Hillary didn’t kill everyone who annoyed her so even if you believe that Moscow was involved in Litvinenko’s death, it makes zero sense to bring it up in this discussion.
You are insulting our intelligence with this tripe.
I was going to reply, but utu echoed my sentiments. Falling into its own footprint means ‘SYMMETRICAL’ COLLAPSE with respect to its base-level. That extra explosives can be used to laterally eject ‘HEAVY’ supporting columns (i.e. tube structure) is besides the point.
Why would diesel fuel tanks be on the roof of a Manhattan high rise? There’s a special truck elevator so they can fill up at the gas station in the clouds?
There’s a lot of city and county codes about storage of fuel. The more densely populated the city the more restrictive the regulations about fuel storage.
No, please, please ignore Judy Wood. That is a useless rabbit hole. Direct Energy Weapons? What, you mean like a bullet, or a sword (or bombs, air planes)? All weapons (excepting chemical and biological) are “directed energy weapons.” The evidence she provides that any out of the ordinary weapons exist is about of the quality of UFO research. Even if you try to give her the benefit of the doubt the only unique contribution she adds to the discussion is to take you down a long journey of trying to prove the existence of things like Cold Fusion. Why would anyone who is serious about 911 want to attach the movement to questions such as whether or not Cold Fusion is real and other “strange phenomena” that doesn’t have a scientifically agreed upon basis?
Another thing that gives Judy Wood away is how hard she tries to present other sincere 911 researchers as being insider plants. According to her, even the widows for 911 truth are apparently trying to distract everyone away from her Directed Energy Weapons theory!
Please ignore this woman.
I’ve added my own comments to the article and erroneously used parentheses instead of brackets as such:
(implode the center core columns and supporting material AND explode outer perimeter support columns)
should read:
[implode the center core columns and supporting material AND explode outer perimeter support columns].
Maybe Ron’s a fast reader with unusually high reading comphrension and an excellent memory? That’s a basic skill of people who are accepted at Stanford. He was probably reading at 12th grade level by 5 th grade and got 750 out of top score 800 verbal SATs.
One of the things I come back to is, what does the rest of the world think about 9/11? I like to get different viewpoints.
There are thousands of allegedly competent engineers in China, Russia, Germany, Japan, Korea, etc. Where are they? What do engineering professors say about building 7 when students ask questions?
A lot of the good, hard evidence we have comes from academia. Why isn’t there a robust debate on campuses like there was with the Vietnam war?
Here is a debate featuring Webster Tarpley moderated by David Frum:
I believe Tarpley wins the debate easily.
Yeah. And when he stops the comments at 1488 we will know that he is a white supremacist …
See my comments #487 & #490…
With good sense, Sean inquired: “If David Ray Griffin is not only telling the truth as he sees it but actually correct about 9/11 then why is he alive and well… ?”
Hi Sean,
… Empowered & unaccountable, the ever so cunning Israeli’s knew the 9/11 lies would be exposed, & subsequently, except for western Zionist-controlled national leaders, they do not care one-fuck about their getting caught by anyone committed to writing the truth.
… In addition, one can peruse the first chapter of Christopher Bollyn’s eye-opening “Solving 9/11,” particularly where he describes doing intense 9/11 research, and getting beaten by a goon squad, allegedly disguised as police.
… Had there been desire & need to stop Mr. Bollyn’s great seminal work, I suggest his barbaric beating would have been unsurvivable.
… Any thoughts on the matter, Sean? Thank you.
We are ruled by a bunch of total psychopaths. Most people are unwilling to admit this, as it causes a lot of cognitive dissonance, so they reject evidence that leads to that conclusion.
Private air strips have workers around during the day so they would have to be killed early that morning to eliminate witnesses and prevent the workers from calling local law enforcement.
But anything goes in the fantasy land of idiots spending years pouring over videos and seeing explosions through clouds of dark gray smoke
What is it you are lacking? Is it called a common sense? What is a common sense? And why you do not have it? Ponder on it and leave the “its own footprint” alone.
“Do you have some kind of problem with me? ” – I read your comments. I liked few of them but most of them have an unhinged quality of a person who really does not belong to this world.
If any of the planes, I don’t know, had Rolls-Royce engines, then commands to those engines would have been transmitted in real time via satellite to RR, from engine start to destruction.
It was Utu not I who brought up Putin’s killing of hundreds of Russians in a false flag terrorist attack on a high building so that he could have a excuse to invade other countries. I just pointed out that whereas Litvinenko was made an example of by an obvious assassination and his emigre/ wealthy patron was suicided, nothing has been done to shut Griffin up or even discredit him.
Ever heard of Lyndon LaRouche, originator of the October Surprise conspiracy theory? Shortly after he got publicity with a two of his candidates winning a Democratic primary for statewide offices in Illinois, LaRouche had Federal agents swarming all over his affairs tax auditing and investigating him for mail fraud. He spent several years in prison.
Alan,
The “Freddy Boy” I was referring to was Fred Reed, i.e. this guy: https://www.unz.com/author/fred-reed/
I just realized that your last name is not even the same as his. His has two e’s. The main Freddy Boy article I referred to as constituting intellectual fraud is this one:
https://www.unz.com/freed/legion-of-the-tinfoil-hat/
I have to admit that I don’t know what claims you have been making. I was referring to Fred Reed, not to you, Alan Reid. We all make mistakes, I know, but seriously, one should pay a bit more attention. There is already too much of a signal-noise ratio problem on these sorts of forums.
The irony is amazing.
WikiSpooks at :https://archive.li/Z3pKv
Says this:
Controlled demolition is a highly technical and specialized field. For example, there are formulas specifying how much of what kind of explosive in what form placed where on particular shape of girder of what kind of steel are needed to cut it. Saying “nanothermite” over and over is not a technical explanation. It is very possible that I have missed something, but everything I have read on the matter has been vague, liberal-artsy, and devoid of the slightest familiarity with the use of explosives. I have seen no indication that anyone has done the research to tell an LSC from a ham sandwich. A competent reporter’s first step would be to interview people at CDI to see what would be necessary to drop the buildings. Having established that the prepping could be done without being overwhelmingly obvious, the truthers would be in a far stronger position. I am puzzled by the apparent lack of interest in the technical questions. I.e., possibility.
If the truthers want to convince others of the conspiracy, they need to make it plausible to the intelligent layman. They have not, at least if I qualify as an intelligent layman. The vagueness and fluidity make the story hard to accept or to critique. As an old newsman, I can assure you that without a whole lot more substance and fewer contradictions the controlled-demolition theory would never get past a desk editor. This, not complicity, is why the press ignores conspiracy theories. If truthers want to be taken seriously outside their own ranks, they need to decide on one story and answer questions about it rationally. Perhaps they can. So far as I know, they haven’t
I can speak nothing to the WTC, but it is indeed reasonable to believe that a plane hit the Pentagon that day. I met a man who flew multiple decades with American and knew the pilot of that aircraft. Moreover, he was golfing that morning at Army/Navy in Arlington and saw the plane. It wasn’t a great feat of flying if you have ever driven 395 North into DC.
Perhaps the plan is to distract America from who is really responsible for 9/11 by starting a war in Syria:
Is a Major Attack on Syria Feasible? Or Are Russia’s Area Denial Forces Just Too Strong?
https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/2544788/passagiers-vierde-toestel-9-11-vochten-tot-bittere-einde
Passengers fourth plane fought to the bitter end: atomisation.
E-Team and Gelatine (Gelitin) B-Thing at 91-92 floors of North Tower
https://steemit.com/conspiracy/@budz82/9-11-and-the-israeli-bomb-expert-infiltrated-art-groups-gelatin-demo-wiring-team-and-e-team-sol-gel-team
If Ron had just asked to tour Santa Clara county and a few local city jails he would have noticed they were filled with Indian looking Hispanics and few Whites.
I think it was Janet Reno who ordered the FBI and local departments to classify Hispanic criminals as White even if they were straight from jungle villages and looked pure Indian.
So looking at statistics is looking at anti White racist PC lies.
Contrast the crime classification with employment and college admission stats. The EEOC ordered that a Spanish name must be classified as Hispanic. In fact when scumbag traitor Nixon created the Hispanic race by executive order in 1970 the EEOC decided that for practical purposes a Spanish surname defined Hispanic.
So all these discussions of White nixed and Indian Hispanics don’t mean a thing. The feds that the Spanish surname gets you the job and college admission.
I know an American woman of standard Irish German English mix standard N European appearance German last name She married a man born in E. Germany, pure German when it was soviet territory.
I think the reason the public focussed on the airplanes being the instrument of destruction is what the Israeli psychologist /economist Daniel Kahneman (Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow) has dubbed WYSIATI – what you see is all you get. Most people know (or remember) zero about physics. So plane hits building. Fire erupts. Building falls down. Ergo plane hitting caused building to collapse.
Even a municipal engineer colleague of my acquaintance believed it, which is sonething Kahneman also pointed. Even professionals can be fooled by the way things are presented.
That’s why the title “American Pravda” is not exactly the right fit for what Ron does. His oeuvre ought to be called “How the Jews Are Really Behind Everything That’s Happened Over the Last Hundred Years,” and it would be a much more accurate, if ungainly, appellation.
Now, having said that, it is obligatory given the siege mentality of most of the commenters here to state for the record that I have no desire to defend the Jews, and I myself do not care for them, either. But attributing this sort of historical hypercausality to groups of shadowy Jewish conspirators who always manage to cover their tracks is a fictional trope of a high order. This style of thinking belongs in a comic book series or an X-Files type program, not in a serious discussion. Perhaps Ron should adapt American Pravda into a set of graphic novels. They would probably be an underground hit.
As several (but precious few) commenters have noted above, the real “truth” behind the problems with the official 9/11 story has to do with the fact that members of the Saudi Arabian government were involved and that the country was being attacked by one of the CIA’s own “assets.” Of course they were going to cover that up. If the Truthers confined themselves to saying no more than this, then I myself would be a Truther.
However, all the Armchair Einsteins in the “laws-of-physics” department of 9/11 Trutherism, with their controlled demolition theories, fake planes, holograms, and other increasingly deranged esoterica, have departed from reality and in doing so have become active, willing (but probably not witting) agents of disinformation themselves. They are a discredit to the entire process of seeking justice, truth, and retribution for the lives lost that day. Nothing about the reported and witnessed events on 9/11—not the collapse of the twin towers, not Building 7, not the flight trajectories or anything else—violates the laws of physics. We need to score that one for the “official version” if we are intellectually honest.
The Truthers really hate it when I say this, but they shouldn’t. I’ve already admitted that I agree with them that there was US government complicity in allowing the attacks to transpire as they did. Isn’t this the essence of the “conspiracy”? If I have been in any way unclear about this, I will now say it straightforwardly: I believe the US government lied about 9/11 and I have no intention of ignoring that. But I am also going to defend physical reality and historical logic when those come under attack, as they do in the Truthers’ outlandish ideas about controlled demolition et seq.
The fact that the Truthers will not take “yes” for an answer is rather telling. Once you deny controlled demolition they get vicious and vile and assign you to the enemy camp, despite the fact that the whole purpose to which they’ve adduced their cockamamie argument is something to which you’ve already stipulated. This goes to show that they are more concerned with being “right” than they are with seeking truth. They just want to polish their Secret Truther Club decoder rings and imagine that they’re smarter than everybody else. Their attachment to their beliefs is entirely in the service of their own egos.
And how is that any better than the Neocons using 9/11 to further their own ambitions?
My mom’s friend also knew that pilot and she swears that they were playing Bridge at the time.
Check this expose’ out, of exactly what you refuse to believe possible.
“Terrorism and ‘revenge’ were…to be glorified as the ‘moral… and even sacred’ values of Israeli society. . . . [T]he military symbol was now Unit 101, led by Arik [Ariel] Sharon. …The lives of Jewish victims…had to be sacrificed to create provocations justifying subsequent reprisals. … A hammering, daily propaganda, controlled by the censors, was directed to feed the Israeli population with images of the monstrosity of the Enemy.”
— from the dairy of Moshe Sharett, Prime Minister of Israel, in Livia Rokach’s, “Israel’s Sacred Terrorism”, p. 44 (1980). Rokach’s father was Sharett’s minister of the Interior and had access to inside information. She was later found dead in a hotel room in Rome under mysterious circumstances. (Natch! and so typical when any Jew reveals, truth and Facts, eh.)
Important Key Word Note: Is how the word “Sacred” with Terrorism is used. Jew’s and Zio insanity, creates an evil combo of belief in Terrorism being Holy and Sacred. But, Only as long as it is, Jew’s doing the terrorism. Whenever any Goy gentile Non Jew does any type terrorism, then, it is…Bad, Evil, Wrong, Illegal, Criminal, and Immoral. But whenever any Jew does it, it is not only okay and good, it is also a mandate from God and a Godly good, great Jewish endeavor.
And the real true measure of a, Jew by fellow Jewry, is to count all such acts perpetrated by a Jew as some type great Virtue. Ergo by this standard, whichever Jew does the Most Terroristic, Murderous, Violence and or, Theft’s, and also Lies the best about it all…Is The Most Virtuous of Jew’s!
Christ even gave a mention to it in NT book of, John 8:44, where it states that, Jews are Of Their Father Satan, and like Satan, Jews too are going to be, Liar’s, Thieves, and Murderers.
Also He said that they are Imposter Jew’s, and really Of the Synagogue Of, Satan!
Well proven as true on Both account’s, eh, and over the past 2,000 yrs. Since Written, as historical research proves so well. There simply are No other peoples, or ethnic groups, or religious groups besides Talmudic Jewry, which have so consistently held the Very Top Worlds #1 Position of, being as Henry Ford titled his Book as…”The International Jew, The World’s Foremost Problem.”
Which speaks volumes, when one considers that, this means that Jews are even far worse than….Negroes! aka like a Smart Negro which has greater capabilities to do evil or wrong’s etc. Due to their higher IQ. Thank God most Negroes are not so smart, for with well over 55-million just within America, think of the vast potentials, and huge mess Whites would then face.
This must be why so Many folks today claim that the Only real way to a MAGA America, is to Boot Out Both, Jews & African Black’s…..And if only one group can be booted?…Make it, Jews.
If Christopher Bollyn is worth beating up, you might be too. Scared? Griffin isn’t, and anyone could find him.
Is there an area that you are not a dilettante outside of booze and cigars? So you surely qualify as a layman. The intelligence however might be a problem.
Danny Jowenko died in car crash few days after the video was aired.
Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7
http://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
http://www.wtc7evaluation.org
Update from Dr. Leroy Hulsey on the UAF WTC 7 Study (March 27, 2018)
https://www.ae911truth.org/news/444-update-from-dr-leroy-hulsey-on-the-uaf-wtc7-study
We had planned to release our findings for public review early this year. However, research often takes unexpected turns, and the more complicated the problem, the more difficult it is to predict the completion date. We are still in the process of studying hypothetical collapse mechanisms and attempting to simulate the building’s failure. Our goal is to determine, with a high degree of confidence, the sequence of failures that may have caused the observed collapse and to rule out those mechanisms that could not have caused the observed collapse.
You spared me a reply. Thank you.
Indeed.
Dutch VPRO tv showed an expert in demolition how the 47 story building collapsed.
His surprised reaction: no doubt whatsoever, demolished with ground floor explosives.
As to the demolitions of the tower, amateur job.
The explosions followed each other downwards quicker than gravity could explain, far too much explosive was used, three weeks or so after Sept 11 cellars full of still fluid molten steel.
To continue her husband’s parents for out and went to Nicaragua, changed their names to Medina. A few years later they got to America but didn’t change their name.
Within about 8 months of the marriage she got a promotion based on her last name. She got an affirmative action promotion every few years because of her last name. By her later 30s she was deputy head of the department. Good things happen when Miss Behrens becomes Mrs. Medina.
The husband is a typical E German Slavic cheekbones blue eyes blondy browny hair.
Group therapy on pro White websites is all very well. But if you don’t want your kids to go down the drain, start checking the right box.
I wouldn’t fill out the census either. The first 3 stages of White genocide are complete. TPTB want us dead
So, how would you call, for example, the number appearing as the sum of
ordinal weights of letters and digits in “American Airlines Flight 11, American
Airlines Flight 77, United Airlines Flight 175, United Airlines Flight 93” ?
(Using some online calculator would be the best choice).
A coincidence? Then be sure there are dozens of similar “miraculous coincidences”
for this event, which automatically excludes any force that had no power to pick
“objects” at will to satisfy proper “imprints” from the list of suspects.
You deny that already in 2001 control of the plane could be taken from outside.
Well, I did not test it myself.
Will have a look if I filed the or a article about it.
Planes without transponder switched on.
You seem to have no idea how many spurious reflections appear on radar screens.
Once a transponder is switched off the air traffic controller loses planes easily.
Mr. Reed,
Its very convenient for the official story that all of the alleged perpetrators bar one were ‘suicided’. No credible case could be brought against then in a court of law. The prosecutors would have to prove that 1) the conspirators got on the aircraft ( no evidence of boarding was ever produxed – no boarding passes, no CCTV) 2) they overpowered the military trained combat pilots none of whom could activate a hijacker alarm within a few seconds 3) they could fly planes at above design speed to hit the Towers slap in the middle and perform a 270 degree corkscrew turn descent fron 8000 feet and fly level for 1 km controlling downforce to strike the Pentagon( none of these feats capable of being perforned by highly qualified professional pilots and 4) that the act of striking the buildings caused them to collapse at near freefall speed, even though in the case of WTC 7, it wasn’t hit by an aeroplane at all. Oh yes and there were almost zero aircraft USAF or USN interceptors around. Most of them were on exercises those couple of days and 2 sent to intercept the Pentagon plane went at least at the start in the wrong direction
The ‘Defence’ doesnt have to prove anything other than the official story doesn’t stand up. Which it doesn’t.
Everyone being crazy does not therefore make no one crazy. This is all too sad.
I beg your pardon, but I am not the one imagining things that didn’t happen or glossing over contradictions as if they didn’t exist. My alleged lack of common sense has not been evidenced by anything I’ve said here.
A Christian would take that last part as a compliment. The part about belonging not to this world, I mean. As to being unhinged, I will only elaborate on what I said just above. If you’re looking for truly unhinged people, look to those who insist that multiple tons of explosives were prepositioned inside the World Trade Center without anybody noticing, and that an elaborate cover story involving four hijacked airplanes, multiple branches of government, and thousands of people was lied into existence in order to obscure the real cause of the destruction. Does that sound “hinged” to you?
Yes, you have missed something. Please read and comprehend all comments before making such unsubstantiated and inaccurate generalizations. Specifically, please see my comments above about thermite.
No we don’t. Truthers are not any single, unified, monolithic group but rather diverse groups and individuals with varying ideas, opinions, and conjectures about what happened, and who did it.
Most of us would agree, however, that none of the 9/11 perpetrators has been brought to justice.
Those criminals remain at large.
Frederick V. Reed reflected & wrote: critique. As an old newsman, I can assure you that without a whole lot more substance and fewer contradictions the controlled-demolition theory would never get past a desk editor.”
Hey old newsman!
… Did you ever consider 9/11 crime scene investigators subjecting Larry Silverstein to questions as to how his “pull it” order on WTC 7 had worked so well?
… Thanks.
Well, I haven’t done more than lightly skim the 500+ comments, now totaling more than 60,000 words. But I noticed there was quite a bit of criticism of my “exoneration” of Cheney and Rumsfeld, so I should expand a little on my thinking.
I’ve never met either of them, but as someone reasonably involved in DC political circles during the 1990s, I think I can say that prior to 9/11 absolutely no one ever regarded either of them as being Neocons. Instead, they were the archetypical examples of moderate business-type mainstream Republicans, stretching all the way back to their years at the top of the Ford Administration during the mid-1970s. As recently as the late 1990s, Halliburton CEO Cheney had been lobbying to get the Iraq sanctions lifted, absolute anathema to the pro-Israel Neocons. That’s one of the reasons everyone was so totally shocked by their apparent transformation after the attacks.
However, keep in mind that by 2000, the Neocons had gained almost total control of all the conservative/Republican media outlets and the foreign policy wings of nearly all the thinktanks in DC, successfully purging all their opponents. Furthermore, the top aides to both Cheney and Rumsfeld were hard-core Neocons like Irving Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas Feith. Thus, even though Cheney and Rumsfeld weren’t themselves Neocons, a very large fraction of all the information they received came from that direction, meaning they they were swimming in a Neocon sea, making it relatively easy for top aides to persuade their bosses on certain things. Rumsfeld was also getting a little elderly, while Cheney had had a long series of heart-attacks starting at age 37.
People point to Cheney and Rumsfeld as having signed the PNAC declaration in 1997, but I think that’s largely a red-herring. DC people are always recruiting their friends to sign various declarations, which may or may not be indicative of anything. For example, I remember Bill Kristol trying to get me to sign the PNAC statement. As it happens, my private views on that issue were absolutely 100% contrary to that of the Neocons and I regarded them as a bunch on lunatics on those foreign policy issues, so I deflected his request and very politely turned him down. But I was quite friendly with Kristol back then, and if I’d been someone without strong opinions in that area, I probably would have agreed.
The whole demonization of Cheney and Rumsfeld in anti-Iraq War circles actually seems pretty suspicious to me. My guess is that the very heavily Jewish MSM focused
focused their wrath on those two figures in order to help deflect culpability from all the Jewish Neocons who were clearly the individuals orchestrating Bush’s crazy foreign policy, and the same is true of the 9/11 Truthers, who probably did so to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism. Normally, the president would have been portrayed as the evil mastermind behind the plot, but “W” was universally acknowledged to be such an idiot that everyone would have ridiculed those sorts of accusations.
Anonymous 227 don’t you realize that most Unz commenters do not accept personal knowledge as truth? Only wikepedia and links to internet sites are acceptable.
It’s in the internet! It must be true ! You know someone who was on one of the 4 planes or was in the WTC? You’re lying they never existed!!
You saw it from your building? Let me get on google maps and prove you couldn’t have seen any of it from 8/am to demolition of tower 7 from your building
You’re a Brooklyn teacher and you and your home room class saw the second plane hit the tower and watched the whole thing? Let me scour google maps and prove the WTC couldn’t be seen from anywhere in Brooklyn.
And I can see explosions through clouds of dark gray smoke that no one else can see.
You are right of course that e.g. the detection of nanothermite does not immediately reveal the whole story. The same goes for the airplanes – proving that the airplane crashes were just make-believe again does not give us the whole picture of what really happened.
There also is the small difficulty of the missing crime scene – most of the debris was rapidly carted off and never properly examined, not even by the government agencies. Is it really sensible under such conditions to demand from members of the general public, who have no access to secret information, the whole story of the destruction of the towers, one that is iron-clad and has no loose ends?
What the detection of nanothermite and other such findings do accomplish, however, is to clearly, unambiguously put the lie to the government-approved fairy tale, and thereby prove that the government is complicit in this conspiracy (I don’t shun that word – Caesar in the end believed in conspiracies, too). That by itself is more important than an imaginary “complete illustrated guide to the demolition of the WTC, with step-by-step instructions for easy repetition.
As far as I know the dust was never investigated independently on very small iron particles, molten iron blown in all directions, forming very tiny globular iron particles.
Nobody at the time was prepared to pay the laboratory, € 5000, if I remember well.
An article by “a guy”. I guess it would be too much work to google what the author’s name was. Well, never mind. The article in question was written by me.
Now, of course, the alleged “mass Muslim rape at Cologne” never happened. Any honest examination of the case would lead to that conclusion. Just for starters, the most scandalous case that was put out was this woman who was raped, got pregnant, and later got an abortion…. It turns out she was not even in Cologne at the time!
https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/
It turns out she was hundreds of miles away at the time! Just made up the story.
Well, that’s just for starters. When you look at the available information about this Cologne event, everything about it turns out to be dodgy and you end up concluding that it is CLEARLY A HOAX.
In fact, I came across other information after writing the article that only reinforced my initial conclusion. For example, I later saw that the main guy presented as an eyewitness of the events, one Ivan Jurcevic, is an obvious crisis actor. That is this video:
It later came to my attention that this Jurcevic (like the notorious Ginnie Watson crisis actress from the Friday 13th Bataclan event in Paris) has an IMDB page: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2406659/
He also has a couple of publicity reels of his (rather undistinguished) acting career on Youtube, like this one:
The guy is a bloody actor!
Well, feel free to claim that this is just a coincidence, that this guy is an aspiring actor, fine. But it’s almost certainly no coincidence.
Meanwhile, you have various people who (unlike Jurcevic) look credible and they claim that they were in the area when this was going on and simply saw nothing. There’s a Canadian English teacher, Marcia Adair, who was there, and didn’t see anything. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/i-was-in-cologne-on-new-years-theres-a-reason-to-be-afraid-and-its-because-of-other-peoples-fear
Key quote:
I later came across the testimony of one Alexander Schoen here: https://thecorrespondent.com/4401/time-for-the-facts-what-do-we-know-about-cologne-four-months-later/1073698080444-e20ada1b
We meet Alexander Schoen, who in October 2015 founded the Hauptbahnhof-Engel (the ‘Train Station Angels’), a group of volunteers who roam the station at night offering free food, drink, and assistance to refugees and others in need. On some nights, he tells us, more than 100 refugees arrive here by train, exhausted from the long journey and often without a follow-up plan.
I highlighted above the text that Schoen “spent hours walking around the station with other volunteers”. Hours.
This Cologne central railway station is an environment about comparable to Grand Central Station. And at the end of 2015, EVERYBODY had a smartphone in their pocket. Yet there is zero photographic record of any of this alleged mass sexual assault. Again, the main witness, this Jurcevic character, is clearly a crisis actor.
But you see, look at the links I provide above. I investigated this question and really tried to establish the facts as best I could.
All of the people on the other side of the debate, claiming that this happened, are simply engaging in storytelling.
In general, your idea that my article tends to discredit the Unz Review is 180 degrees away from the fact of the matter. I only contributed 6 articles to this review. They can all be seen here: https://www.unz.com/author/jonathan-revusky/
Under each article, including the “Muslim Rape Army” piece, I was present in the comments section, defending what I had written in hard, but fair debate. It is my considered opinion that NOBODY (and that includes Ron Unz) ever laid a glove on me factually or logically in any debate under my articles.
If you think they did, then there is a complete electronic record of all the discussion and you can point to where somebody refuted anything I ever said in any article, where they shot me down in flying colors. Go ahead… But no…. even if, by some chance I am wrong about the Cologne thing, nobody ever demonstrated that I was! And I don’t think they ever will…
Now, meanwhile, you do have a point, which is that Unz does publish some utter crap. Like, for example, (an extreme example) there is that deranged woman Ilana Mercer. Like, recently, she was arguing that Obama was ignoring an ongoing “genocide” of white people in South Africa. https://www.unz.com/imercer/obama-ignores-genocide-in-south-africa/
The “genocide” is a problem with attacks on farms in which 50 to 60 white farmers are killed in an average year. (Note that there are over 4 million whites in South Africa!) Also note that there are about 19,000 homicides a year in South Africa (of all races combined). But that’s not a “genocide” apparently, just the 50 or 60 white farmers. Well, it’s a serious matter, even one murder of anybody of any race is tragic, but these numbers do not constitute a genocide!
So, the Unz Review does provide serious alternative geopolitical analysis from very good writers, but then it’s all mixed up with that kind of crap. Ilana Mercer, or all these VDare cranks claiming that there is a rape epidemic going on in Europe and pointing at these kinds of synthetic events like Cologne that pretty clearly never happened.
Things like this Cologne hoax have legs because the people behind them know that the ideological writers of the sort who write here (and on Breitbart and VDare and people like Paul Joseph Watson and Stefan Molyneux and all the rest) will never really fact-check such a story if it is ideologically useful to them.
But anyway, of course, the Cologne thing is a hoax. Of course, the official story on 9/11 is untrue. Of course, the Holocaust is basically a synthetic narrative. It is pretty clear that there were no homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz or any other camp.
It doesn’t actually take a lot of investigation to establish these things. So these stories did not happen and that’s that. It doesn’t matter how ideologically useful a narrative is. If the story is impossible, it simply did not happen.
Doug, no need for you to read any more then. Unless you are interested in lizard men and/ or take some sort of pleasure from train wrecks. Plenty of reasons however if you are one of the troll army.
In July 2001 the procedure for allowing jet fighters to go after missing planes was changed, the Pentagon had to give permission.
On Sept 11 alas nobody for a long time answered that phone.
According to the news reports, there were emergency power generators atop the buildings with diesel fuel tanks to gravity feed them. This was the party line on the afternoon of September 11.
Since then, the narrative has changed to WTC7 so damaged from the twin towers that fell in the morning that this somehow caused it to fall onto its own footprint exactly like a controlled demolition.
Tanabear already posted a video link in this thread which demolishes your “denial”:
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2511829
Only a controlled demolition can produce free fall. End of story. The fact that you’re still sticking to your Hasbara talking points after that is embarrassing,
Feedback for Ron Unz: When you write a long piece and then say at the end that you really don’t know what you’re talking about it makes a curious impression.
Hispanic crime: One of the left’s worst offenses is their tendency to discredit the common sense and gut feelings that guide normal people through life. When I moved to Northwest DC to attend school I noticed that for some reason I felt no fear of the many Hispanics in that area, many of them illegal, no doubt. This contrasted with the AAs who, to judge from the line items in a weekly crime-log put out by my university, committed nearly all the muggings and break-ins. The Hispanics seemed benign and I never had any trouble with them other than that it was annoying that they didn’t speak English and were therefore hard to communicate with. I don’t deny that illegal immigration poses genuine problems but the crime angle is at the least more nuanced than portrayed.
Besides, they’re at least nominal Christians and reputedly sexists, like me. Bet they aren’t into gun-control or Holocaust Education either.
It took a very long time before it was admitted that MH370 had a system like that, and that this system had tracked the plane flying direction south pole.
I never understood why these signals were not used in localising the wreckage.
It’s hard to tell if you guys are lying or just can’t read, but the NIST report says that the “north face” of WTC7 fell at free fall. The interior supports of the building had already failed.
Not true at all, which is why the free fall lie persists.
Excuse me but Ron clearly stated:
The operative word being “Masterminds”. I doubt that the recovering alcoholic president with a 125 IQ, no real military or intelligence experience to speak of, could have been the mastermind. Cheney on the other hand perhaps could have had the know-how, but I bet if anything he was just the point man for the coverup operation. In fact I believe there is reasonable evidence that he was. But we don’t know how much he knew about the plot. If you are interested, you should really take the time to to listen to Jeff Gate’s conversations on youtube regarding Agents, Assets and Sayanim. Especially regarding Assets. The Israelis and organized criminals “profile” US assets years before they rise into positions of authority. They are using Game Theory. Assets, unlike Agents, don’t understand the broader crime they are helping to contribute to. Bush was definitely an asset. The Mossad and Jewish Mafia (the two are inextricably linked) can assume within a range of acceptable probability that an individual will make certain decisions favorable to Israel when put into given situations. This is why certain individuals made it into power in the first place and end up so slavish to Israel in the end. Examples of Israeli assets include:
John McCain
Lindsay Graham
Bill Clinton
Both Bushes (Bush the 1st went off script and the Israelis tried to assassinate him with the intent of replacing him with Dan Quayle who had recently started receiving boosts in the MSM so the world would see him more favorably.)
Dan Quayle.
Agents on the other hand are working directly for Israel and they are aware of what they are doing. Were Cheney and Rumsfeld agents or assets? If they were agents (in this case double agents), they certainly at one point in their career were merely assets. If so at what point did either of them become assets?
Jeff Gates has a book that documents how Israel does this called “Guilt By Association.” He’s not necessarily a 911 truther. His book is not about that. It does however chronicle just how Israel has “powned”, as it were, the US government. Quote:
“We do not govern Egypt, we govern the governors of Egypt.”
—Lord Cromer (1841-1917)
It all starts with organized crime. And Israel has backed organized crime in the united states even before its inception. Men like Meyer Lansky, Micky Cohen and Bugsy Seigel were jewish leaders presiding over a jewish mafia which held sway over the Italian mafia. Meyer Lansky was Israel’s point man to hold this relationship together while Hollywood has propagandized Americans endlessly with movies about the Italian mafia. Meyer Lansky had deep connections to the Irgun and Stern Gang in Israel. Micky Cohen was obsessed with “that Irgun war” over in Palestine. These men were willing agents of Israel’s terrorist founders and their acts of espionage and terror within the US.
John McCain owes his rise to power to organized crime along with many other politicians including Lindsay Graham and Lyndon Johnson.
I highly recommend Jeff Gates on this. There are a lot of ways Israel had available to them to recruit insiders to help cover up their crimes.
It would’ve been very risky for Cheney to be the “mastermind”.. too many orders for horrible things would have emanated directly from his mouth to others. He did filter relevant intelligence coming from the intelligence community before it could get to the president leading up to 911. This is unheard of for a vice president to do this. Normally the CIA would handle it. He appeared to be taking the CIA out of the loop and cutting the president off from them. Also, the president’s staff cut him off from his father Bush I. Bush senior was not able to contact his son, who didn’t even know what the word “NeoCon” meant (he once had to ask his Dad for the meaning) and give him advice leading up to the event. It might’ve been helpful for Bush I to talk to Bush II during this time seeing as how Israel tried to assassinate Bush I. The revelation of this assassination to the public was followed up by a media campaign to sensationalize an assassination attempt on Bush I by Saddam Hussein which was proven later to be false intelligence. Those surrounding Bush II though tried to convince him during the blackout period between himself and his father that Saddam Hussein had tried to assassinate his father, a claim that had already been debunked.
Please do your research into these things before you call Ron Unz a disinformation agent. These issues are complex and we are all still learning.
A video could be seen in the internet where one saw the second plane fly into the second tower.
It was taken from a tower in the vicinity.
The plane was very small in the video, however the important commenting words were ‘it is a military plane, it has no windows’.
Well, it seems highly unlikely that any of my writing will ever appear on this site. However, if you check out my website, https://heresycentral.com/ once in a while, you should see a new article once in a while by me. (And by some other people too.) You might enjoy this one:
https://heresycentral.com/revusky/welcome-to-terra-prime/
or the talk I gave to the “Deep Truth conference” back in June:
https://heresycentral.com/revusky/my-talk-from-the-deep-truth-conference-june-2018/
Feel free to leave a comment. Or write something in the discussion forum I have set up. I mean, frankly, there is a bootstrap problem kind of like how do you get a job with no experience and how do you get experience without a job. How do you get people to participate if the website is inactive. How do you get activity going if people don’t participate.
So I would appreciate your registering to participate in the discussion forum. If I can get some discussions going, at least it won’t be plagued with Anon#xxxx type posters and related disinfo agents and trolls, because I will just delete all that shit. I mean, I don’t have some theory of gardening in which it is some sort of crime to pull weeds….
No doubt there was a lot more explosive used than strictly necessary to bring down the buildings, but this can be explained by the enormity of the crime and the lack of necessary weakening that goes with standard demolitions..
In engineering school, my class had a visiting specialist lecture the class on safety factors. In civil engineering design, the safety factor is 600%. That is, a building has to be 6 times as strong as necessary to carry all anticipated loads on it.
When prepping a structure for demolition, after the building is gutted, crews come in with diamond saws to cut away the vertical supports to get the safety factor down to just over 100%. This saves cost of destroying a building that has full structural integrity.
For 9/11, this option was hardly available. It was necessary to bring in enough explosives to fully demolish the buildings. The surfeit of explosives ensured the building came down not just in a heap, but was pulverized.
Really, anyone could ask themselves, what happens to concrete when dropped from a great height. Does it break? Yes, perhaps a few pieces, but does it turn to powder? Not if it’s any good it doesn’t.
Indeed correct. America has something akin to, 27-Million ex-military, or Veterans. And it is not difficult to see how sooner or later, especially with how most Vet’s have been getting royally screwed seven ways until next Tuesday, by the USA Fed Govnt. once Military members become a retired Veteran. That, somewhere, someday, if even a small well trained sniper type group of fed up Vets, with absolutely zero left to lose due to Agent Orange and other similar Cancers and sickness’. Decides to “Fix” the problem of most every political clown, and various non govnt. bad actors such as Sharpton, Soros, Et al, and starts what will quickly expand. Quickly expand as in, on some reg. avg. Monday or Tuesday, a dozen or even a couple hundred such fed ups, begin to take care of business in the Only real way left that will work. And by weeks end another 10,000 avg. patriotic citizens join in. By that months end numbers shall grow to 100,000 or greater. Wont take much longer and America will see and have several Million well armed, royally fed up, patriots, and ex-military actors acting more like 1776 American patriots than they ever thought possible prior.
With a likely 1/2 or more of USA Police and current military active forces, also as fed up, and as patriotic minded too, joining with the first group. And that’s when what You stated is going to begin in earnest. A real actual MAGA event like no other in history.
If that 1776 First Shot was “Heard around the World”?…This time, the 2nd shot fired will Shake the entire world to it’s very core. Like an Scale 10+ earthquake so to speak.
And big Woe to those who are Traitors, evil doers, and bad actor types who have gotten away with it all far too long already….Why else does anybody think Lib Dems, with most Every key positioned Jew at the helm, has been trying hard to Disarm Americans for over 55+ years now, eh?
When Government and its Officials, Fear JQ Public…That’s when true freedom and liberty exists. But when the exact opposite, as it is and has been for so long occurs, and it is the People/Citizens who Fear the Government and it’s Officials….Then you live under a Tyranny.
And just as how, sooner or later, the Truth and Facts always surface and become well known. So to shall it be when enough people are counted in that Fed-Ups group. The Justice scales will Tip to the righteous and good side, and double Woe to bad actors of every type and stripe.
And they will Not be able to stop it. Justice and all it entails shall prevail. Plus with so much, Righteous Indignation on the part of the peoples side, all moral high ground will remain in their camp. A Win, Win situation if ever there was one. With well over, 100 million armed folk, if even a paltry 10% get reserved for use as, Hunters of bad actors in high level places?…That’s a 10-million man force, dedicated to Hunt down, and exterminate. With a potential of 90 million remaining as every day soldiers to fight all other problem sources etc. A doable and double, win win.
I do not promote this type action, as peaceful talk and similar are always best. Yet one cannot discount the facts at hand, and see the weekly numbers of awakened and fed up’s being increased massively such as never before seen in our life times.
California Dept of Corrections Male Population in 2016
http://www.ppic.org/publication/californias-changing-prison-population/
Whites 21% (out of 42% California population) – underrepresentation factor 0.50
Blacks 29% (out of 6% California population) – overrepresentation factor 4.83
Latino 43% (out of 35% California population) – overrepresentation factor 1.23
But foreign-born Californians are less likely to be imprisoned.
Thank you so much Ron. I remember the Bush knew Bush knew ! Based on the fact that he didn’t rush out of the room in seconds.
The more people looked at the dancing Israelis and Silverstein and Israeli TSA contractors the more the focus was on the Bush administration CIA and Ben Laden family instead of who benefited.
Sean said: “If Christopher Bollyn is worth beating up, you might be too. Scared? Griffin isn’t, and anyone could find him.”
Hi Sean,
… Regrettably, had you a functioning brain & a conscience, those key components would be hard to find.
… Uh, Sean, did you ever read about how American serial killers relished police force manhunts & inability to catch them? One example is the cocky Zodiac Killer who got his rock’s off while on killing spree!
… Same goes for the real 9/11 serial killer-perps.
They celebrate the present unlikelihood to get caught, & foolishly project being forever accountable to a Higher Law than themselves.
… (zzzZigh)
Laurent Guyénot brought up Machiavelli dictum “make another accomplish your dirty ends, then turn popular vengeance against him” that applies here. However neither Cheney nor Rumsfeld (or even Bush) can be seen as victims. They knew what they were doing.
It should be added that Bush winning was predicated on the support of neocons. Bush was coached by Prince Bandar how to deal with neocons (‘the people who did I not like my father’) and mislead by Bandar that he could outmaneuver them.
The Machiavelli dictum very much applies to Trump who is being boxed into the position that the only salvation for him will be doing what the neocons want. And Chuck Schumer will rejoice quietly the attack on Iran or Syria while publicly blaming Trump.
Ron Unz promised us that we want have to see you here anymore and listen to your obsessions about Cologne. Why are you here?
Good. Go in peace and stay there and do not concern yourself with the world that you do not understand.
I’ve posted excellent videos on the subject matter on my comment #1 on this thread. Why don’t you do some RESEARCH and then come back with questions instead of posting generalizations. Did you even take the time watch all of the videos I’ve posted? Of course not…!
LOOK CLOSELY HERE FRED…:
How many huge boxes of names, evidences, proofs galore of every Massive “Blue Ribbon” US Senate committee investigation, like for example that Oil for Food scam in Iraq where over 300 pages of names and evidence were shown of on cspan and msm news, once Paul Volker finished his almost 3 year long investigation of, were taken to and stored within those three buildings or the pentagon office hit? And forever lost and destroyed. Recall all the many such huge senate investigations over the past two decades or so?….Yet None or barely anyone, ever seems to get prosecuted for. Those who do are low level actors typically. The small few high level bad actors busted always get a us prez pardon.
Does anybody think such incriminating evidence is not destroyed? Why else would the us senate dedicate a typical, $50 to as much as, $200+ Million Per investigation? And always, Always, appoints only well trusted, Former big wig top officials such as Volker to head it and appoint the entire rest of crew doing investigations. aka Mainly a, Jews appointed to investigate Other Jews, for various massive swindle scams. Like what has now grown into an aprox. $9+ TRILLION Missing Pentagon dollar amount! As Per last I saw or read of it, and that was at least a year ago.
Nuttyahoo & Israel can sure Buy/Hire/Feed/Arm/Keep supplied/Treat wounded Al-cia-da terrorists/Pay off other connected actors/and also pocket more than one can conceive of.
When added to all other $$$ scams of past 20 or so years, Multi Trillions Banksters pay offs, 2008 market crash, too many mid east Wars expenses to count, with much more War scheduled for benefit of Israel and Jewry. It must total around $100+ TRILLION if not more yet!
And with zero accounting of it all, and whatever was accounted, all records burned in Pentagon offices, and Twin Tower offices. What a huge, massive, Cohencidence.
It’s not that simple. Don’t forget that Gore’s VP was Sen. Joe Lieberman, probably the highest-ranking Neocon political figure in America. Furthermore, Gore’s very influential life-long mentor was TNR publisher Martin Peretz, one of the top Neocons, and so close to Gore that he spent all of 2000 traveling with Gore on his campaign plane. Meanwhile, the Bush campaign was filled with bitter enemies of the Neocons.
Now the Republican branch of the Neocons couldn’t quite directly come out and endorse Gore, but I think it’s pretty likely that most of them hoped that Bush would lose so that they could say “told you so!” and then try to seize control of the defeated Republican Party. In broader ethnic terms, Gore got 80%(!) of the Jewish vote.
That’s the exact reason I found it so astonishing that the Neocons were able to seize control of the Bush Administration…though not any more so than how they managed to quickly seize control of the Trump Administration even without the benefit of a 9/11 type event.
I don’t think there’s every been any group in modern American society so good at seizing control of things…
A couple of points that I didn’t see mentioned:
1. The remarkably fortuitous (and hurried) movement of an Israeli company out of the WTC’s North Tower… a week prior to 9/11.
Zim American-Israeli Shipping (currently Zim Integrated Shipping Services) is an Israel company with ties to the Mossad that was 49 percent owned by the Israeli government as of 9/11/01 (they later sold their interest). On 9/11, Zim’s headquarters was in Haifa, Israel, with other offices in Hong Kong, Hamburg, Germany, and Manhattan, New York/Norfolk, Virginia.
At the time of the 9/11 attacks Zim was one of two Israeli companies with lease contracts at the World Trade Center. The other Israeli tenant, Clear Forest, had a small office of 18 employees on the 47th floor of WTC 1 (the North Tower). According to the Jerusalem Post, Clear Forest had only four or five employees at the WTC on 9/11 and all escaped uninjured.
Zim occupied all of the 16th floor (about 50,000 square feet), 10,000 square feet of the 17th floor, and some space of the 29th floor of WTC 1. Zim had about 250 employees at the WTC before its move-out.
The company moved out of the WTC on or about Sept. 4, 2001 and into a newly built office building in Norfolk, VA — even though they had about four and a half years (and $8 million) remaining on their 10-year lease obligation at the WTC.
Zim is reported to have had about 10 of its purported 20 remaining employees at the WTC on 9/11, none were killed or injured.
Zim found the site in Norfolk, obtained all permits, drew up the architectural plans, and built its 2-story 45,000 square-foot steel frame/brick veneer office building in only six months, which is about as fast as humanly possible for a commercial office project. They clearly had a definite deadline in mind.
2. Of the visas for the 19 hijackers, 12 were issued by a single State Dept. employee, (((Shayna Steinger))), out of the US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (rather than the main embassy in Riyadh). She was hired straight out of Columbia in 1999 — Jeddah was her first assignment. Other employees at the consulate were reprimanded for asking too many questions about suspicious-appearing or incomplete visa applications.
Steinger suffered no apparent negative career effects from her actions, and was not mentioned in the 9/11 report. She continued to work for the State Department after 9/11, was promoted several times, and in 2008 became a board member of the American Foreign Service Association.
They *did* frame Iraq. The false intelligence linking both Iraq to 911 and Iraq to the Anthrax came from the Mossad and the Israeli generals meeting with Wolfowitz and Feith in the Office of Special Plans at the Pentagon. Richard Perle wrote the infamous memo circulated within the Pentagon days after 911 that the plan was for the US to attack 7 countries, including Iraq. They got the military on board with attacking Iraq within weeks after September 11th.
I suppose they had to have a cover story that made sense: OBL wouldn’t be hiding out in Iraq. They sure as hell weren’t going to attack Pakistan — ever. This was a long term plan and they took their time making the case for each country the best that they could and in a logical order. They got their biggest target out of the way before the US was war fatigued and now they are trying to take out Syria by other means. They are letting the Saudis take care of Yemen (another country on the list). But Iraq is out of the way and that is because of the framing done by Israelis and their agents within the Pentagon.
The actual title of this article is “9/11 Conspiracy Theories”. Knowing how the talmudists both caused 9/11 and have been weaponizing our language against us for centuries, shouldn’t we just stop calling them “conspiracies”? There are loads of theories about how these false flags actually happen, but the only real conspiracy that is consistently present in all of them is the government conspiracy to cover them up.
Lets go through a few of these jew crimes against gentiles that Ron Unz has documented and proven with his AP series. Of course the ZOG government and jew owned media covered up all these real, proven conspiracies and to do this day they do their best to hide them from goyim:
Ritual Child Sacrifice
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
The “Russian” Revolution
The Holohoax
The Morgentau plan and the Hellstorm
Kennedy Assasination
The Liberty
9/11
As incredible as these genocidal crimes by jews are, they are just the tip of the iceberg. The truth, substantiated by the above mentioned and on UR proven crimes, is that jews have been lying, cheating, murdering and ritually sacrificing goyim for thousands of years. Martin Luther and Hitler were 100% correct, as Ron Unz will eventually be forced to acknowledge. This is the mother of all conspiracies, the only question is whether the jews really are the synogogue of satan, or are if they are merely satan’s favorite slaves.
Another uncomfortable truth is that lucifer and his allies/slaves the jews have been winning since gentiles started letting them into Europe. The Catholic Church has been completely subsumed and corrupted and likely this will be their last (((anti))) pope. Rabbi’s are claiming that the Red Heifer has re-appeared, a prerequisite for the third temple.
https://godinanutshell.com/2018/09/04/red-heifer-update-september-2018/
Untold millions of Christians have been eliminated in two world wars for Israel. The Christian nuclear family has been nuked all across the planet. Deviant sex has become normalized. Censorship and Orwellian suppression of free speech has been imposed across the planet through jew control of MSM, publishing, social media and government. Christian armies and arms industry are completely in jew hands just as Nato and the entire US military and MIC are. Goyim are fighting perpetual wars across the middle east to create Eretz Israel and bring on the third temple.
Meanwhile, jews claim Hitler was the ultimate evil as they spit on Churches and Christians.
What about the attack on the USS Liberty?
Would a report of that event have gotten past your editor’s desk, eh Fredo?
Or would it have first been necessary to figure out what exact consistency of napalm they were dropping on the deck or the exact angle that the torpedo was launched at the ship, before any kind of significant reporting could be done?
Wasn’t it enough to know that Israel attacked our sailors in a cowardly and treacherous act of war, intending to murder every soul aboard, in order to blame someone else, and then get the US to fight ((their)) wars for them? How oddly characteristic of them!
And when you consider that our entire fecal government at the highest levels, including our controlled media, were all complicit in the cover up of that singularly unspeakable act of mass-murder and betrayal, some might consider that a story that a real (as opposed to a deepstate whore) journalist might want to cover, no?
How many stories have you written about that atrocity, eh Fredo?
You were a war correspondent around that time, no?
Perhaps it just wasn’t a significant enough of an event to write about, huh?
So the president and Commander in Chief, betrayed the lives of his (our) sailors to the enemy, and then lied about it.
Nothing worth writing about there! Just like 9/11!
So what if Israeli agents were filming the attack, and celebrating as our citizens were horrifically slaughtered in balls of fire.
So what if these Israelis get billions of dollars from our citizens each year in tribute.
Anyone who complains when they repay us by murdering our citizens, corrupting our government and getting us to spend our blood and treasure fighting endless wars on their behalf, is just an anti-Semite who’s jealous of Jewish money making skills, huh?
Guess what Fredo, no matter how you cook at it, even the official narrative of 9/11 is a ‘conspiracy theory’, even far less plausible than what the truthers now know.
No Fredo, in order to write the truth about 9/11, (or the USS Liberty, or MH17, or Assad’s “chemical attacks”, or Israel’s iron grip on our fecal government and media and institutions, etc…), all you have to have is the nads to tell the truth. You don’t need any specialized scientific expertize in nano-whateverthefuck. No. All that’s required are integrity and balls.
Two things woefully lacking in the professional whournalism we suffer these days.
Two dampers, One on each side of the tower…each one over a set of elevator shafts, One express, the other Mid-rise,High-rise.
My bad, Sorry, Its not the first time i have been called Freddy Kruger…
If your goal is to be rated as The #1 Ass and ignorant Fool of UNZ forums? Then You are a WINNER!
Be Proud, Be Very Proud! As there does seem to be several other contenders here trying so hard for that coveted #1 Idiotic Ass rating.
Those other few always use as a tactic to deceive, the method of pretending to be some type Top intellectual, via much use of big worded mambo jambos, as if they really know wtf they speak of. You however, never mess around and simply use common man wordings. This is good, as it makes it easier for everybody to spot You as #1. Okay, now go back to as before, and keep your entire head stored up some Jews Ass.
Fred Reed is a propagandist. He only deals with generalisations, anecdotes and feels.
This is the kind of reply that makes me wonder why I even bother to post here…
I did NOT say that the technology for remote control of airplanes did not exist before 2001…in fact I said just the OPPOSITE…I said that technology has been around for ‘very a long time’…here is a decent article that goes into the history of remotely piloted craft in a fairly accurate technical way…
I have plenty of idea about aircraft radar since I am a licensed commercial pilot and have 40 years experience…so no, the ATC radar does NOT lose planes ‘easily’ or any other way if the transponder is turned off…radar coverage is lost only if the airplane drops to a low enough altitude that it is under the radar’s line of sight…otherwise the radar sees it perfectly…and also the plane’s bearing, range and speed…radar clutter is filtered out…I know enough about aircraft radar to write a book…so don’t start..try reading some of the links I gave…
What about the floors upwards? They collapsed from bottom to top before the floors downwards collapsed from top to bottom. Now that’s what I call having a sense of timing from the planners. I even think that the floors underneath didn’t need to be fitted with any explosives since the sheer weight of the few tens of floors above falling on them seems enough to me to crush them. The thing is blowing a floor could only make floors above collapse, not floors below, but the floors above had already collapsed. How didn’t anyone notice the maintenance workers installing the explosives? There definitely should be some record of them intervening in the building. I say that was one heck of a conspiracy and one heck of an engineering feat. I mean the logistics necessary are on a completely different level than JFK’s assassination or any false flag perpetrated by the Deep State before or after.
I admit having a hard time buying the official version but I have an even harder time buying the alternative “truthers”‘ versions. They need too many people to be involved, too much logistics to be implemented. As for gravity, it is a constant of acceleration, increase/decrease of speed per time (9.81 meters per square second for Earth), not speed.
Terrific essay. Thank you very much.
The Karen Dunbar *
*
moment for me was thinking about the date.
The USA may be singular in rendering dates as MMDDYY and the coincidence between the date of the event and the usual US emergency call number seemed suspicious to me.in France, UK etc 119? An inside job is far too unlikely to have remained sub rosa for so long and a foreign actor likely.
Same way, the CIA has been made to take the blame for the JFK assassination.
It’s my impression that Unz is opposed to Jewish nationalism especially Zionism, but not Jews as such. He does not seem think there is anything genetically special about Jews, (or anyone else) and for that reason is open to the idea that they could not have come by their influence over gentile societies without cutting a few ethical corners.
The professors who are the most eminent and credible Truthers have written about philosophy of science and epistemology (Griffin) or actually were a professor of philosophy of science (James H. Fetzer). These fellows can talk about evidential support, subjective belief, inference, laws, theories, and paradigms until the cows come home.
Blackened Betty-Eye Revusky!……reminds me of that song…”Woah Black Betty, Black Betty had a Child, the damn thing Ran Wild!” and, don’t their child’s all run wild?
Good try, Wade, but your argument is based on a false inference.
Here’s what the author said:
So it is clear that, for the author, the issue is not who worked out the details of the project, a fact that should really be obvious. No President works out the details of anything. Devising the means to achieve ends chosen by the leadership is what the Pentagon, the CIA and all the other agencies of government exist to undertake. No, the issue Unz was addressing was who decided to go with a false-flag attack to justify the war for US control of the entire Middle-East. And clearly it was President George Dubya Bush,* who before being elected is known to have declared: “Fuck Saddam, we’re gonna take him out.” But if Ron Unz disagrees, let’s hear it from him.
———
* And no doubt the false flag attack was based on contingency plans drawn up long before George W. Bush became President. This would have been necessary since there would not have been time to put the thing together after G.W. Bush’s inauguration.
So how come they didn’t seize control of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush in your opinion? Who did they control to completely disable the US defences and sabotage all subsequent investigations/response?
If you’re just suggesting that those three weren’t the masterminds, that’s fine, but anything else is puzzling.
Nope. NIST did their measurement along the North face, as did David Chandler, because that is the best available video to track the motion of the roofline, but the collapse was the full width and breadth of the building. And I’m curious as to how the “interior” of the building became separated from the “exterior” of the building as the columns were all interconnected based solely on a fire theory. NIST in their computer model doesn’t show this separation. Maybe you can explain this?
Of course, some of the interior columns collapsing first and then the rest of the building coming down is consistent with controlled demolition. Which is exactly what happened.
See engineer Tony Szamboti discussing the collapse of WTC7 at the 17:00 minute mark:
Bush had already defeated John McCain in the primaries. There is no telling what would have happened if McCain had become President. I doubt he would have lived out his term.
Who and when planted the idea in G.W. Bush’s mind that (1) he wanted to avenge his father for Saddam Hussein attempt on his life and (2) his father not being reelected because of not going to Iraq all the way.
Bush clearly he was aware of neocons’ opposition to his father because of his standing up to Yitzhak Shamir in 1991 and then neocons being a significant factor in his father’s defeat in 1992 (Friedman and Safire anti-Bush weekly columns in NYT).
This exchange with Prince Bandar in 1997 demonstrates it.
Yet Bush did everything they wanted. Or perhaps not everything as after getting to Bagdad in 2003 American armies did not turn East to Teheran or West to Damascus as many neocons wanted. Who decided to replace General Jay Garner with Paul Bremer? The former wanted to keep Iraq and its army functioning that possibly could be used in war against Syria or Iran while the latter disbanded Iraqi army that lead to destruction of all Iraqi institutions and total chaos and the rise of Shiites.
In 2000 I was aware of Bush-Sahmir 1991 so when Bush Jr. was elected I was hoping that the neocons would be sidelined. But they only got stronger. It seem that Obama managed to somewhat sideline them. Is it because Obama had on his side the faction of the globalization NWO that gave him a counterweigh to the narrow minded Zionists? Obama was able to make a deal with Iran after all.
Beyond the complexity of the 9-11 Truth conspiracy (why not just blow the building up and blame the wrong people), the other problem I have as a stupid unwoke member of John Q. Public is that, to me, flying a jet plane stocked to the gills with jet fuel into a sky scraper intuitively seems like it would take out the building.
So some “expert” telling me it can’t happen, when “experts” can be found everywhere for a dime a dozen who will testify to any bit of baloney, and the geopolitical stakes involved, I just have a hard time believing someone telling me something that contradicts my intuition.
That being said, Ron’s whole paranoid Israeli conspiracy might actually be what happened, and I’m just too stubborn and set in my ways to listen to reason. However, assuming the whole thing is a bullshit conspiracy theory intended for propaganda purposes, it fails due to i.) unnecessary complexity, and ii.) counter-intuitive claims.
If the government or the MSM provided a complex and counter-intuitive claim (for example, white racism responsible for black on black homicide rates), I might be persuaded by a simpler and more intuitive explanation for the phenomenon, even if every right-thinking individual might dismiss that out of hand.
Don’t hold your breath that Ron would do that. Others with the requisite skill have already done so:
Why put this on Ron Unz? David Chandler not only debunks NIST’s report but got the chance to confront NIST with a question at one of their conferences. He recounts this here at about the 20 minute mark above.
NIST’s reaction to this is quite stunning. David Chandler thoroughly debunks the notion that NIST’s investigation into WTC 7 was a scientific one. It was quite unscientific and their methods, especially their computer modeling, were shrouded in mystery. They only released the results of 1 simulation of their computer model (the one that got the results they wanted) and they refused to release any information about the simulation and the various assumptions that went into it so that other scientists could replicate their finding.
In short quit implying that NIST was doing “science” in their WTC 7 investigation.
If you expect Ron to debunk those who debunked NIST, you have to be willing to pay attention to the original debunking in the first place.
“The other half the point is even if the structure instantly and without energy input went limp, how did the lower bits accelerate to the speed of the upper bits when the upper bits already had a head start and both of them were accelerating at 9.8m/s^2?
In other words, if the whole thing came down at freefall then that means that the lower floors must have started falling BEFORE the upper floors even reached them.
How does that happen? Does steel get scared?”
Firstly I must admit that I made an error. The quora answer I linked to was incorrect. Really sorry I did not check it before linking to it. I only looked at the calculation, but the fall time 9s was wrong. It was 10s. Only WTC7 fell with 9.81 m/s2 acceleration. David Chandler got 6.31 m/s2 acceleration for WTC1 and his data points seem convincing. WTC1 and 2 did not fall with free-fall speed and 6.31 m/s2 is an acceleration that is typical for a gravitational fall breaking structures. However, there are enough arguments for controlled demolition. I wrote a short story to to my blog where the error I made is corrected
http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2018/09/11/919/
I remember reading in 2003 in Andreas von Buelow’s book “Die CIA und der 11. September” an assertion that the technology existed to remote control airliners. Buelow had been a leading Social Democratic politician in Germany. He had been Minister of Technology and State Secretary in the Defense Ministry. He was in a position to know.
Great post. Thank you.
[It’s very poor behavior to clutter up threads with excessively long off-topic comments focused on your personal obsessions, especially since you’ve been given a fragile second-chance to participate here. Keep this up, and all your future comments will get trashed.]
Well, that’s a dodgy representation of what happened, that Unz disagreed with the “author’s theory”. No, in fact, what Unz did was that he blatantly misrepresented what I was saying and then disagreed with that misrepresentation.
In case you don’t know, that is called the “straw-man fallacy”. In the excerpt you quote:
Well, no, I never said there would be “hundreds of videos and photos”. He was putting words in my mouth! Nor did I say that there would be photos or video of “ANY violent event”. No, of course not. Obviously, a lot of violent events would occur in some dark alley with nobody else around and not be recorded. No, I specifically said this:
So, obviously, I pointed out to Unz that he had grotesquely misrepresented what I was saying. Of course, Unz did not concede my point. He just walked away from the conversation. Quite unfortunately, that is typical Ron Unz behavior.
In any case, what does it matter whether Ron Unz thinks there is a rape epidemic going on in Germany? Obviously, the important question is whether there really is one or not. Besides, look, if it took Ron Unz 17 years to figure out that the 9/11 story is bullshit, then we could project that he’ll figure out that there is no Muslim rape epidemic maybe by 2032 or so. I mean to say, okay, the guy will eventually get there, I suppose, but it could take him a while!
But anyway, I’m quite certain that this rape epidemic stuff is just nonsense. I wrote that article a bit over a year ago, and every bit of new information I ever ran into about this situation just reinforced my position. It later came to my attention that the main “witness” of this in Cologne, Ivan Jurcevic, is obviously a crisis actor. In two and a half years, no photos or video have ever surfaced that are consistent with what they say happened. No CCTV, no smartphone footage…. And there are eyewitnesses who look credible to me who say they were there at the time and didn’t see any of this happening.
But it’s not just about the Cologne event itself. It’s the whole narrative. I live in Spain. A Spanish friend here, was born here and always lived here, but his mother is German, and he grew up speaking with his Mom in German. So he’s fluent and knows people in the German expat community here and so on. He got interested in this whole “Muslim rape epidemic” narrative last summer after I wrote the article and told me that he had broached the topic in various social gatherings full of German people — Germans who were holidaying here but live in Germany….
He’d ask some woman about this huge problem of getting raped by the swarthy savages or whatever…. My friend told me that basically, he would bring up this whole thing and nobody knew WTF he was talking about! Women would say: “Huh? Germany is completely safe. I go out at night at any hour and there is no problem!”
So, what it is really about here is this kind of hard-core racist echo chamber that exists. It really seems that if you don’t read Breitbart or VDare and you don’t listen to Paul Joseph Watson or Stefan Molyneux or Red Ice Radio or whatever, then you just don’t know that there is a “Muslim Rape epidemic” going on there under your nose somehow.
But, okay, fine. What do those people know? They just live in Germany, eh?
But, I mean to say, it’s an echo chamber in which people just keep repeating these things and there is never the slightest attempt to fact check any of this. But then for the people whose information about the world comes from these highly ideological sources, it forms their mental world.
So then, when somebody (me in this case) tells you, “Look, there is no Muslim Rape epidemic in Germany. This is a hoax!” then you freak out, because this is part of your mental world, I guess.
But look, you guys really have things 180 degrees ass backwards. What tends to discredit this site is all this echo chamber wingnuttery, like claiming that there is a Muslim rape epidemic going on, with zero fact checking. I mean, if you are a middle-of-the-road person in Germany, like those people my friend talked to, and you run across some American site that is going on and on about some rape epidemic in your country that you know doesn’t exist, THAT is what tends to discredit the site, not somebody like me, pointing out that this is nonsense.
Now, just to be absolutely clear, I am not saying that mass immigration doesn’t cause problems. And I am not saying that absolutely nobody ever gets raped either. That would be a ridiculous claim.
But, this whole “Muslim Rape army” synthetic narrative, of which the Cologne thing is the centerpiece — I am quite satisfied that this is just bullshit. It’s part of a whole. It’s like this Paul Joseph Watson claiming that Sweden is a crime-ridden hellhole. That’s surely nonsense. Okay, there is some amount of crime, sure, but…. I’m sure that everybody who lives in Sweden or just spends some amount of time there knows that this “Mean streets of Malmo” thing is basically nonsense.
So, no, it’s the constant repetition of all this wingnut stuff on this site that would tend to discredit it, not the occasional piece that makes some attempt to puncture all this nonsense.
Crime statistics are notoriously unreliable due to uncertainties and inconsistencies in reporting rates. Likely the most reliable crime statistics are those for homicide. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that the rate for homicide among hispanics is consistently about double the rate for non-hispanic whites. (The rate for blacks is 7-8 times higher.) See here:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6631a9.htm
A look a murder rates (United Nations numbers here: https://data.unodc.org) in the countries that most hispanics come from shows:
* Honduras ~22 times the US rate
* El Salvador ~ 20 times the US rate
* Guatemala ~12 times the US rate
* Mexico ~ 5 times the US rate
…and on and on.
One can argue that these astronomical rates are due to the sociopolitical conditions in these (and the vast majority of) hispanic countries, but these lead to the question of what caused these conditions. Is it Sailer’s magic/tragic dirt theory? Or is it because of the people who live there? If it is the latter, then the question is, what is the tipping point at which the US will begin to “catch up” with our hemispheric neighbors to our south?
“Nothing about the reported and witnessed events on 9/11—not the collapse of the twin towers, not Building 7….violates the laws of physics.”
True. Obviously the actual collapse of the towers could not have violated the laws of physics, but if you believe the government’s story of 9/11 you are required to believe just that. If you believe that it was a demolition then the laws of physics were not violated.
NIST conceded that WTC7 did enter free-fall for 2.25 seconds or roughly 6 to 8 stories. They originally denied this in their final draft report with the line, “WTC7 did not enter free-fall.” So the NIST computer model shows resistance but they are now admitting free-fall. So is momentum transfer at free-fall acceleration possible?
Well…your idiotic comment caught my attention due to your assertions about the subject of physics…
Let me first ask just exactly what your formal background is in the science of physics…or any other of the numerous specific engineering disciplines that are involved here…?
I ask because you strike me as a complete layman…not in any way conversant in the language of science…and I make that conclusion based on your sweeping generalizations… which is not how scientists speak…
With faith that average U.S. voters predominate (matter?) in US presidential elections, Ron Unz wrote: “… I think it’s pretty likely that most of them (supporters of the Gore-Lieberman Zionist Democrat ticket) hoped that Bush would lose so that they could say “told you so!” and then try to seize control of the defeated Republican Party. In broader ethnic terms, Gore got 80%(!) of the Jewish vote.”
Hi Ron,
… George W. Bush was pro-Israel as an occupied territory cursed fig tree.
… Undated, but please consider viewing the video below, & where PM Ariel Sharon’s limo pulls up to White House for a meeting with the one who liked to portray himself as a “War President.”
… Basically, with the Trump victory example, the Zionist Jewish Lobbies, billionaires, Corporate Media campaign theatrics, and “win-win” presidential election outcomes all serve to demonstrate how even a modified-Cynthia McKinney nomination could be filled with a couple closet-Neoconservatives.
… Thank you, Ron. Belief in the American people’s democratic vote dies hard!
Can’t wait for Ron Unz’s next installment which will explain that the Jews are responsible for covering up Site 51 and the numerous extraterrestrial contacts which occurred in the 20th Century. . . I assume because the aliens have some good renewable energy source that would save the planet but put the Jewish-controlled oil companies and arms manufacturers out of business.
Hi Them Guys:
Am happy the unpaid Ong-Gambler, Revusky is not banned from offering U.R. comments. Although, of course, Jonathan is seeking the dialectic exit door.
Thanks.
Bush did attack Iraq and Afghanistan, but he did not attack Syria or Iran. McCain would have, and he would not have needed any advisers whispering in his ear either
Risk to reward ratio?
Risks:
Why would anyone believe the Palestinians capable? OBL was much more believable as he supposedly already attacked the USS Cole.
You mean the Palestinians orchestrated this right under Israel’s nose in the land that for all practical purposes they rule over with an iron fist? Americans might ask, if the Palestinians were capable of this, why not just attack their primary enemy Israel? Well everyone already knows they couldn’t pull that off either.
Benefits:
Well they could continue their regularly scheduled genocide with even more impunity than before.
Seriously there’s no reason for my side of this debate to speculate about what Israel’s motivations might be, it’s clearly stated in the Oded Yinon plan from the early 80’s that Israel needs to stoke sectarian violence in the Middle East particularly in Iraq. The neocons Project For a New American Century advised on this as well through the late 90’s. Paul Wolfowitz and other neocons pushed Bill Clinton into bombing Iraq during the middle of the Lowinsky scandal (it’s no coincidence that Bill Kristol was the first to announce the impending scandal to the public). This was *after* their attempt to blame the Oklahoma City Bombing on Iraq (yes, Judith Miller and others were dropping hints that Iraq was involved with this too!)
Failing in their attempt to start a war through means such as blackmail and espionage against the US they upped their game. It was a long term plan executed very carefully. Why would they do something so extensive to go after an easy target like Palestine which they already had subdued for decades prior?
Not that many people would watch it. Planes were essential for the drama. 9/11 was a Meisterstück.
Every artist or craftsmen wants to be appreciated by his peers when he can show new tricks and techniques his peers in FSB and other agencies do not have yet.
Glewitz incident in 1939 was not appreciate and not really used for anything partly because it was not spectacular. Only after the war in Nuremberg it was used by the prosecution to argue that Germans wanted to start the war. Some people even believe that it did not happen or that it was not a false flag.
Every thread i visit with this set of claims always has a pair of trolls, This time i have been blessed with two pairs of em…
Point #1
You have to have rocks in your head to think there is any natural process involved in the fires that burned in these basements… I cannot believe you actually post this
1. Peat
2. Coal
Well last time i looked into it the car parks under the WTC did not have a coal mine
And i doubt the concrete car park had a peat moss farm…
So see if you can fathom the reality…
A huge 1389 foot tall steel and concrete building is blown up, By a very good application of CDI work that entire building fell into the lower levels thus filling it with many MANY tons of debris and steel… You know STUFF THAT DOES NOT BURN…. only a small percentage of the debris and steel that remained did not go into the basements… Lets just ship over the tonnage of dust for now…
Now those lower levels being filled with stuff that have a very bad ability to burn have filled up the whole place…. Now for nearly 100 days the FDNY pumped MILLIONS of gallons of water onto those two very short rubble piles… every water pump they could lay hands on running for 3 months…. A lot of water added.
Now i was sure they cut off all the normal services to the site like gas and electricity. And i am sure they did not bring in 50 dump trucks full of coal to add to the trouble there… So we have a problem here, No peat bog to burn, No coal seams to burn, Enough water to fill the basements several time over, shut down gas service…. So with out the fire crews adding fuel to the mix what fuel keep the fire going for a hundred days?
I went from one book to the next looking for things that would burn in such a place, The list is very short. the list dropped to TWO that would do the job… One was real nasty EU and the other was DU or Uranium-238.
Now you claim ‘U238′s too expensive, too regulated, absolutely unnecessary, and VERY easy to detect ”
Point one, U-238 in 1968 was a waste product of the nuke bomb program, Many MANY MANY tons of it were produced to make the huge piles of nuclear weapons, in other words in 1968 it was worth more to give away than to store.
In the era, the regulations regarding DU were lets just say LAX.
I have stated the useful nature of point three, (counter weights,Pyrophoricity)
And point four.. If you take a pile of U-238 and a small wire of magnesium, heap up the DU and top it with the mag wire and set the wire on fire that entire pile of du is going to burn, It will burn until the entire mass is consumed. The combustion products of this reaction happen to be a somewhat hard thing to do testing for in fact… But that is a moot point because the EPA was doing very little to hamper the work being done on this site.
So…. Fact: is fires burned in a place that would be a very hard place to maintain i fire.
Fact: Those fires were known to generate enough heat to melt steel and cause POOLS of molten steel to be witnessed.
Fact: There was not ANY added fuel.
Fact: There was enormous amounts of water added to ALL of the places that were burning on the WTC site.
Fact: The fires burned for 99 days.
Now with a bunch of facts to work with even a layman can fathom the process to make these facts all jive is going to require a fuel that does not require added oxygen to keep burning (list of fuel drops to a small few), Then we have to deal with the heat generated versus the mass needed to sustain a fire that will melt high quality steer beams and girders. Once the mass numbers pile up and up, you will have to keep your eye on the heavy parts of the fuel list(at this point there are 2 EU and DU) Now eu would have been an unlikely candidate and DU would be a very good candidate…
So one does not need to work too hard to see these fires are a real problem to have all these facts on. Now the entire time from the start of 2007 to this very day i have endured much trolling on this claim and the facts. And sorry to burst your bubble Anon.. but i have nothing to substitute for U-238 that can fit the facts…. 10 years your type has been trying to cast doubts and for all your trying you STILL have not one PLAUSIBLE explanation to substitute for mine… But i did have a good laugh at
1. Peat
2. Coal
Have fun Anon.
Look guys and Hasbara trolls. It can’t have been Israel.
We know this because CBS News reported that a passport belonging to one of the hijackers, Satam al-Sugami, was found on the street minutes after the plane he was aboard crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center and before the New York landmark collapsed.
CBS News wouldn’t lie now, would they?
The reason Fred Reed wrote this comment is the same as for A. Karlin. Basically it is virtue or rather the lack of virtue signaling to the powers that be.
In parts of Mexico away from the drugs gangs and where there is still the traditional paternalistic culture, there is a very low murder rate. Where the culture is permissive (as in the US) Hispanics brought up in that culture have high murder rates. So you cannot say Hispanics are better or worse in their own countries or as immigrants.
I actually believe that both nanothermite and small atomic demolition munitions (SADMs) were used. The nanothermite was used to create the explosions around the plane crashes which created the intense but localized fires. The Towers were brought down however by SADMs which pulverized the concrete and created the pyroclastic dust clouds that you see in volcanic eruptions.
Gordon Duff of VT has credibly speculated that the SADMs were US material re-engineered in Dinona and brought back into the US through New Jerseys Teterboro airport. They were then concealed in fire extinguishers which were placed at approximately 10 floor intervals on vacant floors during the weekend of Sept 8-9 when all the security systems were turbed The sequenced detonation of the SADMS created the pancaking collapse and explains both the dust clouds and why the buildings burnt for so long and so intensively underground.
There is some evidence that at least one SADM may have been used in the OKC bombing in 1995 and evidence also that at least one or more did not work and had to be hastily removed even halting the emergency recovery efforts. There is also speculation that Israel may have used very powerful devices in the 2 Buenos Aires bombings in 1992 and 1994.
When you connect the dots, it begins to make sense. It also suggests that 9/11 whatever the immediate triggers was a long time in preparation and the US deep state and the Israel deep state (or maybe not so deep in the latter’s case) were joined at the hip.
And what if they were given the entire amount for free?
This byproduct of nuclear weapons production is sitting in huge heaps all over the places this work is done, They can’t sell it at any price… It just sits in huge storage yards with nothing to do save the odd truck load being used to make DU perpetrators to shoot a brown people…
You can watch multiple videos of news agencies saying it with the image of WTC7 right behind their backs. In 1 or 2 of them the building collapses right *after* they had announced it already collapsed.
Arguing with you is hard because you aren’t in full possession of the facts the rest of us are.
Don’t think to hard about it. The reason is you have no choice.
Excellent analysis of the article by Ron.
I agree with your analysis. Ron does a great job of demonstrating that the conventional narrative is patently false. This really is his particular strength–tearing to shreds our established dogmas. He does not do as good of a job with establishing clearly who the culprits are.
That being said, I have little doubt that Israel played a major role in this attack on the United States.
But I also believe that actors within the United States are also involved in this orchestrated mass murder.
What is so incomprehensible is the level of depravity necessary to perform such a heinous act.
I have a hard time believing anyone with an ounce of decency could have done such things. It is even difficult for me to think that Mossad could be capable of such evil.
I think you are going too easy on Cheney and Rumsfeld, or at least on Cheney. What do you make of Cheney’s apparent stand-down order, according to Norm Mineta’s testimony? Yes, they refer to it as a shoot-down order, but there was no shoot-down, and the actual conversation between Cheney and the unknown young man doesn’t explicitly state what order was involved. This appears to me to make Cheney complicit. (No, I don’t think a jetliner actually struck the Pentagon, but not shooting the plane down that was headed to DC was crucial to making the official narrative possible.) And less controversially, why no evacuation of the Pentagon, after three major attacks, and with a plane headed to DC?
I don’t see how Israel could have been the main actor here, without at the very least a great deal of assistance from inside the U.S. government, including some people in the military and the CIA.
On an unrelated note, I hope you will look at the material put out by Pilots of 9/11 truth, if you have not. For instance:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRMED-911-AIRCRAFT-AIRBORNE-LONG-AFTER-CRASH.html
9/11 is a frustrating topic for many reasons; one is that I have never managed to pull everything together into a unified theory of 9/11, and I’m not sure I’d ever be up to the task (especially given my current limitations). There is virtually no strand of the official story which does not tend to unravel the overall fabric of the story when yanked on. I’ve forgotten 1000x more than most people have ever known about it, and I’m still no expert.
Funny, my recollection was that it was Hamburg and flight schools near CIA facilities in Florida that harbored the alleged hijackers, who were allegedly almost all from Saudi Arabia.
No, US attacked Afghanistan because Afghanistan, in an act of unbelievable honor and integrity, asked for proof that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11, which is standard operating procedure in any extradition request. Obviously there was no proof, as OBL had nothing to do with it (and on the FBI’s website page listing him as a top wanted terrorist, up until he was allegedly killed in Pakistan, 9/11 was NOT one of the crimes of which OBL was accused, due to the utter lack of evidence for it). So Bush laughed haughtily – how dare someone ask me, a criminal conspirator behind 9/11, for proof of who I accuse? – and proceeded to bomb the country to smithereens.
That is the state of utter evil that rules the US. Utter. Terrible. Evil. Fuck the US government, fuck the evil, terrible, corrupt, treasonous, idiotic, incompetent, mass murdering, war criminal US government.
Given the yield of SADMs (https://infogalactic.com/info/Atomic_demolition_munition) it seems unlikely.
The total yield might have rivaled that of Hiroshima and left quite a bit of radioactivity.
Niels Harrit and others discussed the nanothermite in a peer-reviewed journal. Here’s a link:
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/bentham_open/ActiveThermitic_Harrit_Bentham2009.pdf
While I agree with them that the nanothermite gives a sufficient account of the demolition without bringing in other factors, I personally think that some sort of extraordinary process has to be invoked for the well-known video of a steel structure vaporising into a powdery dark cloud.
Ok… Have to talk slow i guess…..
The drawings of the WTC from the archive at WTC7.net ONLY have ARCHITECTURAL drawings,
To see the real informative and necessary information to do any meaningful calculations and determinations about STRUCTURAL elements you need the STRUCTURAL blueprints and supporting pages to go with them… If you have these documents you can calculate the entire story with them from the first charge to the final blast… But these documents are NOT available are they ?
These Basic ARCHITECTURAL drawings do not have anywhere near the whole story of this construction. They don’t show a vast amount of stuff.
I have looked at near every single one of those high resolution tiff files on a twelve foot wide projector screen, i spent days looking at them, When ever i needed something to do math, I found out i needed the STRUCTURAL drawings, the details were not on those simple ARCH drawings.
Now if you have a real close look at the WTC7.net description you will see that they are ARCHITECTURAL.
You cannot do engineering with architectural drawings, And you cannot make determinations about systems of an STRUCTURAL type if the drawings you have don’t have the proper information… The main reason these drawings were released… They answered very few serious questions and made a whole bunch of errors in their analysis to those trying to math with out the information to do those maths.
But i am pretty sure you know all this stuff, why else did you tread such moronic ground?
Rumsey and shotgun cheney were ms-big business type republicans whose staff choices led to them being inundated by Neo-cohen group think. Hence their response to 911.
Sorry, just had to rinse the vomit from my mouth.
The most logical reaction to 911 was an underfunded war in Iraq and Afghanistan that is ba krupting america. Makes total sense.
Try harder Mr Unz. You’re starting to sound like a Neo-cohen mole.
I have a question for most of the zealous 9/11 Truthers here. I really can’t understand why anyone much cares about the precise details of how the three WTC towers collapsed or whatever it was that actually hit the Pentagon.
It seems to be the only important aspect of those questions is (1) whether there is sufficiently strong evidence that the official 9/11 story is false and (2) whether there is sufficiently strong evidence that whatever happened could not have been done by a rag-tag band of 19 Arabs armed with box-cutters and required a highly sophisticated organization with access to advanced military technology. Even agreeing upon a single particular item such as e.g. the presence of a military-grade explosive compound such as nano-thermite would immediately meet these two tests. And it seems there are dozens and dozens of reasonably likely items any one of which would produce that same conclusion. So aside from that, who cares whether it was nano-thermite or nano-thermite plus something else or something else entirely?
Once we decide that the culprits were part of a highly-sophisticated organization, we can then focus on WHO and WHY, which should be of much greater importance than HOW.
It seems to me all the endless debates over HOW then to crowd out the more important WHO and WHY, and perhaps that may be intentional…
Saudis were involved and then you have the old Iran contra and its links to gun and drug running, stuff Sibel Edmonds has hinted at. Maybe the likes of Cheney just wanted some stuff to remain buried.
I am a believer in oil for geostrategic reasons and at that time Central Asia was believed be a lot more resource rich than it has turned out to be. Various oil companies, spooks and hoodlums were very involved in the region and establishing a presence there in Afghanistan made sense in this regard.
https://wikispooks.com/w/images/f/f0/September_11_Commission_Report.pdf
Seriously, if there was ever a case of “manufactured consent”, 9/11 is it. And Chomsky really should know. I have studied scientific propaganda techniques (inadvertently when I was in college), and virtually every technique ever discovered to brainwash people was employed on that day.
Either Chomsky is, and always has been, “controlled opposition” (he is a Jew and always takes the non-sensical, counter-evidential view that US controls poor Israel like a puppet, which makes him a Jew apologist), or he thinks it will tatter his reputation if he tries to speak the truth (which is more or less the same thing).
The official stories of the other such events I have looked into from the same time-frame are bullshit as well. 7/7 in particular has been massively dismantled.
Al Qaeda has at least two functions: (1) it can be deployed to destabilize regimes the west/US/NATO oppose and (2) it can be used as a bogeyman to blame for false flag operations, or as an excuse for military interventions and covert action in other countries.
I am a truther and I have long given up debating isolated technical details with “intellectuals” and “scientists”, such as the number of communist partisans, who also happened to be by a vast majority jews, who were executed for terrorism on any given front by the Einsatzgruppen.
“WHO” is just as clear as who planned and executed the 1917 revolution: luciferians and jews. The “WHY” is also clear. Just read any number of jewish documents intended to be kept secret from goyim: The Protocols, the Talmud, the Kalergy plan.
One thing all Christians and any decent jews should be able to agree upon is that these luciferians and their sundry allies want to turn our physical paradise into a living hell that they rule over.
A partial answer: a murder weapon can help point to a suspect. The details of what actually happened on 9/11 can narrow or widen the number of suspects as they point to who would have had certain capabilities. Let’s say the towers were brought down by unconventional means of some sort (which is about as dogmatic as I have ever been able to get about it). How many actors would have access to such things? But that’s just an example.
Personally, I think the window of opportunity for making the exposure of 9/11 matter on a grand scale has passed. It’s extremely important, but 9/11 truth is not going to lead to any mass awakening, barring really dramatic new developments (like, say, the President of the United States doing a broadcast with previously classified evidence about 9/11). I’m not counting on it.
After watching David Chandler’s work on the physics of 9/11 I stopped wasting time on demolition, planes, etc. I stopped pondering the trees and began to study the forest! Context is everything! I started thinking about motive,cover up, evidence, opportunity, capability, and military operations. I came to the same conclusions as Christopher Bollyn and Dr. Alan Sabrosky. The world dominating impulse of Organized Jewry is fading and there will be hell to pay for the crimes against humanity of the barbaric priesthood and its acolytes.
Yes, Ron, this endless debate over HOW goes around in circles. It’s enough to know that jet fuel did not bring the towers down, controlled demolition did. David Ray Griffin was, I think, the first to ridicule the official theory as impossible and ridiculous, and once we accept the falsity of the official report, the next step is to try to find the WHO and WHY. I live in NJ across from the Towers, and when I read in the Bergen Record of the arrest of the “dancing Israelis” who turned out to be Mossad and failed lie-detector tests, I knew WHO, and the WHY was easy: endless war for Greater Israel.
Malaysian Truther confidently speculated as to the value of VT editor Gordon Duff’s following credible speculation: “Gordon Duff of VT has credibly speculated that the SADMs were US material re-engineered in Dinona and brought back into the US through New Jerseys Teterboro airport. They were then concealed in fire extinguishers which were placed at approximately 10 floor intervals on vacant floors during the weekend of Sept 8-9 when…,”
… Greetings from incredible Scranton, Pa, Malaysian Truther!
… Respectfully, I won’t sermonize on the difference between “speculation” and “evidence.”
…Had Duff concrete evidence, Ron Unz would have noted the findings in this article, and perhaps stop piling-on zealots for 9/11 truth.
Thank you!
So it was an insurance scam combined with insider stock market fraud and a false flag operation to destroy the countries which annoy Israel, and to destroy the US constitution and institute a police state. Check with your superiors. They will tell you if they think you are up to it.
G’day.
In the headline article, see your intro to
There is a 1-word answer to your Q, and the same 1-word refutation of your 2nd statement: WTC7. The problem is, as good as ‘nobody’ understands that ‘naked’ 1-word response, so one has to go into a bit more detail. Now see my 202 skrik says, and others discussing Cheney being the #1 inside job kingpin. QED rgds
PS My musing about HOW is basically to satisfy my own internal Q = curiosity, but also in order to respond coherently to troll-like challenges.
One part of this is humans need to break stuff into manageable portions, The complexity of this even and the heights the perpetrators went to hide and distort the information, forces the many to attack the huge problem in the micro.
Another part is the fact that this work is being left to the little guy to do, The men in this world that SHOULD be doing this work put out dreck like the 9/11 commission report or the NIST report… And that’s the extent of it…. When you are denied Justice like this you will do what ever you can to fix it.
I think the internet is doing just what it has to to work out all the details of this huge crime… I can learn far more now after 17 years than i could after the government printed their book on the matter because of all the hard work of nit picking the most minute details everyone has posted.
With the dung like reputation of the government on so many matters, this sort of detail based refutation of ANY detail we have access to will eventually bring the matter into the light, and by doing the micro work like this much of the other parts will be noticed and worked out by others along the way.
This event has so many angles no one man will ever cover the territory, But the internet and all the folk that make it home can and will get more done. Will have more success. And eventually a very good idea of all of the PERSONS needing a life term in a concrete cell.
The HOW can help to identify the WHO. Who, for example, could have had access to nanothermite?
I stand corrected.
Ron I think the ‘how’ is important because every time I try and talk to friends or colleagues about 9/11, the immediate question that is always fired back ‘If the planes didnt cause the buildings to collapse, how did it happen then?’
That was the brilliance of both the operation itself and the propaganda, of which the visual images were an intrinsic part. I come back to Daniel Kahneman’s WYSIATI concept of which this is perhaps the best example. You yourself in your article on TWA 800 crash explained how the media went to town to destroy the significant evidence that it was a live fire accident involving the US Navy, and destroy the reputation of those journalists who supported it. How much it easier it was to brand those who query what happened on 9/11 as conspiracy ‘kooks and nutters’ when there is actual film showing what the dastardly hijackers did to Towers ( but not from the Pentagon where all the CCTV FILM was confiscated) or UA93.
I absolutely agree with your hypothesis that Israel and the Jewish neocons were the ‘prime drivers’. But it could not have been enabled without the support of the military-industrial complex in US and the complexity of the operation suggests it was a long time in planning.
One final point. Your article suggests it wouldn’t have mattered if Gore had won the 2000 election. 9/11 would have happened anyway and I think you are right.
You don’t need secret planes but:
Maybe. Two points on that:
First, Israel has many trained agents that look (because a large number of ME, though not European, Jews are Semitic (Arabic)) and speak Arabic.
But second, many forget that on the very same day of 9/11, a “simulated attack” using the exact 9/11 scenario – planes flying into buildings – was being conducted. These operations always use “actors” to be the “villains”, though they believe it is just being staged (the same thing happened IMO in London on 7/11 but that’s aside the point). The alleged 9/11 hijackers were thus probably patsies, who were informants or other intelligence assets for Israeli, US, and/or Saudi intelligence, who were hired to take part in this simulation as the “hijackers”. This explains them visiting a strip club and getting drunk the night before – big payday ahead. They were as shocked as anyone as the planes actually approached the buildings, maybe not until the last few seconds, thinking it was a simulation the whole way.
How were the planes guided to their destination? Remote control of the planes. All the planes were a recent model (767 IIRC) which had this technology installed. The point of this technology was to be able to take control of a plane from a hijacker. Israel was given this technology early on. So Israel experts or computers commandeered the plane and flew it into the buildings.
It’s hard to know exactly what happened because no actual, credible investigation was ever conducted. And given the time lapse, we’ll probably never know, absent some very unlikely deathbed “come clean” confession.
How many fake attacks you need we can supply. You want ISIS, we got ISIS. You want a radical Muslim movement to appear in the Vatican, we’ve got that too. We have thousands of victims ready to go at a moment’s notice. You want parents of airplane victims whose children call them to tell them someone in a shaykh costume has taken over the plane, we’ve got them. You name the airline, we can supply it. We will beat any price. Don’t confuse actual war with psyops, though, although if you want real war, and can pay enough, we have got that for you too. By the way, attack another country, they will attack you for free, like in Lebanon, but that is unfair competition.
Corbett thinks it was a crime:
Forget for one moment everything you’ve been told about September 11, 2001. 9/11 was a crime.
The detection of nanothermite in abundance is well documented. I have not seen equally clear evidence of nuclear explosives.
One point to not lose sight of is that this debate really concerns a technicality; the political significance of the event does not hinge on the kind or kinds of explosives used.
So now you’re just reading the responses in order off a card? Your remark is incoherent. Reality will have it whatever way reality wants. The ridicuousness of using as a pretext to knock over the Iraqi government a man who had nothing to do with that government (and was, in every sense, an enemy of that government) is both self-evident and self-evidently independent of that gobbledygook in the last clause. In fact I fail to see any contradiction. Many false pretexts for war, once exposed, are called “ridiculous.” This is just more namecalling. Ron’s essay thankfully does more than throw around adjectives.
Impact sites could have been picked perfectly if planes were flown remotely (drones), which is most likely the case.
But also I have read some persuasive arguments that the explosives/incendiaries were not hardwired but remote-controlled. This allowed them to start the explosion sequence on any floor, and precisely control (through military software of course) the rate of progression. AND, most importantly, to create that pyroclastic flow effect by collapsing the building from top to bottom, instead of starting at the bottom, as is typically done. To do that you need an extremely precise sequence of detonations.
Indeed, when you ask who but Israel, given the required ability, willingness, access and motive, you are left with a weak inside job case or the unsatisfactory official story. The strongest point against Israel here is that nobody else could have done it.
Clearly the physicist’s mind has gone to mush. But since he cannot be that dumb, we see here Unz’s true colors: You either accept the official bullshit, or you’re a “zelous 9/11 Truther.” LOL.
Virtue signaling in an otherwise contentious article?
One thing that always stopped me from believing a missile hit the Pentagon…
Doug Thompson, who runs the website Capitol Hill Blue, reported that he reached the Pentagon 1-2 hours after it was hit. You can find on his website one report he made years later if you look for the title “Explosion at the Pentagon”.
He claimed that when he arrived, he found a guy crying on the side of the road next to his car. The guy said he watched a commercial jet fly overhead, hit a light pole as it was coming down and then crashed into the Pentagon. In another story at a different time, Doug reported the eyewitness(giving his name) had died and strongly suggested it was partially caused by mental health problems that originated on 9/11.
Doug Thompson was always critical of 9/11 conspiracy theories, and while I never bought his explanation for Building 7, the eyewitness story seemed strong.
But these days Thompson and his website are just a non-stop fountain of Trump Derangement Syndrome, so I don’t even bother to visit anymore. He has an anti-Trump monetary sponsor keeping his website operational, but it makes me wonder if he faked the eyewitness story for some earlier sponsor.
Everybody likes to know how Houdini did his tricks. Understanding the correct techniques that go into creating a psy-op or an assassination made to look like a lone nut are valuable exercises in seeing through the next one. It is like knowing sales techniques in order not to become a sucker. The Dreyfus affair is a beautiful example. Alsatian maid who is actually a French spy working in the German embassy discovers papers torn up in a waste basket but which can be glued back together and clear enough to be published in a newspaper. Papers show secrets (which are not really secrets) being sold to the Germans. A Jewish intelligence officer in the French Army is falsely accused, tried in a secret trial covered by dozens of journalists. Antisemitism is alleged by a hired and planted Jewish journalist (Theodor Herzl) and one year later the first Zionist congress is convened in Basel. Later a French government falls, and the Catholic religion is disestablished in France. How you do stuff like this is valuable training for subverting whole countries. Jewish officer Dreyfus who has been keeping low profile while pretending to be on Devil’s Island reading the collected works of Tolstoy is exonerated and gets a Legion d’Honneur with perks. What’s not to like? This is how you run the cattle into slaughter chutes, and get World Wars. Big money is to be made by the right person with the right ideas. Look at Silverstein, Schlemiel makes several billion dollars in a few months on a small investment. Who doesn’t want to be the next Silverstein?
There are good reasons why one would keep ferreting out as much detail as possible.
1. Winning new converts.
Consider your own case: you now state that one clear-cut finding, such as nanothermite, is sufficient to draw the politically relevant conclusions; and I agree with you. However, if you see it that way, then I have to ask why it took you so long to see the light? The evolution of your thinking has been somewhat painfully slow to watch.
You take the minimalist position now that you have changed your mind; before you did, you might quite possibly have considered the “truthers’” story as incomplete and full of holes as the official one. Stopping those holes will help to remove such doubts.
2. Justice.
Do we hold out hope that at some point the U.S. courts will actually do their job and investigate this? If so, then the more evidence we have, the more of the culprits can be tied to the event and brought to justice.
Err … I think that may have played a later part, but the main reason – ta ra! – was oily, as in a pipeline route. In case of any doubt, try looking up ‘carpet of gold or bombs.’
I would summarise your last para as “F the US/Z rogue-regimes!” rgds
IIRC, before September 2001, there was a confrontation between the US and China over a US military plane that China had captured after it violated Chinese airspace.
It looked to me like Bush was itching to make his reputation based on military conflict, and China was his first choice. It may also be that he was aware of just how much money China had invested to help Bill Clinton win re-election in 1996. But the WTC and Pentagon were attacked, and it was pretty easy for his handlers to redirect him to a war on the Middle East and Afghanistan.
Like the prior responders noted, but in this case, the controlled demolition was a very unusual one, due to the extreme height of the building. Instead of collapsing it from the bottom up, they collapsed it both from the bottom up AND from the top down. As they were blowing supporting beams at the upper levels, and as the beams were being compressed by the collapse of the floor above them, some were ejected out (imagine you have a pine needle and you compress it along the long axis, it starts to bend but after some pressure it pops out of your grasp and flies away).
The point is that the building did not tip over sideways.
One of the best pictures to prove this is the following, please take a look at it:
Do you understand physics? Think about the law of conservation of angular momentum (similar to the law of conservation of momentum I’ve discussed elsewhere in this thread). WTC 1 was clearly going to tip over it’s side. BUT IT DIDN’T! Despite (1) angular momentum, a tremendous force which would have caused it to keep tipping further, and (2) the fact the vast majority of the mass of the upper stories were focused on one side of the building, which would cause that side to collapse faster than the other side, yielding an increase in speed of rotation.
That top chunk should have fallen over the edge of the building.
But it didn’t. Why? Because it was demolished in mid-air and the free-fell to the ground inside the pyroclastic “smokescreen”, that’s why! There was no resistance to its fall and it did not retain its integrity due to demolition.
I agree: New Pearl Harbor is the best video I’ve seen on 9/11, although I haven’t kept close watch on the subject in recent year.
I also tend to agree with you that demolishing the official story is the way to proceed, although I’m not sure speculation is necessarily a trap (making us vulnerable to debunkers) if it’s clearly labeled as speculation.
I don’t know anyone claiming that. Dr. Jones refers to nano-thermite. HUGE difference. Watch his talks, easily available, very enlightening.
To find something you have to test for it. Did USGS test for it? No.
But they did test for radiation, and did not find any.
Wow!
Really? You cannot solve a crime by excluding analysis of any aspect or aspects of it. That would be willful blindness, or even gate-keeping. To solve the crime we must identify those with the means, motive, and opportunity, and that task requires close examination of all the available evidence.
If thermite didn’t have the explosive power to dustify the twin towers at the WTC on 9/11, and if thermite was not detected or recorded by the USGS in its analysis of the WTC dust, then some other agent or agents must be responsible for the twin tower demolitions.
Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust
Two iron-rich microspheres are among the items cataloged in the USGS table linked just above, but there is no mention of thermite.
Again, Tanabear posted a video link where NIST itself admits free-fall of WTC7:
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2511829
Here are all three videos:
https://hooktube.com/iGMvnwjUizY
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=Fvy7w139Hkc
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=oqucIFM7S1Y
So, since we know that only a controlled demolition can produce free-fall, WTC7 was obviously taken down via controlled demolition. Hence, the official 9/11 story is pure treason.
Sure, that’s perfectly reasonable. Obviously, you need to provide a sufficient quantity of evidence to convince someone that the attacks were done by a professional organization having access to advance military technology, and different people may require different thresholds. But beyond that, endlessly arguing about all the details seems pretty fruitless.
Actually, in my case, I’d simply never bothered looking into the matter, which is something quite different. Once I did, the evidence seemed at least 1,000% more than was necessary to overcome any presumptive barrier.
And I’d think that all the fierce disputes raging over particular details may sometimes tend to drive away casually curious onlookers.
The way I understand it, and correct me if I’m wrong, is that the transponder also vastly increases the range of detection (secondary radar vs primary radar). Airport control primary radars do not cover the entire US.
See answer 1 at https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/115/what-is-the-range-and-accuracy-of-atc-radar-systems .
@Ron Unz
I wouldn’t describe myself as zealous, but the “how” of the towers collapse is absolutely the first step to understanding “who” and “why.” So long as people can cling the the simplicity of the “how” they have (a couple plane crashes is all it took), they can stay settled with the provided who and why. And on sites like reddit or facebook, the most common rebuttal is that anything but the Popular Mechanics is schizophrenic pseudo-science. “Jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” is a pretty well entrenched ironic meme. It’s natural that people who want to defend their legitimacy will tend to focus on it. The stuff about high energy weapons destroying the buildings, holographic planes, UFOs, I assume is active subversion given how well it derails discussions.
On a side note, because I didn’t see you mention it, image search for “gelitin the b thing.” Christopher Ketcham’s piece on the “art students” is great but this is one detail he could have mentioned.
Let us assume for the sake of argument that we come to know who was behind 9/11 and why they did it, where would that get us? Not to the end of debate because if it tuned out to be the Russians the debate would be whether to start WW3, even though we already see them as an enemy.
Russia would be a low one but is there any for other countries? If it turned out to have been Israel, then what? It is not obvious there would be an attack on Israel. In fact I suspect the outcome of establishing that it was Israel could only be a civil war because Israel’s friends in the US would not accept the findings.
Most of the relevant documents still being kept secret about the JFK assassination are thought to be from the Mexico CIA station and concern Oswald’s interactions with Cuban Consulate and Soviet officials a few weeks before JFK was assassinated. The powers that be did not trust the public with anything that might lead that trampling bewildered herd to stampede into a war then, and they won’t now. A lot of people died but a lot died in the White Death too. Knowing who and why would leave us no different than we were before. Only the people who died as a result were really changed.
I’ve occasionally wondered the same thing.
As for WHY, this is brutally obvious.
To motivate the American people (in particular, and NATO states in general) to wage a war of civilizations against Israel’s rivals. A war of destruction between Israel’s enemies (= everyone) of a global ‘let’s you and him fight’.
So as Christian nations bash their futures upon the rocks of Eternal War- bleeding their life blood and treasury dry murdering Muslims (and any nation Israel considers inconvenient to its larger agenda of global domination), it’s a huge win/win for Zionist Jewish supremacists. (I’m leaving out the ‘Duh’ in deference to my host ; )
It’s what Zionist Jewish supremacists do!
It’s what they did in the last century with the world wars. Get their rivals to slaughter each other. It’s what Sharon did in Lebanon at Sabra and Shatila, only on a much smaller scale than a world war.
But if they could, oh boy would they cum in their pants at the idea of an existential war between Russia and the West.
But for now, they’re contented to see the ZUS drain itself fighting all of Israel’s well-earned enemies. No one, not the Muslims, not the Africans or Mexicans or anyone, loves, loves, loves to see those body bags with young American soldiers coming back from their wars deader than dead.
It serves two things simultaneously in the Jewish supremacist id.
One, dead goyim. Always a pleasant sight.
Two, they’re dead through the intrigue and machinations of Jewish supremacists.
This is a ‘cum in your britches’ level of l’chaim!
So that is the WHY. (Also, minimally there is the lucre for the MIC).
As for the WHO, it gets far more complicated.
The zio-cons are myriad. Dick Cheney was, as you pointed out, a typical Republican conservative in good standing with the GOP of Reaganites, et al. But like Rummy and the rest of the Republican cabal, he was corrupted with promises of whatever it is that corrupts the mega-wealthy and powerful. Probably sexual deviancy of some kind, most likely with children, if he’s like the rest of the Western elite.
We can talk about the masterminds like Ehud Barak or Dov Zakheim, and a lot of the scum at the conception and planning levels, or we can move all the way down to the rank apologists at the whournalism level, to speak of WHOm was responsible, (and continue to be with their dissembling and obfuscation). But figuring out the WHO, is a far more complex and tedious slog. Too many rabbit holes and deflections.
How complicit was the chimp for instance. A lot of people think he wasn’t even told it was going to happen, until it did. Apparently he was allowed to watch the first plane hit the tower from a video feed into his limo at the school in Florida- where his job was to read about pet goats to elementary school children, (and this may have been an inside joke decided by his handlers)).
There are lots of lists all over the Internet speculating on the main players.
Lucky Larry, for sure.
Dick Cheney, as the man barking out the orders of the day.
Dov, as I’ve mentioned, and of course also Ehud.
Bibi knew, as did most of the Israeli intelligence at the highest levels of the zio-regime, as did elements in the CIA/NSA/FBI, etc..
The controlled media likely knew little to nothing. All they could be counted on is to dutifully report what they were told to report. They also know the score, and that their agenda is to do and say what is ‘good for the Jews’. There’s not a western whournalist alive that doesn’t know his bosses are Jewish supremacists, and most likely rabid Zionists as well. So they perform accordingly and on cue.
People like Giuliani may have known or not, but they could be counted on to follow orders regardless. I’d say the same with Rummy. I suspect he knew, but then if he didn’t, he also could be counted on 100% to toe the line, when the time came.
When Palestinians are slaughtered wholesale, most of the western media will dutifully characterize their plight as one they’re responsible for, because they insist on ‘terrorism’ and refuse to make peace. When South African farmers or white Westerners are butchered by orcs, the entire length and breath of the western press all know the score. Downplay the crime. It had nothing to do with race, blah, blah, blah.
They know the score, and it’s the same with 9/11, or serial wars against Israel’s enemies or immigration or “far right” wing parties in Sweden. With one voice, they report and spin the news according to what they perceive as “good for the Jews”. And that is the same metric that works in the congress of the ZUS or Germany or England, etc… all across the dying ((murdered)) West.
If tomorrow, Israel were to drop 18 tones of White Phosphorous on Gaza, burning alive tens of thousands of men, women and children, the entire western press and top politicians would speak with one voice, that “Israel has a right to defend itself!”
So that covers the leadership and media.
One thing that came up in this remarkable thread, -that I didn’t respond to all the great (and a few not so great) comments to me- (at least yet..), is the question of when did Vlad Putin know.
I suspect he was taken by the whole thing at first, as most of us were. And was even willing to go along with the zio-con atrocities, up to a point. But knowing, (as he absolutely did eventually) that it was a Zio-false flag.. he sill rubber-stamped the destruction of Iraq. (he’s a realist, if anything).
But then when it came to Libya, and that they obviously were intending the same thing for Syria and beyond, is when he said ‘Nyet’.
Every single decent person on the planet is indebted to Putin for his courage and integrity.
(Just as we here are indebted to you for yours, Sir)
I agree with you 100%. Keep up the good work and don’t let these paid Israeli shills get away their BS.
yep
By some weird coincidence, this video was listed on this site today:
https://www.unz.com/video/thecorbettreport_9-11-war-games/
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=R6NY8XRUYO4S
dcdave.com
Man, you’re really jewing this up. It’s like you can’t even wrap your head around the concept of truth or justice.
The goyim will know despite your feeble fearmongering.
First of all, the civil tone of your reply means a tremendous amount to me and I would like to thank you for that from the bottom of my heart. I would not mind having a discussion with you about what sort of behavior the conservation of momentum would entail in this particular case, but the debate is getting far too ugly around here at the moment, and also I don’t really have the time to do justice to the subject. However, I plan to stay in this thread in a less involved way. I don’t want you to think that your effort went unnoticed.
I said nothing of the sort.
Good to know.
I started to write out a longer reply, but I realized that I was simply using different words to make the same points you didn’t understand the first time.
Well, what I did understand the first time is that your post reads as snide invective against any who offer analyses alternative to that of the U.S. government and mass media. While your characterization of them was blatantly intended to be offensive, I find it amusing. In the discipline of history, bad hypotheses are often discarded throughout the process of discovery, which leads historians to revise their original conclusions. Your effort to depict this procedure as some kind of intellectual subterfuge is simply funny.
And I’m sure it doesn’t reach Mr. Unz except as amusement.
I have better uses for my time.
Oh, I’m sure you do.
I think that most of the truthers are honest people who are trying to prove that their government is up to no good. That’s pretty much obvious to any resident of the earth.
Why not spend the energy wisely and try to debunk the stupid propaganda that your government is subjecting you to, instead of creating contra-propaganda of your own – against them – the conspiracy theories of 9/11.
You are giving way to much credit to your government. They are not that smart to pull off an operation of that magnitude where everyone will hold the line and not spill the beans to close ones about the terrible secret that they would be are a part of.
Ron Unz reflected, wrote: “And I’d think that all the fierce disputes raging over particular details may sometimes tend to drive away casually curious onlookers.”
… Yes, Ron, above, agree but with a caveat detail.
… The Jewish Corporate Media knew how serious onlookers of Shock & Awe, “liberation of Iraq” saw Dubya’s barbaric attack as purely mass (serial) murder.
… Quickly, smelling disobedience, they relied upon some scintillating Jon Benet Ramsey-type case, and successfully captured the attention of America’s vast majority “casual curious onlookers.” *
* Lazy, I did not search for our Media’s useful Spring 2003 distraction, so I picked their Jon Benet “raging!”
… Thanks.
After reading this entire thread, i can see the need to keep at this work is still very important.
The other places i have visited this theory of mine, All of them took measures to suppress the message to one extent or another… SOTT or Signs of the times even banned me from posting last night.
Must have hit a nerve.
But Ron Unz is this years winner. No filtering, no suppression and he did not boot me out.
Thanks Ron.
those factions that are part of the suppression network know the deeds they are engaged, We know WHO they are and how futile their efforts are….
We are legion.
We do not forget.
We are winning.
They are going to lose.
You are pathetic ! Why don’t you read the Sunshine Warrior by Keller of NYT ?
1991 Wolfowitz shared his enthusiasm of attacking ME countries with Russia being down
1993 he asked who will listen to blame Saddam for WTC 1993 bombing
2001 He was cheer leading the chorus against Saddam.
Man I love that scene when he behaved like a shaken up confused rabid lost dog after the bomb had gone off in a hotel in Iraq!!
There are videos of those “irrefutable” airliners striking the buildings. The “irrefutable” airliners melt into the buildings. That means they are imaginary. Have you ever seen a road runner cartoon? They are also irrefutable.
Do I believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theories?
Yes you do.
I don’t.
No, really, you do. I know, because right after you tell me you don’t believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories, you tell me your 9/11 conspiracy theory.
Because it wasn’t necessary for the neocons to take such a huge risk in order to “win” Americans’ approval for another war. Why are there inconsistencies in the official story of 9/11? Because they were protecting Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia and their oil are the main supporters of the dollar.
So the conspiracy theory is that they were protecting Saudi Arabia by hiding any details which could turn the US public against Saudi Arabia.
Thank you for telling us your conspiracy theory and showing us you are just like…
a) the other truth seekers
or
b) a lunatic nut job
or
c) all of the above
You are assuming Mossad had prior knowledge of what they were about to do. Isn’t that a very big assumption? Or what are you assuming exactly? Are you assuming that something other than Mossad runs Mossad? Or are you assuming that Mossad is Arab Terrorism?
The NIST report states that the interior structure below the east penthouse collapsed, then the progressive collapse began.
But you were wrong in saying the NIST stated that the initial 2.5 seconds was in free fall. Here’s what they actually said:
Why free fall? Because all supports had failed:
Notice all references are to the north face, not the entire building.
So, you were wrong about the NIST report. The NIST report does not back up truther claims in any way. That’s because the NIST report was prepared by people who actually know what they’re doing.
“The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller—-His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’” By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency fear became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. Mentioning Israel (“America is proud to be Israel’s closest ally and best friend in the world,” George W. Bush would tell the Israeli Knesset) so many times, Keller was not very subtly performing an act of legerdemain with multiple meanings. By comparing the victims of the 11 September attacks to Israeli “victims,” he was implying, among other things, that the Israelis are innocent victims who are not involved in terrorism, but are terrorized by Palestinian” https://www.unz.com/article/why-i-dont-speak-of-the-fake-news-of-911-anymore/
Now you got the answer -why Palestinian was not implicated by Israel. The motive was there but the situation was not ripe. Israel had to create it. Israel also was not very enthusiastic abut US forces pulverizing and white phosphor ing their (Israel ) future homes . The big hindrance was absence of any Palestinian terrorism against US
Or you can just make believe. You are very serious about make believe. Is that your profession?
You have to be very gullible not to realize that this was done with the full agreement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in order to frame Egypt and have America attack Egypt. Those stupid Soviets messed up the whole operation by coming on the scene and the Israelis had to stop an operation being carried out with the full agreement and cooperation of the US government and the President of the United States. How unpatriotic to blame Israel!
Ron’s arguments are essentially girlish: “the suggestion that that they [the folks who brought down the Twin Towers] were led and organized by the top figures of the Bush Administration seems even more preposterous,” or “I really can’t understand … ”
These are arguments entirely devoid of substance. They are, indeed, an admission of the absence of an argument and a demand that opponents cease to grapple with the ever uncertain, and constantly changing pattern of claims and counterclaims concerning historical events and political reality, but rather simply conform their opinion to the dictates of authority.
This is a common view, I suspect, among those who have mastered mathematics or one one of the hard sciences. But in fact, physics is easy if you can do the math, and anyone can do the math if properly taught, which few are. Unfortunately, competence with the math easily leads to a belief in a generally superior intellect compared with that of those who strive to make sense of the ever questionable, and essentially unlimited empirical facts about the real world. But just as a grasp of physics requires certain intellectual skills, so also does the evaluation of historical evidence. Appeals to some personal standard of what is deemed preposterous, or what cannot be understood, don’t cut it.
I think you are completely missing the point I was making, perhaps intentionally which is why someone has labelled you a “Troll.” I can readily believe that a plane hit the Pentagon. What I have an issue with is the flight path, which is known from released flight data. This path was a full throttle, corkscrew descent from 8000 ft to come level right at ground and hit the Pentagon from the side. Ask your pilot friend if that’s easy (hint: it’s not easy, not even close). It requires an extreme level of precision to pull something like that off without either splattering on the ground on the Pentagon lawn or blowing right over the top. More than one professional pilot has spent time in flight simulators trying to re-create it and few have been able to do it at all.
This flight path raises several questions that all destroy the official narrative. These questions include: how did an amateur pilot hijacker who by all accounts had never even flown that plane before pull off such a feat of flying? Why choose such a risky flight path at all, that risked missing the target? Why crash into the SIDE of the pentagon? Why not just point at the top and fly right in, as an amateur would have really done?
It doesn’t add up at all.
A gypsy fortune teller may be able to help you regain sanity and full control of your faculties.
Ahhh, CanSpeccy is going the Schwartzenegger route.
Did you bonk the Mexican maid as well?
“Don’t take my word for it”. I didn’t and as you are one of those with variant Tourette’s Syndrome which causes the word “lie” to emerge as a verbal tic I would check any assertion by you. Listening to Mineta’s evidence it is clear that Cheney did not order any stand down but merely confirmed the entirely understandable order that the Air Force (whose planes were too far away anyway) was not to shoot down a civil airliner with passengers on board which was not known to be aimed to hit the Pentagon or any other target. You are what a judge would call, with the usual restraint, “an unreliable witness”.
James Perloff has an interesting theory about what happened to the planes:
https://jamesperloff.com/2017/06/30/911-simplified/
I have always focused on the WHO https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=oWjuRQdvn1o
If someone sets your house on fire, how many people split hairs over whether the arsonist used gasoline or kerosene a lighter or a match? If it is already established that it is arson the minutia of what was used to create the fire is not really the victim’s concern so much as WHO burned their house down.
Do you know who had access to the WTC in the weeks leading up to 911? Do you know who had the motive to create the US war on terror? Do you know who lied about an anthrax meeting in Prague and wrongly associated 911 to Iraq? Who was celebrating the 911 and also worked for a foreign intelligence agency? Because they all have the same answer.
You forgot “1946, the King David Hotel bombing”…
And that one, in many ways, is a much closer match to the 9/11 attack than
any of these “events to remember” in your comment.
As for validity of those “examples”, they are as valid as the statement that
“ISIS” is not financed, not trained, and not used for very dirty purposes by
certain “civilized” countries.
Well Ron there is a detail on which you seem peculiarly equipped to comment and which is surely something that needs explaining if it is to be accepted that it wasn’t aircraft impacts precipitating structure weakening processes that caused the Tower collapses.
That is… How come the tower with twice the weight of storeys above the impact point fell in much less time from impact than the tower where the gravitational load was much less?
Since first seeing that as a critical question, which it is, it has occurred to me that – of course ? – the resistance as floors pancaked would have applied to the floors above the impacts as well as those below so – to the extent that the “free fall” allegations and arguments have any merit – the time for total collapse should perhaps have been extended. It makes expertise in demolition all the more important in coming to a belief about how or why the buildings collapsed AND it makes it important to consider the details of the lightweight construction allowed under new 1960s regulations, and adopted to maximise internal clear spaces and to add height, to be understood. Enough weight perhaps, with only a small amount of kinetic energy, and the joints holding steel floors and joists to uprights may have simply gone pop-pop-pop with practically no frictional slowing of descent. I don’t know. Do you?
Essentially, Perloff seems to agree with Unz.
You provided zero explanation has to how a fire theory could explain the collapse of the WYC7. The NIST computer model shows extreme deformations in the structure which is not seen in the actual collapse. This along with free-fall is evidence of why the NIST computer model if false and fraudulent.
“Why free fall? Because all supports had failed”
Wow, that is brilliant. Care to explain how that is possible absent demolition? However, NIST’s 3 stage model of collapse is fraudulent.
“Notice all references are to the north face, not the entire building.”
Because that is where they were measuring the collapse of the roofline. Are you saying that the south side had already collapsed? There are many videos and the collapse of the roofline is across the width and breadth of the building.
p.s. And if NIST knows what they are doing then why did they have to be corrected by David Chandler on free-fall?
Ron, one of the people you have appeared to trust in the course of your conversion is Eric Margolis. Why do you trust him or accord weight to his opinions? I first understood his creditworthiness when I found him allegedly quoting Stalin as saying to Churchill words to the effect that “we had our Eichmann” referring to Kaganovich and the Holomodor. A diligent search for that most unlikely quote provided just one source: Eric Margolis himself. So, avoid naiveté and, before relying on him, regard him as he is – a big noting opinionator.
That is just mindless heckling.
Silly last question. What makes you think they were expecting to level two skyscrapers?
Hmmm, looking at this:
https://jamesperloff.com/2016/11/22/to-911-and-beyond-the-rothschild-israeli-obsession-with-nuclear-weapons/
I begin to wonder. If they used nuclear weapons on us we are justified in using nuclear weapons on them.
The answer is not actually given in that stack exchange site…but it is both yes and no…
No in the case of the year 2001 and even today if the aircraft transponder is a standard ‘mode C’ transponder…in this case the transponder does absolutely nothing to make the airplane seen, unless the ATC radar can see it…it does not extend coverage in any way, shape or form…it simply gives altitude and its IDENT code [squawk code]…
Very recently in the last few years…a new kind of transponder technology has been introduced which uses GPS to fix the aircraft’s position and direction…and then broadcasts that signal to ATC ground stations and even to other aircraft…all of this is done automatically with no pilot input…this type of transponder is called automatic dependent surveillance–broadcast [ADSB]…also sometimes called ‘Mode S’…
This could extend ATC coverage in areas where radar coverage does not exist…like Alaska…where in fact that technology was tested as a broad pilot program for a number of years…
However the vast majority of airplanes flying still use the old mode C transponder…the airlines have been slow to adopt ADSB, although there is a mandatory phase in period I think out to 2025…
In any case…the issue of the ATC tracking of the 911 airplanes is important…for the simple reason that it shows some examples of practically impossible flying skill…particularly the descending turn into the Pentagon…even hitting the towers with the maneuvers that were recorded by ATC is quite a feat…
So there is lots of hard data and ‘evidence’ there that makes the amateur Arab hijackers extremely unlikely…and there is more to it besides the flying skill…there is also the matter of the airplane performance and even their ability to survive those speeds
One of the planes hitting the tower was going 586 mph at impact…that’s 186 mph faster than the B767 maximum operating velocity [Vmo]…that’s exceeding the airplane’s limit by nearly 1.5…it is a question if this airplane could even reach such a speed in the thick air near ground level…
Many more very straightforward technical questions here…and many of them have not been thoroughly dissected to my satisfaction…lots more potential there…
The Scalpel said:
This is the most incontrovertible piece of evidence that building 7 was a controlled demolition. I have never heard another plausible explanation for how three television networks can seemingly broadcast prior knowledge of the collapse.
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2509433
The following video shows that even the emergency crews in the area were given advance warning of the imminent collapse of WTC-7. Somehow, somebody knew not just that it was going to “collapse”, but also when. Which is rather odd, given that freefall collapses of steel-framed buildings into their own basements, are a phenomenon entirely unique to New York City on 9/11/2001, having never occurred anywhere else in the world, ever.
It was certainly thoughtful of the Israelis to provide the residents of New York with advance notice of their false-flag covert operation. Or maybe some of the perpetrators were somewhat closer to home — Rudolph Giuliani, for example.
From what I have heard, a lot of folks in Pennsylvania don’t believe Flight 93 crashed. They think it was blown up in the air by an air-to-air missile.
If true, we will never know if it was blown up before, while, or after the passengers tried to retake the plane.
All of this makes sense and the Mossad connection was always known and talked about. But there is no mention here about the “Project for a New American Century” members who included Dick Cheney and their “Rebuilding America’s Defences” document. Which suggests war with multiple middle east nations. It is an American document with many Zionists there too. Many of Bush’s men were connected to this document which outlined the reasons and why’s to full war on the middle east and calls for a new 9/11. Certainly many in the the PNAC were zionists, but many if not most were in the Bush admin.
9/11 is a open wound on America.
I saw it happen and initially believed what happened. But the inconsistencies and “unexplained” irregularities made me look deeper into it. Back in 2001 the internet was not that wide, but during the years more and more stuff became published. Remarkably it was the stuff not published, that started a bell ringing with me.
I do not know what happened on 9/11 2001, but I am totally convinced that the official story did not happen, it is not physically possible. And the lack of a full disclosure of all relevant information will hold many highly suspicious of the US governments role in this.
The whole affair can be summed up in : one unbelievable feat on top of the next, on top of the next , on top of the next.
We are supposed to believe ( I will just point at the major flaws):
The hijackers were never rerecorded at any airport prior to the incident.
The almighty US Airforce completely impotent. (The Russians must be rejoicing)
The hijackers could percievably not fly anything, not to mention a commercial airliner
No “black boxes” were found,” except one , whose information is classified.
The airplanes flew at airspeeds exceeding 200 mph their safe operating limit.
The twin towers turned into mostly dust, yet caused the collapses ?
The steel from the buildings shipped abroad, before a thorough investigation was concluded.
Inside trading on airline futures just before the incident.
Some people made a lot of money on this.
Some people knew what was going to happen.
I live in Europe, and an incident of this type would have taken years to conclude and the particulars would have been thoroughly investigated and a complete official report published, witout parts being classified.
9/11 is still an open wound on America, my condolences go to those that lost someone, but even they must concede that this case is not closed. There are so many things that do not fit that you become suspicious ( Especially given the US track record)
This case will haunt the US for decades, as the JFK assassination did and do.
I firmly believe there is a conspiracy behind this, I just cant place it, there are to many things that does not add up for this official report to be true.
sorry for the spelling.
Which can only happen through controlled demolition. No office fire can remove “all supports”, let alone remove them across the building at the same second. It’s an impossibility – end of.
And yet we can see with our own eyes that it wasn’t just the north face but the whole building. And if you want to argue that we’re only seeing the outer “shell” free-falling in “Stage 2” you’re even more retarded than I thought. That would double the impossibility (if that’s possible, haha). Then we have an office fire first removing all supports across the inside of the building at the same second – which would somehow collapse the insides without disturbing the shell – and then, later, doing the same to the shell. Needless to say, that would be virtually impossible even with a controlled demolition.
… Unless, of course, you do it at the same time like a standard, controlled demolition.
Oh yes it does. It’s a smoking gun. NIST admitted that WTC7 was free-falling for 2.25-2.5 seconds and we can actually see it and measure it. That’s not possible even for 0.025 seconds unless it was rigged to fall.
Haha, watch the videos:
https://hooktube.com/iGMvnwjUizY
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=Fvy7w139Hkc
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=oqucIFM7S1Y
Thermate was used to *weaken* the structure so that smaller, less conspicuous cutting charges could be used.
Beria attended the Yalta Conference with Stalin, who introduced him to U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt as “our Himmler”.
Source: Montefiore, Simon Sebag (2005). Stalin: Court of the Red Tsar. Random House. p. 483. per wiki
Their brains are trapped in a loop, a hall of mirrors. They are hoping that some overlooked detail will show them the way out. The 9/11 event was targeted at people’s minds. Call it mind control or mass propaganda, Black Magick, whatever you want. It can become pathological if you let it, which is why I have moved on and only rarely check in on 9/11 truth these days.
The implications are mind boggling and go everywhere. What people need to break the loop is a productive way forward.
This interlude has reminded me of one more argument against the official 9/11 story. The rubble piles for WTC1 and WTC2 were too small.
No civil war….just military tribunals and hanging ropes!
Sometimes passenger jets cut through steel-framed buildings and their nose comes out the other side. Sometimes they crash into the earth and largely disintegrate. It’s so hard to keep track of it all.
Go look at the Shanksville “crash” site, shortly after a plane supposedly went down there, and listen to the newscasters description of what was there. It looks nothing like a plane crash.
Ron, haven’t finished this excellent article, but I was compelled to comment on your hispanic immigration points. Your position is fatally flawed:
(1) Even if the murder rate is better or equal to whites (your graph seems to indicate they are higher, if only by a small margin), it does not follow that pro-hispanic immigration policy is neutral or beneficial to the country. There are also the problems of low IQ, lack of initiative, lack of industrialness, tendency to form racial based cliques, other cultural/behavioral traits that lead to them forming a reliable Democratic voting bloc generation after generation. A USA with a dominant Hispanic community will result in us becoming just another Hispanic country, complete with all their traditional corruption and dysfunction. Which leads me to my second point:
(2) Your data must be flawed or explainable by some other phenomena than “hispanics are not that criminal” because all countries with a majority of Mestizos or Indians have a higher murder rate than the US. Mexico has a higher murder rate than Chicago. Same for El Salvador, probably Brazil and Guatamala.
Crimson2 is a well known Hasbara retard. Here’s a view from the other side with a bonus “Pull it” revelation from our friend, Larry Silverstein:
So one Jew is telling us that only one face of the WTC7 collapsed and the other said that he ordered the WTC7 demolition like a pizza from a fire department (is it free if it takes more than 30 min?). You can’t make this shit up.
Schwarzenegger probably is better at math than CanSpeccy.
Ron Unz is onto something real and important here. There IS a massive “industry” for lack of a better word that thrives off of simply having people chase their own tails forever debating minutia. Many people profit and make money off this by getting people to buy their books, visit their websites, attend their lectures, etc. There are similar cottage industries surrounding most popular “conspiracy” topics. People have been flogging off “Planet X” conspiracy books for 20 years now. Every year they predict that it’s coming “next year.” It never arrives but yet they persist. Just as 9-11 truthers can forever persist re-hashing the millions of bits of trivia out there into new theories about how it was done.
None of this actually furthers any cause and I believe Ron is correct that it keeps regular people away more than it draws them in.
It also acts to pacify people in a way. By talking and debating, people feel like they are doing something, but they are really doing nothing. The real perpetrators of 9/11 are no closer to being caught today than they were 17 years ago. They never will be caught. Despite millions (I presume) of people believing the official 9/11 narrative is bunk, there are no protests, there is no real political movement around it, nothing. Just a few people chatting here on a small dark corner of the internet as tumbleweeds blow by…
Wiz, you can choose to be called a liar or an idiot but those are the only options given your illogical “reasoning” on the collapse of WTC7.
Every time I hear another person claiming ‘The Jews Did It,” I suspect I’m seeing the work of paid Islamic jihadist trolls who are trying their utmost to shift the blame away from Muslims to Jews, so that Muslims can continue to flood into the West as immigrants.
Saying that the Jews did 9/11 ignores the tidal wave of Islamic terrorism that has occurred in all Western countries ever since 9/11, and the fundamental sea change that has taken place in the Islamic mind. Muslims know they live in rotten, stinking, sandpit countries, and they want out. They want to live in the West and what’s more, TAKE OVER THE WEST. Getting western whites to blame the Jews for as much Muslim-caused terrorism as possible is just clever propaganda work on their part.
I find it disgusting that and entire slate of Muslim terrorists, who are definitely, undeniably extremist Muslim, should hijack 4 airplanes, and yet it’s somehow ‘all the work of Mossad.’
Mossad isn’t that smart. Part of the thinking of paranoid people is that your opponent is ‘all-powerful,’ and ‘super-clever.’ This is the pure, childlike ideation of paranoid mind. Yes, I find liberal Jews to be asinine and dangerously wrong-headed, but Muslim terrorism committed by Muslims is actually Muslim terrorism committed by Muslims.
“I would obviously feel much more comfortable if they were seconded by an experienced professional”
I am a professional civil engineer – a graduate of Imperial College, London – and I assure you that the laws of Issac Newton were not suspended 17 years ago.
Huge amounts of material flying upwards and sideways – defying gravity – without a source of energy is absolutely impossible.
It is pretty obvious who are the real culprits – as only one Israeli died. They were also the main beneficiaries as Netanyahu made clear on Israeli TV – he just could not help telling the public what a smartass he was.
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it
But now having finished the article, I now feel my post too trivial to bother with in light of the full impact of the article lol.
First of all, you cannot prove Tuned Mass Dampers were ever installed/retrofitted at either of the WTCs otherwise you’d have already provided this info.
By means on an example here is an example of TMD installed from the outset in the Park Tower, Chicago, IL which was build in 2000. It’s mobility range is short.
You, however, posit something along the lines of this scenario:
Here is a diagram of WTC elvators/shafs:
Your scenario fails because the dampers–as I’ve stated in my previous reply to you–must be IN THE CENTER of the building to produce equilibrium force as to stabilize the building; yet you state that each of the two dampers where placed on the extreme ends of the core columns perimeter where two EXPRESS elevators are positioned (see WTC elevator graphic). Your theory is being undone further with each success reply.
The Jews brought the Muslims into Europe, (((Anon))). We won’t forget.
Here is a question the many seen to omit…
What force other than israel may have had far more operatives in place at every single access point to all these factions being manipulated to make 9/11 a success?
At this point the text “Israel” is printed on this page 394 times…
What if you are not looking far enough up the chain of command?, Perhaps there is a far more influential power to blame for this event?
From day one it’s been a israel this israeli that meme festival, I think having seen all of the things so far about 9/11 with few exceptions a major angle is totally glossed over.
at this point the text “Jesuit” appears zero times.
Judging by your other response to me there is no need for blueprints to imagine where you’d position these dampers. In using the blueprints, that was the gist of my question: (a) to show the original design(and position(s)) of these dampers in the original blueprints, or (b) show the retrofitted design(and position(s)) in any modified blueprints/drawings.
So I see you’ve just answered my question with your other reply to me, again just your theory–and a flawed one at that as you can read in my response to it–baseless in any corroborating documentation.
Let’s just leave it at that, along with the rest of you theory, imaginative to be see, but short in foundation and absent any credible documentation/evidence.
‘…Saying that the Jews did 9/11 ignores the tidal wave of Islamic terrorism…’
On the other hand, denying any Israeli connection at all simply gnores the ‘five dancing Israelis’ and all the evidence associated with that. Unlike the more spectacular 9/11 theories, that isn’t a matter of abstruse claims about structural engineering or unprovable ‘deep state’ conspiracies, but simple, documented fact.
We do indeed have a set of culprits: Saudi Arabian religious fanatics, who plotted to fly planes into the Twin Towers and did it. We’ve also got malevolent bystanders: Israelis, who knew about the plot, watched it unfold, were there to ‘document the event,’ and never warned us.
A man kidnaps your daughter as she is playing in your yard. Your neighbor watches it happen, and neither tells you nor calls the police. Is he your friend?
‘…Muslims know they live in rotten, stinking, sandpit countries, and they want out…’
Actually, I do know of one group in one country of whom more than a third told pollsters that ‘they would leave if they could.’
They would be Jews in Israel. Boy, that must be a shithole, huh? As to ‘wanting to take over the West…’
Still, we should take in the Jews of Israel — and I for one look forward to the day we do. It’ll be penance for our sins.
Mossad isn’t that smart. Part of the thinking of paranoid people is that your opponent is ‘all-powerful,’ and ‘super-clever.’
You think it is super-clever to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings? What IQ level do you consider to be “super-clever”?
INCORRECT. Transponders can extend the effective range and accuracy of radar installations quite considerably beyond what is achievable with simple “primary radar.”
“Primary radar” simply means that radio waves (microwaves) are bounced off of a remote object (e.g. a plane) and dispersed in all directions. Only a tiny proportion of the reflected waves makes its way back to the radio station where it is received and analyzed. Most energy is lost because an airplane reflects energy in random directions.
Primary radar only works if the airplane is close enough for the reflected signal to be received and analyzed despite being scattered and dispersed along the way. This limits the range of “primary radar” to perhaps 100 – 200 mi.
By contrast, a transponder on board an aircraft is triggered by incoming radar beams BEFORE they they are bounced off the airplane body and dispersed. The outgoing transponder signal can be received over much longer distances than a mere passive radar echo.
Typically, a transponder provides useful information at distances far beyond the range (ca. 100-200 mi) of “primary radar.”
I didn’t say anything of the sort. Read my post again.
Also, please come back when you’ve found the U238 and RDX. Should be easy.
Carfentanil in the air system, just like the Russians did with the theater hostage situation.
QUOTE: “If true, we will never know if it was blown up before, while, or after the passengers tried to retake the plane.”
There is no evidence whatever that passengers tried to retake the plane. This heartwarming story was concocted later. The alleged cell phone calls to “loved ones” could not have been made given cell phone technology at the time.
Sadly, the entire uplifting story about “Todd Beamer” is a government fabrication.
Unless the staff were all Israeli.
Don’t count on local LE being able to do anything useful. They arrested the dancing israelis and nothing happened. The just sat there silently until (((Chertoff))) eventually had them released without charge.
IIRC there was an alternative theory posted on UR a few weeks ago. Boris Berezovsky was doing some dirty work for British intel, and Litvenenko was the mule who accidentally poisoned himself.
I’m not saying it’s a fact, I’m saying don’t assume your version is true.
So your version is that Putin keeps quiet because he’s up to the same tricks.
It makes sense. I heard the president of Uzbekistan pulled off a similar false flag bombing a few years back. Of course it’s Uzbekistan, so no one outside of the country really cared.
Exactly my point. If 2 weeks isn’t enough for Ron Unz, a normal person would take months. What percentage of them would have the emotional drive to do so?
As with the holocaust, Pearl Harbour, Ton Kin Gulf, Liberty, Hitler’s attempt to control the whole world, there must be more, there are believers and sceptics.
What I see hardly mentioned is the role of Cheney at NORAD, ‘accidentally’ there for an excercise.
What a USA vice president does at NORAD for an excercise, it has never been explained.
Anyhow, Cheney at NORAD seems similar to Kissinger at the time of the Vietnam war in the USAF control centre there, supervising that the USA bombing crews got the wrong coordinates, they thought they bombing Vietnam, in reality they bombed Cambodia, what Congress had forbidden.
The second thing just yesterday came to my mind.
We all know that Bin Laden was accused of masterminding Sept 11, in my opinion for fear that he ever would speak Obama murdered him.
But, at the time, Afghanistan offered to extradite Bin Laden to a Muslim country, to be tried there for Sept 11.
The Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn, who might well have been the next Dutch prime minister, was of the opinion that the USA should wait for the outcome of this trial before waging war on Afghanistan.
Fortuyn never became prime minister, he was murdered by an animal activist.
He had said something in favor of fur coats.
I never understood the motive.
But the thought now crossed my mind ‘was killed because of possibly obstructing Bush jr’s war plans ?.
On the other hand, implausible, common in political murders is that the murderer is killed, as Lee Harvey Oswald.
There is also no sign whatsoever that the murderer benefited in any way from the murder.
He now is, under restrictions, out of jail.
He tries to go to some foreign country, but if he would start there a rich life, Dutch journalists would immediately write about it.
” Saying that the Jews did 9/11 ignores the tidal wave of Islamic terrorism that has occurred in all Western countries ever since 9/11, ”
What tidal wave of terrorism ?
I see a wave of western terrorism in Muslim countries, that goes on until the present day.
The much easier answer, than resorting to “the good goys were duped by the evil Jews” trope, is that Cheney and Rumsfeld are evil mass murdering warmongers who knew exactly what they were doing. All the evidence points that way. Just because you “looked into their eyes” and believed them to be good men does not make them so. Sorry, we all make character assessment mistakes. Heck, I’ve been deeply in love and very intimate with women who, after some time, I realized I did not know at all.
At the end of the day, everyone is responsible for their own actions.
You cannot deny that Cheney manned the control center on 9/11. And that thus he is responsible for the standdown and ultimately for releasing all the Mossad agents who were heavily involved in 9/11.
You cannot deny Cheney covered up what happened on 9/11. His fingerprints are all over all of it. I was following it very closely at the time.
You cannot deny Cheney heavily lobbied for the irrational war against Iraq. And lied and lied and lied about fanciful causus belli.
Admit you made a mistake in judgment about these two tyrants and move on :).
Well done, an almost correct observation, 100% correct when “the subject at hand” refers to the I/J/Z-plex, say, and note that then, the attempted diversion/destruction of debate is carried out by hasbarats and their ‘travelling-dogs’ = traitor-gentiles. Are you relatively new here? If so, hope you enjoy the ‘free enquiry’ atmosphere. rgds
Actually, if you look at all of the countries being flooded by Muslims, and who is making the decisions to let them in (or advocating for it), guess what – it’s not Muslims, it’s Jews. There’s an excellent video about how even in Sweden it was Jews that led to their multi-cultural disaster, it was linked on this site once but can’t find it atm …
First nobody was saying it was “the Jews”, as if all of them had a unanimous vote, lol. No, it was a cabal of Jew supremacists, mainly residing in Tel Aviv, D.C. and NYC. The vast vast vast vast vast vast majority of Jews – 99.99999% of all Jews – had nothing whatsoever to do with it. So stop spreading bs. Second, your argument is a total non-sequitor. The fact that some Jews used the fact of radical Islamism (and we can get into the role of Jews in creating radical Islamism, but that’s for another day) to advance their agenda does not mean there are not radical Islamists. Your logic fails on every possible level.
Sure, but then again, you are assuming, against all the evidence, that 9/11 was about Muslim terrorism.
By the way, this BBC article reports that many of the alleged “Muslim terrorists” aboard those flights … are still alive. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
Really? You met them? Oh, wait, you re relying on what the Jew media told you. Oh, wait, it’s anti-Semitic to say Jews control the media. And even more so to say that Jews would point the finger at Muslims for a crime Jews committed. Right. That’s sick and disgusting.
Haw. See my comment of September 12, 2018 at 7:35 am GMT. I just re-analysed your statement here; no doubt you are one of the
and your tribe is
eh?
Erring psychopathic megalomania, much?
At least you got the genius bit correct.
Where is this “nose” coming out the other side? I know in one case, at least, an engine came out and landed in the street, but where did the nose come out? Link please :).
Gee, if only you could completely control everyone, and they would just all behave the way you want! That would be paradise!
Yeah, for some people figuring it out is a hobby. Don’t read it if you don’t want. At least they keep attention on the topic. If it weren’t for these folks, some important research, like that of Dr. Jones, would likely never have come out. Sites like Engineers or Pilots for Truth, all of which add a lot of data, is populated with the people you disparage and dismiss.
If you want to focus on the fact that the official story is ridiculous and end it there, fine, let that be your strategy. IMO it’s a stupid one, because you have to provide a plausible alternative for people to accept that maybe the official story isn’t true. That’s just human nature – the mind (of most) abhors a vacuum.
I’ve spent a lot of time researching this and the “no plane at WTC”, the “energy weapon” and the “nuclear weapon” folks really piss me off because I think they make the whole movement look ridiculous. But that’s only because there aren’t enough people pointing to rational alternate explanations. And if people stop arguing in favor of the more rational alternate explanations, the only ones that remain are the batshit crazy ones, like a “tactical nuclear weapon in the basement of WTC”, or an “energy beam from a satellite”.
Everyone needs to pursue truth the way they think is best.
Ron at least has a bigger platform than most, and he can choose his way. I have utmost respect for just undermining the official story and stopping there. But I also think the message would be vastly more “understood” and “believable” if a counter-explanation was offered, with the adjunct, that of course this is only a hypothesis and what is really needed, what this is really about, is that we need a full, true, honest, fair, impartial investigation. That is certainly my point of view.
Thanks. I would expect Simon Sebag-Montefiore to have a better source than Margolis. It suggests that Margolis in busy journalistic mode made up his nonsense from simething he vaguely remembered reading or being told. But nonsense because Stalin wouldn’t have heard of Eichmann or expected Churchill to know who he was talking about.
You know that there was a WTC bombing in 1993 – a failed one? How come no one has come up with conspiracy theory about that one? Why can’t somebody put together a conspiracy theory about why that bombing failed? I guess nobody likes a failure. Or maybe it’s true that success has a thousand fathers, but failure is an orphan – no one wants to write a conspiracy theory about it
Hello,
thank you very much for very informative website with many important articles.
In regards to September 11, 2001 events and much indication — especially in the case of the attack on the Pentagon — no commercial airplane was used (cp. lack of airplane debris, no black boxes found, etc) I am wondering if there has ever been any info or idea about what happened to the airliners of AA and UA that are claimed to have been used in the attack ??
Any possible explanations for their “disappearance” ??
Well, according to Niels Harrit you’re wrong. There was thermite-
Danish Chemistry professor Niels Harrit was one of the scientists who analyzed the debris of the destroyed buildings and detected the residual presence of nano-thermite, a military-grade explosive compound, and I found him quite credible during his hour long interview on Red Ice Radio.
I’ll take his word over yours. Next…
The statements of the witnesses, the FAA administrator, the Pentagon employees and the C-130 pilot, condensed into the following compendium of industrial-strength extracts, were not selected because they are the most frequently ignored testimonies (which they are); but because they are mutually-compatible, non-contradictory, and convergent on a highly-plausible explanation of flights 77 and 93 that was already published in July of 2001 by James Hatfield:
Concordant also with the vast majority of Pentagon witness reports (including those lacking a C-130) and with the apparent rarity of debris in high-resolution post-impact images, this remote-controlled and explosives-packed hypothesis was, for me, “like a domino effect”—a really bad day for planes near Steve.
http://history-bytes.blogspot.com/2006/09/77-and-93-on-911.html
Possibly not exactly ‘back then’ but latest May 2004 [.pdf], quote:
Spherical iron and spherical or vesicular silicate particles that result from exposure to high temperature
rgds
Thank you for bringing some sense and order into the debate. I totally agree. In fact, in my opinion, we don’t need to think about any type of controlled demolition/explosives. All these endless arguments about controlled demolition/explosives do is obfuscate (possibly intentionally) and detract from what should be the main focus of the debate; who allowed these 19 jihadists to be able to succeed, and so successfully?
I personally believe that the jihadists were infiltrated by Mossad and between them and certain figures in the American government, enabled the operation to succeed. So the focus should be on who was ultimately responsible?
What Americans should be asking themselves is how the hell dual passport holders – regardless of which second/dual country – can ever be allowed to hold senior positions in the American government. This can lead to serious cases of conflicts of interest. You simply cannot be sure of proper impartiality. For example, when Michael Chertoff, who I believe also holds an Israeli passport, allowed the dancing Israelis to return to Israel without a proper, full and thorough investigation. That’s just one example
The very fact that dual nationality passport holders hold senior positions of power in the USA government already speaks volumes for the compromised state of affairs in the USA. And accusations, insinuations and casting them as prime suspects, especially where that second country (like Israel) might be involved, is absolutely justified.
In the UK, we don’t have any dual passport holders (yet) holding senior positions, but we have a very large number of MP’s affiliated to “friends of Israel” groups who subvert our democracy in order to further the interests of that country
This is simply rotten and needs to be rooted out.
What makes the BBC’s announcement of the collapse of WTC 7 all the more remarkable is that there would be no need for the conspirators to drip-feed news to the press. Once they had done the deed, they could simply let the press report on the unfolding tragedy.
The BBC exonerated itself by saying it had received the report from Reuters; but where did Reuters get the story?
It is irrelevant who owned Reuters in 1845. 100 years later, Reuters was owned by the Press Association and the Newspaper Proprietors Association, and it was floated on the Stock Exchange in 1984.
P.S. While we have mainly discussed the attack on the towers in NYC here, it is worth mentioning the attack on the Pentagon. The Pentagon was not hit by a plane but was hit by a cruise missile. There are several clips on YouTube where you can see footage of this. Here is one.
Note:
1) the size of the object
2) how close it is to the ground
3) the flat trajectory
This is clearly not a commercial airliner.
Now who has the capability to launch a cruise missile? The United States could have but there are too many issues involved in maintaining secrecy and I think it would be difficult for US troops to fire on a US target. A more likely culprit is Israel. Israel is in possession of six Dolphin class submarines, manufactured in Germany, which can launch cruise missiles. See here
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/nukes-the-high-seas-israels-underwater-atomic-arsenal-11434
There is no need to melt the steel: it weakens considerably with temperature, as any blacksmith will tell you.
The figure shows “Strength Reduction Factors for Nippon Steel FR [Fire Resistant] Bolts at Elevated Temperatures” and comes from here:
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/materialInFire/Steel/FireResistantSteel/boltedConnection.htm
Similar information is available from many other sources.
Agreed. I am indeed very well known for sucking up to people in a position of power – hence my associations with pro-Putinists in the West, with Sputnik & Pogrom in Russia (blocked by Roskomnadzor), and with this august website, whose influence is at least on par with the NYT. It’s a bold and convoluted strategy, but I am sure that it will pay off with an Atlantic Council gig any day now!
I notice the capitalised L in ALan “Mr Reid”. There is another commenter here named Alan Reid. Shame on you for resorting to such low means by attempting to pass yourself off as him and try to make your comments appear to be written by him. You’re exposed as a fraud!
Tell you what TAC how about you prove there was not a TMD installed into those towers How about that. I know they were there, If you knew anything about this sort of very tall building you would too.
And thinking that they would be in the center of the building instead of TWO of them counter corner to each other might be your first problem… But what ever, you seem to have a hard on trying to refute my claims what ever i say so i will just chalk you up as a paid troll and call it a day.
@AlreadyPublished
thanks for the info about what has been published about flight 77 and 93 in connection with a C-130 etc …
My problem is a slightly different one: IF indeed AA77 crashed into the Pentagon, why wasn’t there any debris of the plane as one would normally see at a plane crash site (such as engine parts, fuselage parts, black boxes, etc)? The same question arises about flight 93 and the crash site in PA?
IF it wasn’t flight AA77 that crashed into the Pentagon (as the debris evidence as well as logical conclusions comparing the size if aircraft and size of hole in the wall, etc. indicate) but rather it was some kind of missile, then where did AA77 go?
A Fraud?
What ever.
Might be i held the shift a millisecond too long that time. Not everyone makes use of browser cookies.
But you are the boss. Have fun with that.
At least four of the men initially identified as hijackers are still alive.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm (Sept 23, 2001)
One of these lost his passport, so his may be a case of identity theft. Other cases may be individuals with the same name. The man highlighted in this article, Waleed Al Shehri, is a pilot whose picture was published by the FBI. “He acknowledges that he attended flight training school at Daytona Beach in the United States, and is indeed the same Waleed Al Shehri to whom the FBI has been referring.”
The BBC later claimed that the mystery has been cleared up, referring readers to the report of the 9/11 commission; although I am not sure that the report has any discussion of the early mis-identifications. Strangely, the same photo of the same individual is used both in the original BBC story and in the 9/11 Commission report.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
I agree that Cheney and Rumsfeld get disproportionate attention from some 9/11 people because they are safe targets for people worried about being accused of anti-semitism. Yet, exonerating them as dupes is a different thing altogether. While neither had ethnic incentive, Cheney had plenty of profit motive. I don’t know much about Rumsfeld, but I’ve never had any doubts Cheney aligned his interest with neocons. If you look at his actions surrounding 9/11 and afterward, he’s either gullible and stupid, or smart and greedy. My bet is on the latter.
“. How didn’t anyone notice the maintenance workers installing the explosives?”
There are many possible explanations. For example, perhaps they were told that they were installing something else and not explosives.
Perhaps those who installed the explosives were not official maintenance workers.
Like many 911 truth deniers Your philosophy seems to be that one should believe the government stories without question unless one can reconstruct the exact alternative (truthful) scenario without error.
That is sort of like saying, “if Santa Claus does not exist, please explain how all those presents, every single one, got under all those trees”.
Two thoughts:
First: I’ve never seen a clear video of the Pentagon attack. The videos are all so blurry that both sides present them and claim victory, saying its “clearly” what they want it to be. Its never clearly anything.
Second: The side of the pentagon that was hit was facing West, it couldn’t have come from a submarine.
Peter Dale Scott, famous for his writing on the Deep State and JFK, points out that Ali Mohammed, “one of al-Qaeda’s top trainers in terrorism and how to hijack airplanes was an operative for FBI, CIA, and the Army”
He writes:
“So let us sum up what we know so far about Ali Mohamed:
1. A key planner of the 9/11 plot, and trainer in hijacking, was simultaneously an informant for the FBI.
2. This operative trained the members for all of the chief Islamist attacks inside the United States — the first WTC bombing, the New York landmarks plot, and finally 9/11, as well as the attacks against Americans in Somalia and Kenya.
3. And yet for four years Mohamed was allowed to move in and out of the country as an unindicted conspirator. Then, unlike his trainees, he was allowed to plea-bargain. To this day he may still not have been sentenced for any crime, and may even be in witness protection.”
http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/articles/9-11.htm
Now at the very least Mossad was tracking the 19 hijackers, and might even have been helping them; but it is hard to avoid the conclusion that people much closer to home had an even greater level of culpability.
And of course there was Saudi involvement as well, described here by Sibel Edmonds, who writes:
“It has been established that two of the 9/11 hijackers had a support network in the U.S. that included agents of the Saudi government, and that the Bush administration and the FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship.”
http://nswbc.org/Op%20Ed/Op-ed-Part1-Nov15-06.htm
Well anon… I saw your claim and to think that because these lower levels that we all know were filled with mostly structural steel and other building debris post collapse, and we all can figure out the FDNY used gargantuan amounts of water on the resulting piles of said debris…
you postulated that because 1-peat or 2-Coal can burn in enclosed spaces for prolonged time with oxygen moderating the process…. Well this situation is ZERO like either of those particular examples.
We have a concrete sub basement of what 3 parking levels and a concrete under structure to keep out the river adjacent… Not too much to burn there… So we might have a bunch of cars with gas in em, oh and i guess everyone has a few liters of oil, They have paint too right… four rubber tires… yeah sure 99 days, right enough to produce foundry like conditions… hot enough for me to see video of huge steel beams being removed from those piles DRIPPING steel,GLOWING red HOT???
Yeah, rocks in your head. Plain and simple.
A steel beam that big would barely get hot enough to glow in darkness from fire caused by normal building materials and other stuff that may be in the basements…. REGARDLESS of how much insulation you managed to heap onto them.
The energy to heat all that debris on the site to the levels the thermography showed on the surface is not coming from normal building fires, And let’s just keep in mind the amount of time this whole mess was burning, The FDNY called the fires out on December 19th, If you count the days that is 99 days!
I defy you to produce information on ANY structural fire that has burned anywhere near that long, Anywhere EVER!
There is not one public accessible document regarding any of the structural elements of that series of floors. If i could have found them i would be gladly using them, as would a few others.
But i don’t need to continue conversing with a paid troll so have fun TAC.
And once again i still have seen zero refutations of my theory.
I suspect you are either just trolling and playing dumb while sowing doubt, or trying to convince yourself “Truthers” do not have a point.
But I am going to assume you are just a lazy, complacent ignoramus, so I will spoon feed you some information anyone with interest and couple of hours of free time could have found with little effort on the net.
Steven E. Jones, a former professor emeritus of physics at Brigham Young University published a peer reviewed paper on why he thinks there should be a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges, ie a controlled demolition.
http://wtc7.net/articles/WhyIndeed09.pdf
He and and emeritus Chemistry professor of the University of Copenhagen plus other experts also published a peer reviewed paper on the findings of a very sophisticated nano thermitic material in WTC collapse dust residue after analysis with the most advanced equipment, and how they reached the conclusion it was way more powerful than the most powerful known nano thermite analysed on record.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228660396/download
And here is a video in which the professor explains himself and his findings, and how he was threatened, offered a bribe and finally fired from BYU for publishing the above paper.
Yet another one by Peter Michael Ketcham Mathematician, NIST researcher for 14 years, a specialist on computer models like the one used by NIST to explain the collapse due to fires, calling the NIST report bogus and unscientific, and claiming the most probable cause -after researching the subject himself- was a controlled demolition.
And here a Dutch demolitions contractor and expert Danny Jowenko, swearing WTC7 collapse was a controled demolition done by a team of experts, after watching a video of the collapse, not knowing it was WTC7.
Here you have information important enough to make you become an skeptic, AKA “Truther”.
If after considering the amount of evidence and expert opinions provided in the links above you keep on asking stupid questions about your uneducated speculations on why skeptics could be wrong, I’ll take it you are either just a paid shill playing dumb, or simply too dumb to understand the implications of the information provided in the above links, a possibility not easy to dismiss after reading your posts on this thread.
It does not matter very much whether the hijackers are alive, dead, or never existed – what does matter is that there were no hijacked planes being flown into buildings that day.
Did you not see the phrase I quoted from Jame’s Hatfield about “planes packed with explosives“?
Wouldn’t that suffice to blow a plane into small fragments?
There were small fragments of F77 outside the Pentagon.
There were small fragments of F93 spread over many miles.
i) A personnel attorney at the Pentagon, [Gilah] Goldsmith was riding a shuttle bus to work on Tuesday, Sept. 11, when she learned of the attack on the World Trade Center. […] “We saw a huge black cloud of smoke,” she said, saying it smelled like cordite or gun smoke.
-Jewish Bulletin News, September 21, 2001
“The airliner crashed between two and three hundred feet from my office in the Pentagon, just around a corner from where I [Don Perkal] work. I’m the deputy General Counsel, Washington Headquarters Services, Office of the Secretary of Defense. A slightly different calibration and I have no doubt I wouldn’t be sending this to you. My colleagues felt the impact, which reminded them of an earthquake. People shouted in the corridor outside that a bomb had gone off upstairs on the main concourse in the building. No alarms sounded. I walked to my office, shut down my computer, and headed out. Even before stepping outside I could smell the cordite. Then I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.”
-Timothy McSweeney’s, September 19, 2001
How do you rationally account for all the witness reports of a jetliner impact?
Another wilde goose chase. Molten steal, not just red-hot but orange-yellow-hot, was seen leaking out of one of the towers before the collapse, and found sloshing around under the rubble pile weeks after the event. Moreover, any softening of the steel should have been to the stories actually ablaze – there is absolutely no way to explain the rapid collapse of the whole structure without added explosives.
Give it up already – you have no leg to stand on.
It’s very easy, in fact. The uranium has been oxidised, not destroyed, and it can be detected by mass spectroscopy. The latter technique is routinely used to examine dust in nuclear power stations, for evidence of fuel leaks. There will still be dust from 9/11 all around Manhattan. You could test your hypothesis by taking some samples, and sending them off for analysis by one of the companies that examines dust from nuclear power stations.
After claiming most technical aspects on which “Trutherism” is based have been debunked without offering any evidence to support it, are you shocked someone in this thread is calling you out and framing you as a shill or an ass-licker signaling to the World he’s got the “right” opinions?
Is this how you contribute to the discussion? I hope you research better the articles you publish here at UNZ than you did before publishing that first comment of yours on this thread, because your “impressions” on it are proven ignorant rubbish, and the question on the 19 Zionist hijackers naive and plain silly.
And you just published an article on the idiocy of the average after that idiotic and ignorant comment?
If you are too lazy and complacent to research and study why some people are skeptic on the 9/11 official narrative, you should also abstain from contributing on this thread, unless you are just a moron or a paid shill that is. And if you have researched and have evidence to back what you claim, you should provide it here, so rational people can consider all the arguments and evidence available before forming or modifying their opinions on the subject.
But if you keep on making claims without any references, links to new evidence, etc. do not be shocked when people calls you a shill or dismisses your seemingly ignorant and silly comments for what they are. Duh!
Hmmm…”In parts of Mexico”…very low murder rates…[but] where the culture is permissive”…
And just where does “the culture” come from? Apparently you think “culture” is an outside input that impacts a society/group of people rather than an output of that group?
In reality you are simply doubling down on the magic/tragic dirt theory: Hispanics move to the tragic dirt areas of the US, so they murder twice as many people as non-hispanic whites.
Color me unconvinced…
A statement, I just listened to parts of it, confirming that the planes that hit the towers were NOT the ‘hijacked’ planes.
And indeed, what I wrote before, something under the rump of the first aircraft that passenger planes do not have.
I’m going to mow the lawn.
Sept 11, as the holocaust, Peyton Place, it will never end.
Paul Thompson has a useful timeline of events surrounding 9/11:
https://911timeline.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html
Yes. A transponder can extend the effective range and accuracy of radar installations quite considerably.
The reason is simple physics again.
The return signal a radar sees without a transponder varies in the inverse fourth power of the distance to the object. That is ~ 1/(R^4).
That is because the signal the radar transmits is at 1/(R^2) when it hits the plane. It is reflected by the plane back towards the radar, but now that already tiny signal faces the same 1/(R^2) reduction.
However, a transponder is an active source of energy, and can detect the incoming signal from further out and generate a powerful enough response to reach the radar station with enough signal strength that the radar station can resolve it.
Like I say, come back when you’ve found the U238 and RDX.
We had this discussion a few months ago. The upshot was it looks like cell phones may be able to work from an aircraft and they’re normally banned because their continual base station jumping puts extra load on the network.
Then again, something not being impossible is no proof at all that it actually happened.
The Potomac is west of the Pentagon, isn’t it? Could a submarine have been operating in the Potomac?
The hypothesis of Mossad being responsible is indeed an interesting one and not so outlandish for what I have read.
Apart from what the French Defense Minister had said in the informal setting you knew about through you acquaintance, Italian 42th Prime Minister and then president, Francesco Cossiga, who was himself involved in Operation Gladio and from which he also later became a whistleblower and forced to resign as a President for it, also claimed in an interview with Corriere Della Sera(Italy’s most widely read newspaper) that the Mossad and the CIA had carried out the attacks.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/ex-italian-president-intel-agencies-know-9-11-an-inside-job/7550
https://www.corriere.it/politica/07_novembre_30/osama_berlusconi_cossiga_27f4ccee-9f55-11dc-8807-0003ba99c53b.shtml
Interesting and amusing also Cossiga’s obituary in The Guardian, in which the conspiracy-false flag claims by Cossiga were dismissed as having been made “ironically” by the former President.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/18/francesco-cossiga-obituary
Boris Johnson renounced his second citizenship (USA) recently but that’s the only one I’m aware of.
The more controversial question is whether ‘dual citizenship’ should be extended to encompass ‘dual nationality’ and then whether or not Jewishness should count as a nationality.
Nationality is kind of a weak word in English. I think the Russian version has a lot more of the meaning I intend.
Err … IIRC, GWB may have been reported to have said something very much like: “I want to ‘take-down’ Saddam [he tried to kill my daddy]. Find me a way.”
That seems to be a lo-o-ong way from consciously and specifically deciding
More likely, it was the mafia [as here described by Wade] surrounding [and controlling] him, who took GWB’s ‘vague order’ as their chance to pull off the long-prepared 9/11 stunt, murdering ~3000 of ‘their own people’ on the day, then going on to attempt WC7in5, that attempt leading to the murder of millions while destroying many countries [all in accordance with the wildest blood-wet-dreams of you know who]. Some proof could be GWB’s stunned look at the goat-book reading. Not that I’m defending GWB, just ‘truth-seeking.’ rgds
Yup. You know there was a TMD. And you know it was made of U238.
Did God tell you? Did you read the glowing stones out of a top hat?
Here is a little test for self-assessment. The subject is entirely different, but the relevance to your question is: how much evidence do we need – are we prepared to draw radical conclusions from a single, clear-cut piece of physical evidence, even if those conclusions go against well-established history?
Before diving in, I’d like to note I am not trying to troll anyone; if you don’t like being distracted from the important question of this thread, please just stop reading.
This original research paper shows clearly that, in samples of soil that received radioactive fallout after the Hiroshima bombing (Fig. 1),
1. there is no uranium 235 (Fig 3),
2. there is (the 235-U fission product) cesium 137, and its abundance correlates with surplus amounts of uranium 234 (but not 235-U; Fig. 5).
The authors conclude that the “fissile raw material was the enriched uranium,” but that is clearly not supported by the facts – from the purported degree of its enrichment in the bomb and its shorter half life, the activity of 235-U in the fallout would be expected to be about 25 times higher than that of 238-U. Instead, 235-U has the lowest activity of any uranium isotopes detected.
While this is just a single paper, the authors cite earlier ones that also find no 235-U but are not available to me; but I found another more recent one that also finds essentially no uranium 235.
Question: do you find this evidence sufficient to conclude that no nuclear explosion happened at Hiroshima – that they maybe just dropped a dirty bomb, a conventional explosive mixed with some nuclear reactor waste? If not, what (and how much) other evidence would you need?
High resolution mass spectrometry would be insanely sensitive for U238. There’s almost zero in the background environment and there’s nothing with the same m/z that could interfere.
But then again this guy pulled his theory out of his ass so he’s not going to follow up.
You seem to have missed the critical point that it was not my word but rather the word of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) I’ve been citing. USGS found no trace of thermite, and I’ve provided links directly to USGS documents to support that.
More importantly, thermite does not have the explosive velocity required to turn concrete and steel into a fine powder.
You failed to provide a link to Niels Harrit’s work. I did your legwork and found the abstract to Harrit’s work at Wikispooks, which contains this telling line:
So, Harrit relied on samples taken by “a Manhattan resident,” which means there was no chain of possession, a serious defect that is also noted in Dr. Stephen Jones’s work:
https://www.veteranstodayarchives.com/2012/09/21/911-dust-by-jeff-prager-final-version/
Once again, thermite is not a high explosive and does not have the explosive velocity to turn steel and concrete from the WTC twin towers into a fine dust.
From the USGS document linked just below:
Determination of a Diagnostic Signature for World Trade Center Dust using Scanning Electron Microscopy Point Counting Techniques
Irrespective of whether or not thermite was found in some WTC dust, the fact remains that thermite does not have the explosive velocity (power) to turn concrete and steel into a fine dust.
It is not up to me to prove YOUR theory. It is implausible as you describe it; merely a work of fanciful imagination and nothing more. If any sound theory can be backed up with corroborating documentation, which can then be peer reviewed–just like one of our regular UR commentators insists on every time (with the notable exception of anything to do with the holocaust) then by all means consider it plausible in the greater endeavor of getting to the truth of 9/11.
Yours is, however is full of holes, yet merely to be treated as entertainment rather than grounded in reality.
I do not have a beef against you nor anyone else who posits a theory, for that matter, to explain some of the many answered questions that to this day remain about 9/11. What I do have a problem is people hijacking 9/11 with outlandish claims giving a bad name to the people who really want to the get to the truth of what led up to that tragic day.
As you describe in your scenario TWO different dampers many stories apart and at opposing ends of the building would create oscillations of two different frequencies–thus hampering the return of the system(and building) to equilibrium.
Since Jeb Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz at the Project for the New American Century were calling for a new Pearl Harbor, and George W. Bush needed a new Pearl Harbor before proceeding with his plan, announced before election, to “take Saddam out,” why is it reasonable to suppose that Israel was responsible for 9/11, described by Bush as “the Pearl Harbor of the 21st Century, when it occurred.
Yes, Israel, a US dependent state that would long ago have been wiped from the page of history without US backing, would no doubt have been prepared to have the US outsource a key parts of a job like 9/11 to them, but there is no logic to the idea that Israel committed an act of war against its own agent of security by undertaking the 9/11 attacks for its own purpose. True, 9/11 was deemed by Netenyahu to be in Israel’s interest, but that is another matter.
On UR you should get used to tossing “Deep State” around then you would have trouble with your UK not having dual passport holders in “senior positions”. Lord May I guess nand Lord Broers are two Australians that come to mind just for a quick sampling.
No you are not, that criticism is not fair. However, what you do reveal here is your lack of thoroughness and critical thinking. You simply believe anything that pops in your mind and looks plausible – without ever seriously considering that you might be wrong. That is how you sustain your prolific writing output. You have talent and intelligence, but you are wasting it by focusing on output quantity. Write ten times less, but research your topics thoroughly and think them through; then you can make a difference.
Right. There is no reason to believe that other explosives were not also used – those like TNT for example will just burn up without a trace.
I think you may have overlooked evidence that Ron, in uncharacteristically sloppy mode has appeared to deny any important part to the 19 Arabs. I wish he would apply the rigour of which he is capable.
To call call it girlish to reject the most probable logical inference because you “really cannot understand” or because it is “preposterous” is unfair — unfair to girls, that is, though it is clearly evidence of intellectual immaturity , if not worse.
The great risk of making a fool of oneself is the reason a publisher should never publish their own stuff — unless he’s running a vanity press.
You have many holes in your argument. I’ve merely pointed to the initial ones: placing a tuned mass dampers at the WTCs. If you cannot do that the rest of your argument is immaterial. However, if you can place the TMDs at the WTCs then other holes in your other assertions can be pointed out. See me response to you in #756. Since you cannot prove this initial point there is no need for further discussion on the matter.
Did you read Gary Volger’s account of the Iraqi oil siphoned off and shipped to Israel? If not here it is:
No he was not reported to have said something like …. He was reported quite specifically to have said during the campaign:
Fuck Saddam, we’re gonna take him out.”
And the US Government just let it be? No inquiry into the reasons for the failure of NORAD, no penalty for those responsible for the failure of NORAD, no inquiry into why the hijackers were admitted to the US over the objections of the immigration staff at the US embassy in Saudi Arabia, no inquiry into how come Pakistan’s military intelligence agency sent Mohamad Atta $100,000, etc., ad nauseam … LOL
Why should I pay penance for sins I didn’t commit? I have spent decades fighting the jewish forces in our government and media that have been bought or blackmailed by Israel and its 5th column here. I don’t want us to take in the Israelis when that day comes. They have set in motion the dynamics that will sweep them into the sea as they have been ironically claiming would happen. When that day comes, I will sit on my porch with a sackful of popcorn and watch the well-deserved destruction of Israel.
As you sow, so shall ye reap.
Why does it have to be USA or Israel? Could it not be that the working group was international and had a preponderance of both Americans and Israelis? Maybe it was largely a Jewish endeavor that also employed many gentiles?
Why should Criminal Inc necessarily be a wholly owned subsidy of one government?
Okay, but how hot did the steel actually get in the towers?
Many people confuse the temperature of the fires with the temperature of the steel. It is the latter that matters. NIST found that only 2% of the steel tested on the perimeter columns got over 250C(482F) and none of the core columns. There was no evidence of steel getting over 600C(1120F). If fire on a few floors that burn for less than an hour(56 min), in the case of the south tower, can cause a building to explode top-down that would be a first. Almost all steel-frame high-rises suffer from fires at one point, so why did this never happen before or since? For those that believe fire can destroy a building the way WTC1,2 and 7 were, it is incumbent on them to prove this experimentally, not merely assert it.
Hey! … Err … keeping it friendly, what I understand, and not just from Wade’s and your little pas de deux here, is that this ‘mafia’ has the entire US rogue-regime in its pocket. IF so THEN the US Government did just let it be; everything following your “No inquiry” was the Sgt Schulz defence: “Just following orders!” Just one proof: Look at the dismal NIST failure; their defective product was a) ordered from above then b) duly delivered, as ordered. Presumably that whole department just went “Yes, sir!” The corruption is almost everywhere you look in theSaker’s AngloJudaic empire, and not ‘just,’ D & F, DK, SE, NO etc. must all be infected by the same parasite.
I really don’t ‘get’ your LOL.
Who do you think forged the Habbush Letter? Philip Giraldi claims Cheney ordered the forgery.
Assuming Cheney is guilty, one can ask what else he might be guilty of………….
Wasn’t Bush thinking of invading Iraq back in 1999? It’s sort of convenient how well 9/11 worked out for him…… While Bush might not be a smart man, his father was former CIA director.
https://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1028-01.htm
The alternative may be for the Israelis to carry out their threats to blow up the world if they feel desperate enough. It’s called the Samson Option.
Ron (I don’t feel entirely comfortable addressing you by your first name, but Mr. Unz feels too formal for me–and splitting the difference a la the South with Mr. Ron is just a non-starter): I hope you will read Griffin’s New Pearl Harbor Revisited (if you’ve already read New Pearl Harbor). It has more than minor supplementary material, and tends to push toward a more extreme critique of the official story. It’s crucial reading, unless it’s been superseded by works I don’t know about. Among other things, Griffin’s discussion of the alleged phone calls is particularly important. The fact that someone made faked phone calls which were not actually from the allegedly hijacked planes, certainly deepens the rabbit hole.
Man, it makes me sad I have dropped the thread of studying 9/11, but I’ve been dealing with health limitations from before the time I even became convinced 9/11 was a false flag (roughly 2005, I guess) so there are actually much sadder losses. But I am just sitting there thinking about books I wanted to buy on the subject, some of which I am pretty sure have gone out of print already.
It’s not just about 9/11. Chomsky -the “radical” intellectual – believes in all the official narrative: holocaust, JFK was assassinated by Oswald, the Bolshevik “revolution” was in fact a Russian revolution, first and Sscond ww were a struggle against dictatorship, evil, etc… that the lobby doesn’t exist. etc…etc…
J. Mearsheimer and M. Walt may be great scholars but they don’t know what they are talking about.
It’s evident that one doesn’t need a phd to know that the lobby has complete control of the USA. But for Chomsky, supposedly a great scholar, even a scholarly book can’t convince him of the existence of the lobby.
It’s a very strange phenomenon indeed. Another “radical” intellectual who believed 100% in the official 9/11 narrative was Alexander Cockburn.
Another example is Craig Murray: an honest and courageous man but who simply can’t accept that those who have power can commit such evil acts.
Maybe Chomsky is just a buffoon. He defines himself as an “anarchist socialist”.
His disciple -Norman Finkelstein- says that Chomsky is a zionist.
Maybe he’s a buffoon and a zionist. Anyway, Chomsky is more clever than thousands and thousands of goys that admire him and buy his “radical” books.
Not all truthers describe the Twin Towers as falling into their own footprints. I certainly don’t. I think it’s an inaccurate description.
Why do you think all the Herskowitze’s of the world will be pumping up the story that it was the crazy Bush who wanted to start the war with Iraq? And then you come and throw the usual the red herring that his father was CIA and that it supposes to explain everything. But look at his father. He was very reluctant to go to war in 1990 against Iraq. And then when he did he did not go all the way. He let Saddam Hussain retain his power. And ten year later comes his son and is overheard talking about Iraq. Is it possible he was just signaling to the neocons because this is want they want to hear? The neocons are the warmongers but now some Herskowitz will tell us that Jews did everything they could to stop crazy Iraq obsessed Bush from going to war but unfortunately they failed. Blame Bush.
Keep it friendly, sure, if we can. But look, the question is this: who rules? The US Government or some other party? I don’t buy your notion that Bush was a fool who caused 9/11 by some simple-minded slip of the tongue and without any knowledge of what he was doing.
Of course there is no paper trail, no presidential order: “take out the Twin Towers, blame 19 dumb Islamic fanatics so we can go ahead and take out Saddam.” But if there was no more than a ‘vague order,’ it was of a kind with “who will rid me of this turbulent priest” and it would have been issued not absent mindedly and without awareness of what was in the pipeline. The Bushes, remember, are CIA, dating back, so reports have it, to the time of the Kennedy assassination if not before. So, yes, the Mafia, if that is what you want to call them, are involved but they are in government, not outside of government.
And Trump, who appeared on TV, two days after 9/11, setting forth for a German reporter what has all along been the official explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers (the jet fuel fire, just too hot, the steel melted and the towers came down) is part of that Mafia, although it is apparently riven by factions.
Dubya is pretty certainly a very smart man. Did he not say, after losing an election to a yahoo in Texas, that he’d never be “outdumbed” again. Dumb George was simply the most effective persona for “catapulting the propaganda,” (Dubya’s phrase) the primary function of any democratic leader.
As for the factions in the US Government, which are not neatly divided along the Democrat–Republican line, here, in my view, is what divides them, and it’s not 9/11.
The argument that the steel did not get hot in WTC1 & 2 is weak because you cannot at the same time claim that there was molten steel and at the same time claim that no steel got to 600 Celsius. We must discard NIST measurements as they did not measure all steel. An argument of temperature for steel structures in WTC could only be that assuming there were no explosives, thermite and that kind of stuff, the temperatures could not be high enough to bring the building down, but this argument cannot be made strong because fire can indeed bring a steel-frame building down at least theoretically. This whole argument should be discarded and proofs of demolition be based on other stronger arguments, which there are many. Repeating this weak argument only harms the demolition theory, as weak arguments are easily broken.
Sure, that was one of the several Griffin books I read, most of which generally contain a great deal of overlapping material, so after I’d read the first 2-3 I probably read the remaining 2-3 much less closely.
As I emphasized upthread, there appear to be *dozens* of huge gaping holes in the official narrative, and it seems a matter of personal taste or individual expertise which we regard as most persuasive. The cell-phone argument seemed reasonably strong to me, with lots of apparent experts saying the calls were impossible. But then again, some other experts seem to claim that they were actually possible. So since I don’t know anything about the technology, let alone the plausibility of “voice morphing,” I’d regard that particular matter as quite suspicious but not as decisive as various others. Presumably, someone with greater knowledge of 2001 cell phones might feel differently.
That comment is not up to your standards. Not least because of the imprecision.
Whether there is sufficiently strong evidence that the official story “is false” immediately invites interpretation starting with noting the implication that you mean it was deliberately falsified in some critical aspect(s) which must have been in the interests of powerful people. It seems that we have to interpret your test as not satisfied by the cover up of CIA or CIA plus FBI plus White House incompetence and negligence. False because of failure to examine debris for evidence of controlled demolition? Is that it?
As to your dismissal of the “rag-tag band of 19 Arabs with box-cutters” it seems that may just be a reflection of your belief that use of nanothermite played an important part from which you infer that whatever the 19 Arabs did they were simply patsies for the serious plotters. Maybe but whatever hypothesis is being considered, it must make sense of all the facts and difficulties could arise at many 6points which you seem to want to airily dismiss.
If you say that the (alleged) finding of nanothermite particles sufficiently justifies your broad brush approach I wish you would take us through that. I have read nearly all of the lengthy paper of which the abstract is given at
https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOCPJ-2-7
It finally proffers the conclusion that sophisticated nonthermitic material of a kind which became available (to some) a few months before was found in very small quantities in what appeared to be particles from the WTC (which buildings not specified). If you were counsel hoping to use their evidence you would be wanting to ask them a lot of questions first. Amongst many, could those particles which contained, inter alia, aluminium and iron have resulted from chemical reactions involving the aluminium in the aircraft fuselages [therefore maybe only from WTC 1 and 2?]; were demolition experts consulted on the way the thermitic chemicals might have been used (painted on for some purpose, used as detonators, whatever) and, if other explosives would have been needed were there remnants of those, and of the wiring up, remote controls, detonators etc that surely would also have left traces; could the hijackers have included thermite in their baggage or carried on explosive substances to enhance the effect of the planes’ impact?
If one has to conclude that the way the buildings were brought down meant that there had to have been prewired demolition then clearly the 19 Arabs thinking they were part of an Al Qaeda operation fade into the background. But one of the reasons for not succumbing easily to demolition stories, let alone no plane versions, is that one then has to believe six impossible things before breakfast. At the less fantastic end of stretched credibility is why the buildings had to be destroyed, and if destruction of WTC 1 and 2 was the centerpiece why not simply redo the 1993 Muslim terrorist (?Al Qaeda) attack properly.
It is true that assessing what is a mere distraction is not easy. It may well be that the distraction should be attended to because of potential implications. What if it is true, for example, that the phone calls from Flight 93 couldn’t have been made?
Such details are insignificant to deep thinkers.
Sounds like someone heard what was going to go down and saw a way to make lots of money at our expense (because insurance premiums would go up for everyone to cover the losses there.)
My immediately preceding lengthy comment was meant to show as a reply to your earlier comment in which you referred to the nanothermite proving the impossibility of the rag-tag band of 19 Arabs with boxcutters story and the falsity of the official story.
BTW “dozens of holes in the official story” doesn’t get one very far. That is what you would expect of a slap dash attempt aimed to avoid embarrassment.
I don’t know anything about it, but that claim seems perfectly plausible to me. And apparently everyone thinks that Ledeen and his friends forged the Yellowcake documents.
However, I think we need to make a huge distinction here. I can very easily see Cheney, Tenet, and those around them massively tilting or even forging the evidence to pave the way for the Iraq War. Maybe they actually believed Saddam had WMDs and maybe they didn’t, but they certainly wanted American to overthrow him for a wide variety of different reasons, probably some they believed aligned with American national interests and some not.
Since the Iraq War turned out to be a total disaster, I think you could make a pretty reasonable case that anyone involved in forging those sorts of documents was guilty of treason and should be tried and executed, very possibly including Cheney. After all, they knowingly provided false intelligence information during wartime that directly led to the deaths of thousands of American servicemen.
However, there’s a *gigantic* difference between believing that Cheney and his friends got together and forged documents to support a war they wanted to have for various good and bad reasons, and believing that Cheney knowingly helped organize an attack on NYC and the Pentagon deliberately designed to kill thousands of Americans. The first case seems perfectly plausible, while the second seems extraordinarily unlikely except through some totally unknown X-factor, like horrific blackmail information against him.
I’d even go so far as to personally doubt that most of the key Neocons around Cheney and Rumsfeld were fully aware of the 9/11 plot. However, various of their own “close friends” may have asked them to do certain things or place certain people in particular positions were integral to the 9/11 attacks.
Basically, I think it’s a lot like what the Venona Decrypts reveal about the enormously powerful network of Soviet against in FDR’s government. Probably relatively few of them were ever asked to do anything really dramatic, but if they were every now and then asked to place “a good guy” (i.e. an outright Soviet agent) in a particular position, that’s all that was necessary.
That was on the steel that remained intact. The NIST report states for the external panels:
while for the core columns:
https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=101019
Well…here we go again…another fucking shnork on this website who read something on a wiki or in popular mechanics decides to make an empty assertion…without actually backing it up with anything…
Everything you just said is TOTAL BULLSHIT…And is readily proved as such…
Where did you get that ‘info’…?
Being a complete fucking SHNORK…you’ve probably never heard of the FAA’s Aeronautical Information Manual…
Total Fucking Shnork claims…
WHAT A COMPLETE FUCKING IDIOT…
The so-called ‘secondary surveillance radar’ is NOT any kind of radar at all…it is a radio beacon [ie a radio transmitter-receiver] that sends out RADIO signals to the aircraft transponder…
The ATCRBS beacon is usually collocated with the primary antenna…the small antenna on top is the transponder beacon…
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-be5911e48c66a8d0f687e3bff3be9816
BOTH signals from the primary radar and the transponder beacon are line of sight radio signals, so there is no difference in maximum range, which is limited by the earth’s curvature…in fact since the aircraft transmits its signal back to the ground station, its range is limited by the power that can be carried onboard an aircraft…the primary radar has no such limitations and can be very powerful…
Next time you pop off, first try to actually possess some actual information…
There is no evidence whatever that passengers tried to retake the plane. This heartwarming story was concocted later. The alleged cell phone calls to “loved ones” could not have been made given cell phone technology at the time.
I will grant you the story the passengers tried to retake the plane could be fabricated. But the phone calls left on the answering machines of relatives are not fake.
We know the passengers on flight 93 knew other planes had already crashed into the WTC. It is far more likely they at least tried to stop the hijackers than everyone just sat in their seats and gave up.
“After all, they knowingly provided false intelligence information during wartime that directly led to the deaths of thousands of American servicemen.”
And, imho, you should have also written : to the …..Genocide of the Iraqi people or if you don’t want to use the word, to 1 million or half million Iraqi deaths. I don’t believe you consider the lives of “american servicemen” more important than Iraqi lives.
Hope you don’t find the point irrelevant. I believe It’s a way of doing justice to the half million/ 1 million Iraqi killed that even in a simple comment, that FACT should never be forgotten.
Another TOTAL FUCKING SHNORK…
You obviously know nothing about aircraft or avionics or the ATC system…in which I have flown for 40 years…
See my reply here to the ridiculous moron that you agree with…
The signal strength is a function of TWO things…the electrical power and the distance…your halfass ‘physics’ applies only if one assumes EQUAL power in both the radar and the transponder…
Sorry to inform you of this, but that is not the case…the Air Route Surveillance Radars [ARSR] are many times more powerful than the transponder carried aboard an aircraft…
The limitation of both is line of sight, due to the earth’s curvature…the national airspace system and ATC has been designed carefully to not have shortcomings like the disneyland scenario you fantasize about…
ARSR are powerful enough and geolocated in such a way that they provide overlapping coverage over most of the country…the aircraft onboard radios [including transponders] are also designed to be powerful enough to work out to the REAL physical limitation, which is LINE OF SIGHT…
The so-called ‘secondary surveillance radar’ DOES NOT in any way shape or form EXTEND RANGE…as I already said…
Here again is the AIM…
That is how the system works…the gap-filler using SSR is only for certain areas at lower altitudes that does not affect commercial passenger operations since they fly high enough to be on ARSR all the time…
I am not making an argument specifically, merely reporting the findings of the NIST report on steel temperatures from the fire affected areas. NIST stated before their investigation that they did believe that they had enough samples to get an accurate measure of steel temperatures.
NIST stated, “has in its possession about 236 pieces of WTC Steel. Additionally, regions of impact and fire damage were emphasized in the selection of steel for the Investigation…NIST has samples of all 14 grades of steel used in the exterior column-spandrel panels. It also has samples of two grades of steel used for the core columns (wide flange and built-up box columns) that represent steel used to fabricate 99 percent of the core columns..NIST believes that this collection of steel from the WTC Towers is adequate for purposes of the Investigation…”
p.s. You don’t need to poll everyone in the country to get an accurate representation.
Also let’s differentiate between steel temperatures caused by the fires and high temperatures potentially caused by other phenomenon. If we know there is molten iron/steel or something else we know that this was not caused by the fires so we have to posit another agent. The RJ Lee report of 2003 states,
“Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension.”
p.s. You can actually see a molten flow coming out of the South Tower a few minutes before it collapses.
All lines of inquiry point to demolition.
“…fire can indeed bring a steel-frame building down at least theoretically.”
Someone needs to prove this experimentally.
Yes, NIST stated that in their report, but they stated something else in 2003.
In their December 2003 Public Update on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster they wrote, “NIST believes that this collection of steel from the WTC Towers is adequate for purposes of the Investigation.” After it was shown that there was no evidence of high temperatures they claimed that they did not have enough samples. This also contradicts NIST’s first public statement that the 236 pieces of steel were specifically selected from the regions that experienced fire and impact damage.
But we should also ask why NIST didn’t have more samples to analyze.
“For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on a slow boat to China, never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car. Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing for the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall… As things stand now and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals.”
Bill Manning Fire Engineering 2002
Why do they leave me out of all of their conspiracies! You’d think, after all of these years, one of my friends or family would say “psst, you know there’s this secret message service…you should really sign up”
A Jewish conspiracy would be awesome. I got laid off from my last job (along with 10% of staff) at a Jew-run investment firm. My whole reporting line – up to the CEO – was Jewish too. But they kept the goy (I was the only Jew in my group of 7). I have a very Jewish name too. How could they miss it? And my job before that, at a historically Jewish law firm, my Jewish bosses promoted the pretty blonde WASP over my Jewish friend who was pushed out.
PS: the only thing that’s real here is Aspergers
I have not researched it deeply, but there are reasons to believe that many, if not most, of the dead at WTC are fake. Leaving apart the questions of the plane (I personnally believe no one died in any plane), and speaking only of the Twin Towers, I think the real number of dead is much, much smaller than announced. What kill real people (and have so many angry families making trouble) when you can so easily make up as many dead as you want. The key to understand 9/11 is that it is basically a psy-operation, as Ace Baker demonstrate in chapters 6 and 7 of his American Psy-Opera film. One clue about the blown up number of dead is the very small number of families who did manifest themselves when the 9/11 compensation fund was created (in 2011 I think) (and even among those who got some money, I would tend to suspect a lot of fraud, from the same usual suspects). There are a few videos on the subject, easy to find (google 9/11 fake dead).
Seems his co-ethnics are in the same line of work:
The headline article is 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.
Conspiracy: a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful
Theory: a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something
Secret = covert; apart from the executive cabal, individual task-implementing ‘cogs’ are only told what they need to know for that task.
Theories are not plucked out of nowhere; 1st comes some inspiration, usually after some observation(s), then various theories may be examined for ‘fit.’
In the case of WTC7, the 1st observation is free fall. One theory to explain that is controlled demolition – thought by many to be ‘best fit.’
Ditto for WTCs 1 & 2; upon close examination, we may also theorize ‘controlled demolition.’
But now it gets tricky; we can’t see into the covert cabal who ‘ordered’ the above & more horror.
We have hints; PNAC, say, with their New Pearl Harbor or some reported boasting that Washington is Z-occupied territory.
This is all a long way around, to say that a) I can’t answer your “who rules” nor, with nothing more than such hints above, can I even speculate, let alone c) finger the order-giver, which resulted in ~3000 murders on the 1st day and subsequent “Shock’n whore” carnage, all in Z-designated ‘enemy countries.’ Sorry, but not too sorry, but ‘form’ will be a factor. rgds
First, thank you for the effort to remain civil. I knew Santa doesn’t exist since I was five. A Serbian partisan told me. Long dull story I won’t inflict you.
My point, I see what I see. The official story takes a stretch in terms of physics. The alternative story takes an even bigger stretch in terms of logic. I don’t know. Though my guts tell me Israel, I have no evidence. My beliefs are constructions of my mind, truth is independent of my mind. I don’t fix facts to match my beliefs.
I see what I see.
You just pwned yourself.
Come back when you understand what the signal power at the radar receiver will be when it is is reflected off an object at a distance R and what it will be at the object at a distance of R.
Hint, the transponder only needs to emit at a power larger than the reduced signal reaching the plane.
I think you have to have a bit of a psychopath in you to understand the thinking of a psychopath.
WHAT PART OF YOU’RE A FUCKING IDIOT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND…?
Do you hold a commercial pilot license…?
Have you ever flown in the ATC system as pilot in command…?
Do you hold certification as an air traffic controller…?
Quite clearly the answer is NO since you are a FUCKING SHNORK and neither a pilot nor controller…
Here’s a fucking hint for you…even a village idiot knows not to yap about things he knows nothing about…apparently you’re not that fucking smart…
Boy, I don’t want to be you. There’s something really wrong about you. When I think that we possibly have the same origins, i.e. we share the same genes, it scares me.
Karlin doesn’t know anything on any topic, which is why he had to go back to Russia.
Preciously, Precious wrote: “I will grant you the story the passengers tried to retake the plane could be fabricated… It is far more likely they at least tried to stop the hijackers than everyone just sat in their seats and gave up.”
Greetings Precious.
… Below is PreZident Trump, up from Oval Office seat, and reinforcing Flight 93’s fabricated reality.
lf he pulls us a Nikola Tesla design, I’ll swallow my boxer, until then I’ll believe he smoked Mary Jane while gazing at at his navel.
Chomsky is, like many other somewhat “alternative” mainstream intellectuals, a 9-11 Gatekeeper, whose aim is to suppress awareness of 9-11 truth, i.e., that Israel DID IT.
Much like he pretends not to understand the pervasive influence and power of the Zionist power configuration.
In fact, he always downplays it.
I think you have to be a psychopath to believe that a natural mind can’t read you. Are you a psychopath?
Hey Mike,
There are many problems with this Anatoly Karlin guy, besides poor research…
The major issue is that this guy is intellectually DISHONEST. That simple.
Practical example:
Not long ago, this shill wrote here that, re the violence in Ukraine, the main culprit was really Putin and the Russian government! You know I ain’t one of these “team Russia” trolls, like Martyanov, FB, serGay Krieger and other Stalinists, but c’mon now!
The neocons created that mess, Russia had to react, and rightly so.
On the same screed, Karlin then said that Zionism had hardly played any roles in the M.East wars, except, a ‘little’ in Iraq!
Syria? Nah, just a ‘civil war’!
This despite the fact, for example, that he can inform himself on these matters from the excellent and serious P. Giraldi every damn week!
Karkin, that’s a guy out to deceive, to obfuscate.
Take care.
Much like you think you’re smart.
He is indeed very well known for suckin up people in position of power.
The correct explanation is Israeli terrorists. Like yourself.
Thank you for proving my point – direct “primary” radar has limited reach. “Secondary radar” covers areas beyond the reach of regular “primary radar” which depends on bouncing radio pulses off of aircraft in flight and displaying the reflections as an image.
As noted in your helpful quote, in areas not reached by (civilian) primary radar, aircraft-based transponders transmit details about the aircraft to ground stations in response to periodic radio queries from ground stations.
In other words, secondary radar has a greater reach than primary radar. QED.
Jeff Prager, seriously?
I’ve been watching for a while now when the issue of 9-11 comes up, the way you are always attacking serious researchers, like Harrit, Jones, Bollyn.
Either you have been deceived or you are yourself up to no good.
Gordon Duff is clearly a disinfo agent and so is Prager.
http://bollyn.com/the-antidote-for-disinfo/#article_14243
Yawnn…
Israel not “Jews”. While Sharon was certainly audacious/ruthless enough to be capable of it and the country he would stop at nothing to defend benefited from 9/11, and I have not read or listened to everything mentioned above, the evidence thus far is not direct and would at most justify the bastard verdict.
Have you done anything to find a direct evidence that could confirm your belief? And if you did, don’t you think that by sharing it would be great for the cause of the Truth movement?
What? There are plenty of conspiracy theories about that one, the most prominent one being the one pursued by the government, but there is also an alternative one that the FBI was behind the entire operation, recruited the actors, and even supplied the live explosives which were used in the attack.
Just because you don’t know about something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
And of course those theories are less well known because that attack (a) didn’t kill 3,000 people, (b) didn’t destroy the WTCs, (c) didn’t result in the massive deprivation of civil liberties, (d) didn’t result in the erection of a Big Brother surveillance state, and (e) didn’t result in the creation of the Permanent War State which has squandered trillions of dollars and millions of lives creating anarchy, despair and suffering throughout the MENA region.
Do you even know how ridiculous you sound?
Wizard of Deception, er, Oz?
He is a well known/regular neocon type shill here at Unz.
Best ignored.
Below is PreZident Trump, up from Oval Office seat, and reinforcing Flight 93′s fabricated reality.
“Fabricated reality” is an interesting choice of words. Care to back it up with some evidence?
I don’t see it. It was perfectly predictable that thousands of US soldiers would get killed, and many more maimed, in those wars. This moral angle is nonsensical.
You are getting mixed up in your exitement. You are the hasbara. There was just some garbage at the so-called Shanksville “crash” site and nothing else but a planted incriminating ID. Yes, ID found, no engine found, no luggage, no passengers Since there was none there you have to make believe it was scattered over all over the planet. Wiki will help you, perhaps you write for them when you are not answering a fire alarm like this. By the way a jet engine WAS found near the World Trade Center dropped off by a pick up truck on the sidewalk near a construction site. Photographed by the FBI of course, and there are photos of the FBI photographing the incorrect planted engine. But it was an engine from a 737 not any plane that matched what the the non-existent planes were supposed to be. Clever, but no cigar. You can buy junked 737 engines to fake evidence cheap. I am not saying it was not a good job, but you can’t fool everyone. You can fool yourself and you will see where that gets you.
Frankly, I am completely surprised by such a claim. People who can murder millions don’t care if they are Americans or foreigners, particularly since 9/11 was designed to kill mainly the lower caste, the firefighters. They purposefully waited until the important people had gotten out and the firefighters were all in there (not calling them out first) to pull the trigger.
You may also know that more Americans died in Cheney’s Iraq War than died on 9/11. So he murdered all of those Americans, you know, the ones he supposedly cares so much about in your worldview.
I know it’s hard to let go of old friendships, and to accept that you made very wrong conclusions about some profoundly evil people. Keep working on it and ignore you ever knew or liked the man and focus on the evidence of (a) command of control center, (b) total cover up of the event and no investigation at all, (c) constant lies such as “we had no idea planes could be flown into buildings” coming from his regime, and (d) numerous cruel, illegal wars that not only murdered millions of foreigners but 1,000s of Americans, all brought to you by Dick Cheney.
The face of evil:
Some few years after 2001, around 2005, I did try to use my cellphone twice while landing over different large cities, i.e., not nearly as high or moving nearly as fast as a jet during the flight apex, but still fairly high and moving fairly fast, and I did not even get a signal.
Your lucky moment. Besides calling me stupid, prove your genius is not founded upon baselessness. Try. I somehow think you don’t know mechanics. Hey, I’m stupid.
Thanks – Peripatetic commenter has kindly supplied the more technical view. Following the trajectory of the emitted radar (microwave) pulse:
(1) The strength of emitted radar pulses decreases with the square of the distance, i.e. ~ 1/(R^2). (^2 means power of two – apparently superscripts are unavailable in comments.)
(2) The radar pulse hits the aircraft, and is reflected in all directions. A tiny proportion of the reflected energy – the “echo” – happens to travel back in the direction of the radar installation.
(3) The echo strength again diminishes with the square of the distance from the point of origin (the aircraft), ~ 1/(R^2).
All this assumes that the signal can travel “line-of-sight” without intervening mountains etc. Line of sight range between a ground station and an aircraft traveling at an altitude of 35,000 feet is about 290 mi.
The transmit power of the aircraft-based transponder can be relatively small assuming high-powered receive antennas at the ground station. The Voyager 1 spacecraft (now beyond the orbit of Pluto) continues to communicate with a transmit power of probably less than 100 W. (Total power consumption for the entire Voyager 1 craft is 249 W).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Communication_system
I gave up on reading Karlin’s stuff a while ago when I got tired of his sophomoric, superficial style of “analysis.” At that time, my impression was one of sloppiness more than deliberate deception. However, that Putin/Ukraine example indeed seems too much of a whopper for sloppiness alone.
Cheers, M.
Your country buddy. Call me stupid. I think exterminating you is OK. Exterminating your grizzlies is not OK.
Ad hominem, seriously?
Everything in this world is uncertain. Any belief or course of action is the result of incomplete knowledge. Asking for mathematical proof of even a physicists’s plausibility argument leads to armchair-bound expounding of a thesis that no one will take seriously enough to act on. Litvenenko accused Putin and the Russian deep state of false flagging mass murder, and then he said Putin was a paedophile. He knew he was taking a risk , but it turned out he was taking a much bigger risk than he realised. That is life, you take calculated risks without guarantees, or pass your time as an armchair theorist.
He was talking about Dick Cheney’s motives and moral fibre. In that context, Iraqi lives were certainly not worth mentioning.
But thanks for reminding us to virtue-signal whenever possible. I’ll make a note.
Putin isn’t my idol. Russia isn’t my country. If Russians are fine with him, I’m fine with him.
Not quite idiot…
You specifically claimed in this in your comment…
That’s factually incorrect…first of all ‘primary’ radar is not ‘simple’…it’s technically called Air Route Surveillance Radar [ARSR] and has a range of 250 nautical miles…
Turning on a transponder DOES NOT extend this range, as you preposterously claim, since radio communication is limited by line of sight…this applies equally to radar or to the radio transmit/receive of a transponder…
The line of sight is found by this approximate formula…
So if the airplane is flying at 30,000 ft the maximum line of sight distance is 213 miles, which is 185 nm…
That’s the maximum that any radio coming from that airplane will reach…that includes the transponder, which is just a radio…
It’s also the maximum line of sight distance of the primary radar…
So it is self-evident that you are not increasing the range of the primary radar by means of the transponder, since the radar is fully capable of reaching that far…
You [and your idiot cousin] also may have missed the fact I already explained that the primary [ARSR] and secondary, called the Air Traffic Control Radar Beacon System [ATCRBS]…are two separate systems…but they are typically co-located, with the much smaller SSR antenna on top of the primary antenna…
The small antenna on top is the beacon that interrogates the aircraft transponder [ie secondary radar] and receives the reply signals back…it is considerably smaller and less powerful than the primary radar and also a lot cheaper…that is why they are placed to ‘fill gaps’ where there are no primary radars, such as over sparsely populated areas…
How anyone could possibly deduce from this that placing SEPARATE and standalone SSR antennas somehow increases the range of the primary antenna is truly beyond reason…it is village idiot territory…
That’s also why it makes no difference that the radar bounce back signal is weaker than a straight radio signal…the former a function of the exponent 0.25…and the latter the exponent 0.5…since they are completely separate systems, they are both designed to reach the maximum distance by LINE OF SIGHT…
However, the complexity is that they use directional signals, although that only changes the power by a factor …
The amount of power available to the aircraft to re-transmit is function of the solid angle subtended by the plane at its distance from the source divided by the solid angle covered by the beam at that distance. That solid angle is still proportional to 1/r^2 because the beam is not coherent …
One of the problems with my theory is this, Every single American being taxed is paying HUGE amounts of money to a bunch of folks that took power using this event. They still hold that power.
Another huge population of human beings is living with the serious effects of this event in the area and down wind… Not a few, Millions.
What did happen, What was used to make it happen and how they might find relief in a meaningful way, is at the top of my list of concerns…. Once i determined the entire squad of police dogs had died i took it very seriously…. I used a strict logic regime to craft my thinking on the matter, i went wherever the evidence directed and then polished the entire thing over years of looking into it.
If i gave a crap about your troll like childish screeds i would be ignoring your lame attempts to rile me, but the gravity of my works on this matter FAR outweigh any of those concerns.
There are a vast number of first responders with unbelievable sickness because of these fires and EVERY official yammering head on the matter is not looking into the matter at all, They all have a serious case of Gulf War Syndrome, The mountain of information on that little post 1990 medical condition is part of the hell these persons is marching…. THEY are the reason i have to deal with morons like you all the time… Their not being done right by YOUR government, They have been abandoned. Many of them cannot even keep up the cash flow to treat the damages done to them by doing this work… That is real sick.
SO yes TAC your going to have to see it’s not a responsibility of MINE to prove any of this, I have shown a very real explanation for just a few of the conditions i think have merit in regards their plight… You may think the entire thing is for me to prove but i do not. Having been through a meat grinder about this matter, having lived through the real world invasions my free speech has visited upon my person… Having a sense of compassion for men and women i will never meet, drove this issue forward You and any troll like you will never understand any of this.
I say those persons were severely damaged by a 99 day long Uranium-238 fire from those rubble piles. I say that the man MANY folks living down wind of that fire have a very serious and long term series of concerns to think about and deal with.
I wish i was wrong about all this, but after having is constantly come up the same time after time i saw the need, You don’t have those concerns, you have an agenda, a tasking order… Well eat it shit boy… I will never have to justify anything to the likes of you EVER.
My sadness is for all those dogs, they had no choice to avoid being killed. My sadness is for the men and women that did have a choice and worked their ass off to help and provide hope… But i have not one ounce of respect for your filthy ass.
So take your lame commentary and pound salt, The grown up folks want to talk here kid.
She even looks like Larry Silverstein in drag.
My thanks to you as well. I appreciate your point of view. I tend to be a skeptic myself. There are just too many inconsistencies in the 9/11 government story to be believable. I believe that in a dispassionate analysis, there is a point where the “official” explanation becomes unquestionably less likely than alternate explanations. This is not to say that once that point is reached, one will have the flawless, full explanation of events. In other words, if I can’t explain how every present got under every tree, it does not mean that therefore Santa Claus (the official story) must be true.
I trust your sincerity, so please indulge me in a little back and forth.
In my post (#9) of this thread, I posted information regarding the debris field of flight 93.
” The wide displacement of the plane’s debris, one explanation for which might be an explosion of some sort aboard prior to the crash. Letters – Flight 93 was carrying 7,500 pounds of mail to California – and other papers from the plane were found eight miles (13km) away from the scene of the crash. A sector of one engine weighing one ton was found 2,000 yards away. This was the single heaviest piece recovered from the crash, and the biggest, apart from a piece of fuselage the size of a dining-room table. The rest of the plane, consistent with an impact calculated to have occurred at 500mph, disintegrated into pieces no bigger than two inches long. Other remains of the plane were found two miles away near a town called Indian Lake. All of these facts, widely disseminated, were confirmed by the coroner Wally Miller.”
What is your opinion on how this squares with the “official” story of passengers charging the cockpit causing the plane to crash whole into the ground?
In my post #5 on this thread, I showed that 3 separate TV networks broadcast prior knowledge at about the same time that building 7 would collapse, when in fact, prior to that collapse, no such thing had ever occurred and has not occurred since then. Additionally, emergency personnel were similarly alerted to the future collapse after Larry Silverstein admitted that he told the disaster management team to “pull” building 7. (pull being a common use term for controlled demolition).
Given all of this, do you believe the “official” story that the building collapsed due to fire only?
Now if the “official” story is riddled with lies, what part of the “official” story should we believe? Should we believe any of it on faith, or should we thoroughly investigate? (of course we know that most of the physical evidence was destroyed as soon as possible)
I think they can program cruise missiles to turn.
https://www.wired.com/2008/06/mystery-cruise/
Below is from the link:
“Cruise missiles are guided via a series of pre-programmed waypoints – hence the occasion when BBC reporter John Simpson watched a
cruise missile in Baghdad fly
“down the street and turn left at the traffic lights.”
see post #9. A debris field of 8 miles. did someone sneak onto the crash site, steal crash debris, and scatter debris from the plane in an 8 mile swath?
So I guess you are aware of the elevator upgrades that were being carried out shortly before 9/11, and the general description of lots of construction happening after hours? And you are aware of the stay that some Israeli artists made in the Twin Towers?
https://www.newnationalist.net/2017/09/world-trade-centers-infamous-91st-floor-israeli-art-student-project/
Again, preciously consistent, Precious wrote: “Fabricated reality” is an interesting choice of words. Care to back it up with some evidence?”
Greetings from Scranton, Precious!
… Yea, me too, & thank you, indeed “fabricated reality” is an “interesting choice of words.”
… Fyi, my mind is made-up that all of ZUSA’s official “take” on the 9/11 event is fabricated reality!
… Regarding PreZident Trump’s Shanksville memorial address, I noted how he mentioned Flight 93 passengers having conducted a democratic (popular) vote that unknowingly weighed heavily upon the PNAC’s public & diabolical Middle East foreign policy-aspirations. (Zigh) That was a no-no…, Precious.
… Nonetheless, by a landslide margin, including a weird drop into Shanksville earth, the hijackers lost! And, later, according to the on-scene County Coroner, so was evidence of mass-casualty bodies. (Zigh)
… At present, I reckon Larry Silverstein would have been better served if the A-rab multiple-virgin seeking terrorists had top gun Neoconservative representation during the aerial voting. (zZigh).
… Uh, WTC-7 owner, Lucky Larry, could have avoided the inconvenient “Truther” embarrassment resulting from his having ordered “Pull it” to emergency responders.
… Selah, and now a station-break, selah, for a word from our GWOT sponsors!
Peripatetic commenter is, of course, correct.
For casual readers: (Civilian) conventional “primary” radar has certain coverage gaps due to the characteristics of radio wave propagation and the location of radar facilities.
Aircraft in those areas can still be tracked using “transponders” transmitting information from the aircraft itself.
An aircraft outside the coverage area of “primary radar” can effectively make itself invisible by turning off its transponder.
Military radar (especially airborne radar) has much wider and more accurate coverage than civilian systems.
There’s no “best fit”. Controlled demolition is the only explanation. Not only did Larry admit to it but the final NIST report confirms WTC7 free-fall.
Independent of that, people have already analysed the footage and came to the same, unmistakable, conclusion (fairly simple if you know the measurements of the building and the video frame-rate).
So we know for certain that WTC7 collapsed at free-fall for 2.25-2.5 seconds. That’s literally not possible unless the supporting structure was rigged and taken out (and in very precise split-second intervals). If someone is telling you that the top of the building was “grinding” through the lower floors – they’re not describing free-fall, period.
Furthermore: for a building to collapse into its footprint, all of this must happen evenly across the structure. That’s also impossible with fire unless you’re burning down a wooden outhouse (maybe).
Gwenyth Todd has a distinctive take on which U.S. government insiders were most likely culpable in 9/11:
http://noliesradio.org/archives/50756
I’m not sure what to make of Todd. The fact that the Washington Post ran an extended, sympathetic story about her and her claims to have thwarted a false flag aimed at provoking war with Iran makes me somewhat suspicious.
I saw these systems in class, In high school, From a 16mm film about physics.
Being the AV geek of my class i even loaded and ran the projector for that presentation to 30 other classmates.
They explained how the worlds tallest building was made possible by this system, they explained in a bit of detail about the computer and hydraulic system worked and how if there was a failure of this system the building would have to be evacuated because the motions would be unacceptable to the occupants.
The years after 2001 i was searching everything i could to locate ANY mention of these dampers and the effects they might have had on the collapse… From 2001 to today i have seen nothing other that the commentary i myself have produced.
From the event to the present day i have constantly hit wall after wall in digging up information about this series of devices and their maintenance… with the seriousness of these devices and the effects they would have had upon any collapse scenario, the black out was a glaring and very obvious attempt to hide their presence.
With that WTF moment to drive me i started to look at WHY would they hide an element that would bolster their lame assed ‘Pancake theory’… then i started to look at it’s possible design and makeup, Started to ask about the secondary blasts, started to think the fires and all that were related… Many years later i saw a whole series of films about Gulf war syndrome and the many explanations on that issue, then i saw the facts about what Uranium-238 could do as a FUEL to do work, Like cutting through tank armour.
I saw a video clip of a burn pit of U-238 machining chips being burnt to dispose of it…. That did it.
That series of videos made the connection for me to start trying to avoid using U-238 as a FUEL to sustain those fires that caused MOLTEN steel to be captured on video… Well enough time has passed and i don’t avoid this explanation any longer, It works and nothing else does in it’s place.
But Please have a go Anon.. You explain 99 day long fires under a steel rubble pile…
Just one plausible explanation is all i would need…
Unfortunately, none of that makes a difference, because of the way radar systems work.
See: http://www.sunavionics.com/NavTransPrinciples.html
The use of transponders depends on the almost simultaneous arrival of the reflected signal from the aircraft and the transponder response to the interrogation signal sent at the same time as the radar signal.
It seems it is ADS-B that will have all aircraft periodically broadcasting position information from GPS or whatever, and thus could allow them to be tracked at a greater range than radar could.
In that case, we’ll exterminate the diaspora also.
Ho hum.
It doesn’t square.
Amazingly I have to fully agree with Hitlerite LK on this…Karlin is indeed a pathetic poltroon…
They’re clear about where the dust came from. Given the dilution factors involved, the original quantity must be very substantial. Background noise will be absolutely zero, given the unique nature of this substance.
That’s absolutely impossible. Check out the SEM imagery on the paper. You can clearly see alternating layers of iron oxide and elemental aluminum. This is a thermodynamically unstable state of affairs and could in no way have arisen by chance. Saying this could have come together by chance is like saying the Rosetta stone inscriptions were the result of natural weathering.
Not this thermite. This is not anarchists cookbook thermite, this is some kind of extremely high grade material produced using a proprietary process that somehow manages to produce micron scale alternating layers of the two reactants. The source would have to be a research lab or a very specialized explosives company.
Another testimony to the grade of this material is the sharpness of the DSC trace. Regular thermite needs a magnesium fuse, whereas this one self-ignites at very low temperatures and is consumed completely and rapidly.
Material like this doesn’t grow on trees. It is really quite a special breed of explosive. The only other explanation for myself is that someone with a research lab who is specialized in nanothermite production deliberately produced and seeded their material into a bunch of manhattan dust samples and then arranged for them to be sent to the author. It’s a long shot, since the samples all came from different people and there have to be very very few people in the world capable of producing such a material.
Correct, except that this is notional and refers only to the TIMING. It is quite possible that NO actual reflection can be detected, e.g. because the aircraft is far away and not very reflective (e.g. a balloon). However, the “squitter” response from the balloon’s transponder would still show up on the radar screen where the (primary) reflected signal WOULD have been displayed if it had been stronger.
Correct. ADS-B also allows aircraft to monitor each other’s location, course etc. directly.
Sophisticated systems are available at a price to “spoof” and otherwise manipulate radar, transponder, ADS-B and other electronic signaling.
No. it sounds like someone facilitated it. it sounds like someone was a part of the core team.
It is possible that they examined all the surviving structural steel, and the pieces sent for scrap were not from close to the fire. The combined NIST reports amount to thousands of pages, and I have not read them all.
On behalf of “Precious,” The Scalpel intervened, surgically observed & inquired: “see post #9. A debris field of 8 miles. did someone sneak onto the crash site, steal crash debris, and scatter debris from the plane in an 8 mile swath?”
Greetings Scalpel!
… After President George W. Bush goofily spoke about his having “looked into Putin’s soul,” & publicly proclaimed he could “do business” with “Pootie-pute,” I have evidence that the Russians did it!
… The fuckers. Russkies avoided Mueller’s FBI, snuck into Flight 93’s crash site, “stole crash debris from the plane in an 8 mile swath.” The fuckers!
… And here America believes Russia only interfered with the 2017 ZUSA presidential election result. (Zigh) Am pissed, must call Maxine Waters and Nikki Haley!
… Thanks, Scalpel.
A Transponder has one very simple job, To transmit information like flight #, destination and altitude back to the center that is tracking it using primary radar, A transponder gives them in the center at the scopes a ‘Data block to help identify a contact fast….
It is not going to enhance or hinder primary radar contact. It is a tracking aid for the traffic control center and other aircraft in range to identify a radar contact without having to make queries and waste time… It is just a bunch of codes the on board FMC feeds so as to ease identification, Turning it off is not going to effect primary radar contact in ANY way. Turning off the transponder is just going to remove the data block not the primary return.
Lets cut to the chase. Israel did 9/11 to stop Saddam supporting Palestinians suicide bomb massacres that were taking Israel to the brink of a mass exodus of its population. OK, what should be done, if the US takes action against Israel, much of the Jewish Israeli population will move to the US.
It all depends how much weight we give to alternative hypotheses.
After reading the article about Litvenenko, I considered the new hypothesis to be plausible. This leaves a question mark in my mind every time a trail of reasoning depends upon the normal story.
If you’ve read the same article and you have good reasons to dismiss it out of hand then fair enough.
The Israel lobby wants the United States to attack nations and movements which Israel considers to be enemies.
The Israeli enemy list consists mostly of Shiites (Iran, Hezbollah, etc.), secular Arab nationalists (Saddam Hussein, Qaddafi, Assad, PFLP, etc.), European nationalists, and the Russians who are perceived as supporters of all these groups.
If 9/11 was an Israeli false flag, then why didn’t they frame Iran, Hezbollah, Assad, Saddam Hussein or some Palestinian group? Why didn’t they frame Russia, or White nationalists?
The last thing the Israel lobby wanted was for the US military to get distracted in Afghanistan.
The fact that the perpetrators were radical Sunni jihadists was a major embarrassment for the establishment. The neocons have a history of friendship with the world’s most radical Sunni regime, Saudi Arabia. The neocons also have a history of using radical Sunni jihadists for proxy wars, beginning with Brzezinski’s 1979 decision to arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan, and continuing in Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen.
But even if 9/11 itself was a false flag (which I do not concede), in the years since 1990 there have been dozens of other radical Sunni terrorist attacks on the American homeland, the homelands of our European brothers, and on American and European diplomatic outposts, resulting in hundreds of American and European deaths. During the same time period there have been no attacks on the American or European homelands or diplomatic outposts on the part of secular Arab nationalists, and only the Burgas attack appears to have been the work of Shiite jihadists.
Again, the neocons want war with secular Arab nationalists such as Assad and Shiites such as Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. On the other hand, they view ISIS and Al-Qaeda as useful proxies to be used to weaken Iran, Syria, and Russia.
If they went to all the trouble of carrying out dozens of false flags, why didn’t they even once frame the people the are eager to destroy?
The simplest explanation is, all of these radical Sunni terrorist attacks are exactly what they seem to be – a continuation of the 1368 year old Sunni war against European Christian civilization which began in 650 AD when Muawiya sent the first Muslim fleets to attack the Greek islands.
These terrorist attacks embarrass the establishment, because the establishment would prefer to use Sunni terrorists as assets against Russia, European nationalists, secular Arab nationalists, Shiites, and anyone else perceived as an enemy of Israel.
By denying the reality of radical Sunni terrorism, you 9/11 conspiracy theorists are helping the neocons
What this fluid is, is a matter of conjecture.
The NIST report disagrees. I do not have the time to read the thousands of pages in full and look for flaws. However, I can be certain that, with billions of dollars at stake, the insurers for WTC 1/2/7 paid experts to review the NIST report in the hope of discovering malfeasance, such as the cover-up of a demolition. No such thing was found, and they had to pay Larry Silverstein’s claim in full.
Yup. It’s all your own invention.
I’m happy for you to indulge your fantasies, but no need to involve us. Thanks.
It’s what appears to happen in at least a couple of the videos of the South Power penetration. This video analyzes one of them:
Note: I am not a Simon Shack acolyte, but I think this is one of his more sober videos.
I think Genghis6199’s 9/11 Taboo has additional footage showing the nose apparently going through the building, if that’s currently streamable anywhere.
If those insurers had disagreed with the NIST report, how do you think the government regulators to whom they are subject would have treated them?
There are lots of questions surrounding that bombing, but it wasn’t quite as “searing” an event as 9/11:
https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/28/nyregion/tapes-depict-proposal-to-thwart-bomb-used-in-trade-center-blast.html
Invention or not it does answer questions unlike anything you or your cohorts have produced.
At least i have tried.
Everyone here can see the truth, Everyone here can make assessments and judgments about the things they have seen….
I don’t bother trying to convince the likes of your ilk, I have other targets to offer my comments and observations.
This sort of thinking is just a starting point, i have faith the right set of eyes will encounter this theory, the set of eyes will have a corroborating part to the puzzle, They will move the ball even further.
Times are coming for the forces trying to hide all of the things that they have done, Piece by piece we will shine the lamps of truth into the dark spaces and reveal the evil at work behind the veils.
Not one troll commenter will ever slow this process. All they can do is draw the gaze of the interested and provide reason to dig further into the subject.
Why, it’s almost as if the authorities wanted the bombing to occur and kill people.
J.Ross says:
Exactly. Investigative journalist C. Bollyn, who’s been investigating the 9-11 terror attacks since 2001, has stated that in an operation of this magnitude the planners had to be able to control the investigation, interpretation of the events, and litigation.
Who had the means to do exactly that? Israel and its agents.
Sean Stone and Christopher Bollyn on 9/11, Israel & the Mossad
On the afternoon of 9/11 the President of United Airlines announced that the plane in question had landed safely in Ohio. This went out on the news. You are making things up. You are not a skeptic grandma. You are a wolf.
All right, I guess I was wrong. I thought that the conspiracy community focuses only on success stories like 9/11 out of desire to participate in creating theories that have potential to bring them fame and fortune, as opposed to less successful terrorist attacks that don’t have the lure of stardom associated with them.
“It is possible that they examined all the surviving structural steel, and the pieces sent for scrap were not from close to the fire. ”
The entire buildings were destroyed top to bottom. To suggest that only the steel from the fire affected floors were necessary to investigate the collapse is ridiculous. You don’t destroy evidence in a crime that killed 3,000 people unless you are trying to cover something up.
“What this fluid is, is a matter of conjecture.”
But it is not a matter of complete conjecture. It is a molten flow and it would interesting to know what it is. NIST in their August 2006 FAQ wrote, “Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace.”
So NIST is saying that it might be molten aluminum from the plane, but molten aluminum is silvery, not orange or red. However, maybe it was mixed with organics and this caused the apparent color to change. NIST did not do any experiments to verify this. Others have done such experiments and the results do not support NIST’s conclusions. Even the most basic aspects of their investigation are not supported.
“The NIST report disagrees.”
Possibly, but what is NIST’s explanation for the complete collapse of the towers? Once you look into the matter you discover that they stop their analysis at the point of ‘collapse initiation’, they actually do not model the complete collapse. It is more of a building performance report than an inquiry into it’s collapse.
Hi Lysias – good to see you here at UR!
As for the Samson option, I never quite bought into it. They have what – six nuclear subs and the rest of their nukes around Dimona? A concerted preemptive strike could take them all out.
What is more worrying are the nukes hidden in Israeli embassies around the world. I seem to recall something about strong radioactive readings around the embassy in New York – except I can’t seem to find it now…
Fucking amazing…the jackass goes ‘hee haw’…and the tree monkey claps his hands in delight…
Do you fools actually have any material to back up any of these amazing gas eruptions…?
Because the primary radar [reflected signal] and the secondary ‘radar’ [ie transponder beacon] are on completely separate frequencies…[1215 to 1400 MHz for primary and 1030 MHz secondary send, 1090MHz secondary receive…]
There is also a specification for pulse repetition interval between radars based on how close they are…
That’s from the FAA ‘Quick Radar Guide’…LOL
This to minimize problems like FRUIT and garble…which can make nonexistent aircraft appear on the screen, or an aircraft close to another to disappear…this is just a small taste of some of the problems that can happen with ‘secondary’ radar…
For a fuller discussion, see this…
Let me first ask just exactly what your formal background is in the science of physics…or any other of the numerous specific engineering disciplines that are involved here…?
crickets.wav
I don’t think you’re going to hear from Mr. “Intelligent” again.
“You are giving way to much credit to your government. They are not that smart to pull off.”
You are right in one regard. The 9/11 attack was a sloppy joe inside job. It is very easy to see that the official story is false once you look into it. The success comes from their power over the media and their ability fool people after the event.
There is an old saying that appeared on British programs like Yes Minister or something:
Never believe anything until the government denies it
Most of us don’t engage in “my dick is bigger that your dick” competitions like you do.
You seem to be smart enough to get the point that you have missed. I have known Ron Unz long enough to trust his honesty and his intellect. So… since I don’t mind at all what may turn out to be the truth – though I would take time to consider the consequences if some of the scenarios imagined were proven**: especially ones that involved complicity of Cheney and Rumsfeld – I look to someone I trust to do a major part of the analysis.
OK, my approach may be equivalent to what would be lazy if I accepted that I had a duty to find the truth. But I don’t. My conceit, if you like, is to enjoy puncturing bad or badly expressed arguments. A mild version of that is to point out that someone has missed the point or failed to answer the question asked. I think I have read/viewed some of the material you have kindly linked. But, given your presumed mastery, I would be pleased to read your succinct version of how it came to be that the tower with the bigger weight above impact point came down so much quicker. (I would put any idea that it was known in advance exactly which floors were going to be struck as loony tunes stuff like virtually all the no-planes versions).
**Cp. the discovery of 99.9 per cent proof that FDR actively sought the Pearl Harbour attack down to the accepted loss of battleships and crews and the preservation of the carriers. That would surprise me but not cause a major reset as I suppose it still would for many Americans. (But isn’t that post 1965 immigrant flood marvellous? Even more than the expected 50 per cent of 18 year olds who don’t know who FDR was.)
Thank you…this is what the controller’s scope looks like…
And here’s what those symbols mean…
The data blocks provide the aircraft identifier and altitude…
All of which is still far more likely than mammalian glands (not just a tube network but one with one exit, on the outside of the body, and producing not just a liquid, but a liquid which provides the nutrients offspring require to survive, etc.) and sucking (which requires about 40 muscles movements to coordinate) developing concurrently by chance, being dominant enough to be passed on to children, yet still remain compatible enough to mate with unmutated members of the species – all of which one is supposed to believe as part of the evolution religion.
I think the odds of a mutation like that are probably less than 1 divided by the number of atoms in all of the galaxies combined.
Thanks. Always good to hear from someone who sounds as though he knows what he’s talking about and does so honestly. You do leave open the possibility that the Arabs, or some of them, were provided with the sophisticated thermite product by the Mossad or other facilitators. I can think of several low probability but not impossible reasons for that.
I’m glad to hear that another person wasn’t trying to impersonate you. It wouldn’t be the first time such a ruse has been used here to discredit a commenter.
The tsunami of endless diversionary theories is not about selling books.
It’s about Jews lying collectively in large numbers trying to keep from expelled to a homeland that has been turned into a green glass parking lot.
The Jews are busted seven ways to Sunday.
Soon there will be a Jew hanging from every lamp post. Millions of Americans (especially veterans) are praying to hasten that day.
They did it to themselves.
Unz is trying to save himself by being a last minute convert. He’ll hang, too. No camps this time.
Thermite/thermate is a non-starter as a tower takedown. Conventional explosives (thermite included) will not convert steel into dust. Judy Woods (and DEW) is close but the technology is questionable even in 2018, as is the power required. A much better demo device is a full-size nuke UNDERGROUND. Google “Sedan Nuclear” to see what an underground nuke explosion looks like. If you want an almost complete explanation of the who and how of tower and WTC7 takedowns, read D. Khalezov’s book (available online). Warning: The book is long and should not be attempted if you have a short attention span, it’s not for the tl;dr crowd.
The Pentagon attack involved both a plane and a missile — this is a detail left out by Khalezov. Also, you should acquaint yourself with the Kursk tragedy (August 2000) to get a full understanding of who was involved in 9/11 (Whose subs stole the missiles from the Kursk?). The Russians covered up the Kursk truth.
Multiple mini-nukes won’t work; the first mini-nuke to explode will take out the others unless widely separated.
What makes you think I don’t understand that?
The original question was how “secondary radar” differs from “primary radar” in terms of range and other capabilities. Peripatetic commenter and Eagle Eye addressed this in some detail.
Importantly for present purposes, we all agree that there are some areas in the U.S. NOT fully covered by (civilian) “primary radar.” In such areas, aircraft can effectively make themselves invisible (to civilian radar) by turning off their transponders. Similarly, it is possible to issue spoof transponder signals that would be interpreted as coming from an (actual or fictitious) aircraft.
Protocols to avoid interference between adjacent radar stations may be interesting to nerds, but are of no relevance to the basic function of “secondary radar.”
Thanks for keeping the narrative plausible. I am surprised at the number of commenters who disagree with you though UR commenters are obviously not a standard sample of Americans or English-literate persons generally. As you appear to approach certainty on the buildings having been demolished with explosives I hope that you as prosecuting counsel, or technical adviser to the prosecutor, insist on preparation for the cross examination by precise explanation of how the buildings were prepared for demolition including coping with uncertain levels of aircraft impact, why demolition was necessary for the plotters’ purposes [Silverstein needs another look of course], whether WTC7 was demolished and, if so, how that fitted into the overall plot.
Yet it has the further amazing properties of selectively not igniting while leaving behind little unconsumed telltale traces of itself.
Indeed it appears this nano thermite leaves behind the little nano-magic-passports only in WTC dust samples collected haphazardly and provided out of the blue by private citizens, and not in WTC dust collected and controlled in a scientific manner by the U.S. Geological Survey.
https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf
Well, that settles it.
After all, who can forget the blinding bright flashes all the way down as the twin towers seemed to rip themselves apart from the top, erupting downward and outward in cascades of dust and debris that showered out well beyond their own footprints?
What was it that propelled that shard of steel into Deutche Bank and put all the holes in the Winter Garden atrium?
What happened to Building 6?
Image: Wikipedia
Where were all the bright flashes?
Seriously, that is the basis of the “nose survived” claim? LMAO, to a large extent Unz is right, all these “brilliant observations” (as if, if it were a computer simulation, they would have the nose come out the other side) really should just damage the cause.
I have basically all the videos of WTC 1 being hit and this one looks doctored. Some black smoke came out the front, yes, and since it blasted out a window or other smaller hole it has a cylindrical shape to it – but that definitely is not the nose.
Fail.
That’s ok, I will be the first to point out i suck at typing…
That the the NIST WTC investigators never investigated the possible role of nanothermite in the destruction of the WTC buildings is particularly interesting in view of the following ten facts:
NIST was working with the Lawrence Livermore National laboratory (LLNL) to test and characterize sol-gel nano-thermites*, at least as early as 1999 (Tillotson et al 1999).
Forman Williams, the lead engineer on NIST’s advisory committee, and the most prominent engineering expert for Popular Mechanics, is an expert on the deflagration of energetic materials and the “ignition of porous energetic materials” (Margolis and Williams 1996, Telengator et al 1998, Margolis and Williams 1999). Nano-thermites are porous energetic materials. Additionally, Williams’ research partner, Stephen Margolis, has presented at conferences where nano-energetics are the focus (Gordon 1999). Some of Williams’ other colleagues at the University of California San Diego, like David J. Benson, are also experts on nano-thermite materials (Choi et al 2005, Jordan et al 2007).
Science Applications International (SAIC) is the DOD and Homeland Security contractor that supplied the largest contingent of non-governmental investigators to the NIST WTC investigation. SAIC has extensive links to nano-thermites, developing and judging nano-thermite research proposals for the military and other military contractors, and developing and formulating nano-thermites directly (Army 2008, DOD 2007). SAIC’s subsidiary Applied Ordnance Technology has done research on the ignition of nanothermites with lasers (Howard et al 2005).
In an interesting coincidence, SAIC was the firm that investigated the 1993 WTC bombing, boasting that — “After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, our blast analyses produced tangible results that helped identify those responsible (SAIC 2004).” And the coincidences with this company don’t stop there, as SAIC was responsible for evaluating the WTC for terrorism risks in 1986 as well (CRHC 2008). SAIC is also linked to the late 1990s security upgrades at the WTC, the Rudy Giuliani administration, and the anthrax incidents after 9/11, through former employees Jerome Hauer and Steven Hatfill.
Arden Bement, the metallurgist and expert on fuels and materials who was nominated as director of NIST by President George W. Bush in October 2001, was former deputy secretary of defense, former director of DARPA’s office of materials science, and former executive at TRW.
Of course, DOD and DARPA are both leaders in the production and use of nano-thermites (Amptiac 2002, DOD 2005). And military and aerospace contractor TRW has had a long collaboration with NASA laboratories in the development of energetic materials that are components of advanced propellants, like nano-gelled explosive materials (NASA 2001). TRW Aeronautics also made fireproof composites and high performance elastomer formulations, and worked with NASA to make energetic aerogels.
Additionally, Bement was a professor at Purdue and MIT. Purdue has a thriving program for nano-thermites (Son 2008). And interestingly, at MIT’s Institute for Soldier Nanotechnology, we find Martin Z. Bazant, son of notable “conspiracy debunker” Zdenek P. Bazant (MIT 2008), who does research on granular flows, and the electrochemical interactions of silicon. Zdenek P. Bazant is interested in nanocomposites as well (Northwestern 2008), and how they relate to naval warfare (ONR 2008). MIT was represented at nano-energetics conferences as early as 1998 (Gordon 1998).
Bement was also a director at both Battelle and the Lord Corporation. Battelle (where the anthrax was made) is an organization of “experts in fundamental technologies from the five National Laboratories we manage or co-manage for the US DOE.” Battelle advertises their specialization in nanocomposite coatings (Battelle 2008). The Lord Corporation also makes high-tech coatings for military applications (Lord 2008). In 1999, Lord Corp was working with the Army and NASA on “advanced polymer composites, advanced metals, and multifunctional materials” (Army 1999).
Hratch Semerjian, long-time director of NIST’s chemical division, was promoted to acting director of NIST in November 2004, and took over the WTC investigation until the completion of the report on the towers. Semerjian is closely linked to former NIST employee Michael Zachariah, perhaps the world’s most prominent expert on nano-thermites (Zachariah 2008). In fact, Semerjian and Zachariah co-authored ten papers that focus on nano-particles made of silica, ceramics and refractory particles. Zachariah was a major player in the Defense University Research Initiative on Nanotechnology (DURINT), a groundbreaking research effort for nano-thermites.
NIST has a long-standing partnership with NASA for the development of new nano-thermites and other nano-technological materials. In fact, Michael Zachariah coordinates this partnership (CNMM 2008).
In 2003, two years before the NIST WTC report was issued, the University of Maryland College Park (UMCP) and NIST signed a memorandum of understanding to develop nano-technologies like nano-thermites (NIST 2003). Together, NIST and UMCP have done much work on nano-thermites (NM2 2008).
NIST has their own Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST 2008). Additionally, NIST’s Reactive Flows Group did research on nanostructured materials and high temperature reactions in the mid-nineties (NRFG 1996).
Richard Gann, who did the final editing of the NIST WTC report, managed a project called “Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology Program”, both before and after 9/11. Andrzej Miziolek, another of the world’s leading experts on nano-thermites (Amptiac 2002), is the author of “Defense Applications of Nanomaterials”, and also worked on Richard Gann’s fire suppression project (Gann 2002). Gann’s project was sponsored by DOD’s Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), an organization that sponsored a number of LLNL’s nano-thermite projects (Simpson 2002, Gash et al 2003).
As part of the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer, NIST partners with the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Indian Head (NSWC-IH) on Chemical Science and Technology (FLCTT 2008). NSWC-IH is probably the most prominent US center for nano-thermite technology (NSWC 2008). In 1999, Jan Puszynski, a scientist working for the DURINT program, helped NSWC-IH design a pilot plant to produce nano-size aluminum powder. It was reported that “At that time, this was [the] only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the United States” (SDSMT 2001), however, private companies like Argonide and Technanogy were also known to have such capabilities.
———
* Nano-thermites, are high-tech energetic materials made by mixing ultra fine grain (UFG) aluminum and UFG metal oxides; usually iron oxide, molybdenum oxide or copper oxide, although other compounds can be used (Prakash 2005, Rai 2005). The mixing is accomplished by adding these reactants to a liquid solution where they form what are called “sols”, and then adding a gelling agent that captures these tiny reactive combinations in their intimately mixed state (LLNL 2000). The resulting “sol-gel” is then dried to form a porous reactive material that can be ignited in a number of ways.
That’s because we were talking about your lies about what the NIST said.
You seem to be making this up completely. Surprise.
You want me to explain to you what the NIST report said? How do you know it’s fraudulent if you haven’t even read it?
The interior floors failed first and when the outside supports of the north face completely failed after 1.75 seconds, there was a brief period of free fall. The video evidence shows that the building’s interior collapsed first, so I don’t know why you are playing dumb on this.
And you idiots who claim demolition might want to show us ten silent explosives that were invented for this super secret illuminati demolition job. Watch out for chemtrails, I guess.
I hope you got off on your little fantasy, because the only ones who will be hanging are Nazi punks like you. You’re fucked, Adolf.
From a 2018 vantage point it may look as though the NIST report exhibited a number of failures in the investigation(s) and clear ups that might be evidence of wrongdoing. But it is worth envisaging the approach of people who might have genuinely thought the connection to Al Qaeda was so clear that they shouldn’t risk getting sidetracked or delayed by a lot of irrelevant and misinformed noise. And limitations on the authority of A to prevent B getting on with e.g. clearing the sites needs to be considered too in any calm analysis.
Tell me this was not pre-planned:
Totally agree. Writing articles about IQ tests exposing the idiocy of masses,
and not passing himself the “9/11 test” after looking at it for 17(!) years is a
contradiction that has no decent explanation.
Could it not be that these things are international working groups loosely catering to a whole variety of interests, private and state? Everyone benefits, but no one gets exactly what they want. Perhaps they even have to dilute it a bit each time a new player comes on board and demands their share. Who said running criminal enterprise was easy?
Stop calling people trolls just because they point out that your theories are baseless, and stop muddying the water with these made up mini-nuke style ‘conspiracy theories’.
None of the writers of the Popular Mechanics article have any serious academic credentials.
But David Ray Griffin, a former theology professor, is some kind of expert on structural mechanics, fire safety, demolition, and aviation?
There needed to be some overarching structure to tie together the necessary arms – airport security, media, demolitions, property ownership, NORAD, Pentagon, White House, etc. Israel did not have the capacity to provide everything on that list which is clear proof that the working group was bigger than just Israel.
Was the working group deliberately assembled specifically to carry out this particular project, or was it cut out from a larger preexisting network?
In the first case, who would have had the impetus to start it? PNAC looks most likely.
In the second case, what is the collective identity of the larger group? No idea, but they must be ridiculously powerful.
Prior to 9/11, when nano-thermite was ostensibly used to bring down the World Trade Center towers, was there ever any use of it made for demolition? Has there ever been any use of it in an actual fielded weapon?
Did one of the greatest crimes in the history of the World intimately depend on a completely unproven technology? Is that what we are being asked to believe?
No…the point is you and your retarded cousin are full of shit…and have been talking all kinds of bullshit which I have had to refute…
You both now seem to have changed your tune, from the previous ‘transponder increases primary radar range’…which is total bullshit…to now some crapola about turning off transponders to make airplanes ‘disappear’…
That is now a new line of equally useless horseshit from you…being radar invisible is IMPOSSIBLE in the busy airspace of the northeast US which is the area of interest…if you had read that article from the professional controller I linked to, you would have found this…
Here is a map from his presentation showing just the ‘Cleveland Center’ air route traffic control centre [ARTCC]…that’s showing just the long range radars [ARSR] and not the shorter range [50 to 70 nm range] terminal control radars located at airports [TRACON]…and which outnumber the center radars by a wide margin…
Count those radar sites and see how far you are going to get without being seen in the northeast…more fucking useless gas eruptions…
This is supposed to be a factual discussion and when technical topics are involved I’m not going to sit idly by while a couple of whackadoodles stink up the joint with all kinds of bullshit…that doesn’t serve the interest of folks here who may be trying to separate the wheat from the chaff…
Your best bet is to shut the fuck up, unless you know what you are yapping about…
Depends on your understanding of evolution. When consciousness gets involved, atomic events stop being so random. I grant you that random mutation would never have resulted in anything useful before the heat death of the universe, but I contend that consciousness’s cathexis and ‘will to power’ could accelerate the process dramatically.
Science goes wonky when life gets involved.
I think the quantities we’re dealing with are too big for hand luggage.
Also, I don’t think a cargo hold full of thermite would have much effect other than an absolutely massive white flash and lots of burned eyebrows. It would need to be prepositioned on structural elements to work properly, which means Silverstein would need to ok the operation. At that point, do we really care if the demolitions team was Arab or Israeli?
It depends on a type of moral hazard. Giving weight to theories of what happened when one is reading articles about historical events is armchair, so it does not really matter if whether you follow the beaten path or favour a heterodox theory, because nothing is at stake. While knowingly playing a dangerous game Litvenenko formulated a bad hypothesis of some kind that led to him thinking he was safer that he actually was. Yet, we can be quite sure he was at least sincere in whatever erroneous belief led to his death, because he knew his life might be at stake.
The trouble with people promulgating theories from armchairs is you do not even know they set any store in the theories they are telling you about. One might almost say the opposite, that the less the people they accuse of being terrible criminals actually are, the less danger they are in and so one should assume such accusations are less than honest.
He’s hardly last minute. Jews like Unz, Atzmon and Finkelstein have done way more for the good of the world than 99% of gentiles. We owe them.
Or Iran, for that matter. If I were a Mossad agent (and I’m sure half the board will now come to the conclusion that I am), plotting one of the most infamous crimes in history, why wouldn’t I make Iran the chief culprit, rather than a bunch of Sunni Arabs from Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
In the real world, no reaction goes 100%. Explosives are messy, and always eject unburned fragments.
You trust them? I don’t trust them any more than I trust Popular Mechanics or the 9/11 Commission.
Great question. It’s like someone asked earlier about the 1990’s bombing of the WTC. There may be something to see there but we’ve spent so much time on the big issues that we haven’t got around to it yet.
We can see some before building 7 comes down. Remember, this material would be against the support columns which means it was buried under the fireproofing and exterior cladding. That material would have been sufficient to stop a brief burst of light.
I’m always fascinated when people bring this up.
Imagine you’re an air national guard F-15 pilot; you fly a few weekends a year. Or even an active duty air-force pilot, brought up and trained in peace-time. You’ve trained to shoot down enemy aircraft. Are you going to be quick to shoot down an american airliner in american air-space full of american civilians? Innocent men, women, and children? When nobody has ever done that before? You want to be the first one?
Honestly, I would think less of this country if fighter pilots were that eager to follow orders like that, or keen to carry out that kind of duty.
Yes, that’s interesting. What’s your take? I’ll make some suggestions:
A) They considered nanothermite but found no evidence.
B) They never considered the possibility. After all, this was just an airplane terrorist attack.
C) They wrote the report as directed.
“From a 2018 vantage point it may look as though the NIST report exhibited a number of failures in the investigation(s) and clear ups that might be evidence of wrongdoing.”
From a 2005 vantage point it appeared that the NIST report on the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 was problematic. In other words, they were problematic from the get go for those paying attention.
“…approach of people who might have genuinely thought the connection to Al Qaeda was so clear that they shouldn’t risk getting sidetracked or delayed by a lot of irrelevant and misinformed noise.”
What does this have to do with the NIST report? The collapse of WTC 1 and 2 is an engineering or physics problem. It has nothing to do with Al Qaeda.
Thank you for the insightful in depth response to my interrogatory. LOL
The reason these threads go on and on without getting anywhere so long is the participants are happier talking about variations on magic bullets and controlled demolitions than what to do to the culprits.
Assume the case against Israel is proven beyond reasonable doubt, and let us discuss what should be done to Israel.
This was the best part:
– “NIST concedes that they found no evidence for explosives”
– “So, then we asked them: well, did you look”?
– “And they said: no, we did not look for explosives, or residues of explosives”.
Are you on mushrooms…?
I don’t presume to speak for Mr Unz but he has said only that the official story seems no longer rationally supportable…and some speculation as to the WHO part…
You are putting the cart way out in front of the horse…the government claims to be in possession of THREE INTACT flight recorders iirc…out of a total of eight…nobody has ever seen those nor been allowed to examine them…
They likewise claim to have recovered ’90 percent’ of the wreckage of that Flight 93 that was miraculously swallowed whole…and even the earth covered itself back up…[but they dug out the pieces while nobody was looking and are keeping that in ‘storage’]…
I daresay that if you are talking about legalities and procedure then let us start by examining the HARD EVIDENCE…
Yesssir Boss… I will get right on that , I have a memo drafted and sent on up to head office straight away… Mr troll.
Everyone can see you and all of them can fathom your ilk…
Stop looking like one and folks will stop treating you like one.
I have a very strict rule about a commenter with no name…. ANON gets you very little respect.
You can say all sorts of blatant stuff, But with out a real name like me you don’t have the same veracity do you.
No, the only unproven technology that you are being asked to believe that completely destroyed three steel-framed high-rises on 9/11 is fire.
Thermite or nano-thermite might have been used but conventional demolition explosives could have been used as well. But you can actually see a molten flow that appears to be thermite/thermate flowing out of the South Tower a few minutes before it collapsed. However, the examination of the dust and steel components do show that thermite was most likely used. Plus standard thermite was used to bring the Skyride Tower in 1935.
see post #9. A debris field of 8 miles. did someone sneak onto the crash site, steal crash debris, and scatter debris from the plane in an 8 mile swath?
I totally accept that flight 93 was shot down by a missile. I watched Trump’s tribute that Chuck provided. Trump identifies the crash site, but he never says it is the only crash site, nor does he identify the size of the debris field.
“Why free fall? Because all supports had failed”
Okay, but free-fall only occurred for 2.25-2.5 seconds then it met resistance. If all the supports failed then where did the resistance come from?
“You seem to be making this up completely. Surprise.”
Have you actual seen the NIST computer model of the WTC7 collapse? It shows an east to west failure and extreme deformations in the building. None of this is seen in the actual videos of the collapse.
“The video evidence shows that the building’s interior collapsed first,”
Are you saying that the interior just started to move first or are you saying that it completely collapsed to the ground before the roofline started moving? If the entire interior collapsed first then you would have seem the huge plumes of dust and debris come up from the building. But you don’t see that.
p.s. This is the NIST computer model of the collapse. Notice the east to west failure and then the extreme deformations in the roofline and exterior. None of this is observed in the actual collapse.
Just read your underpants story on your blog…thumbs up…
Ron Unz:
I doubt anybody has done anywhere near as much as Bollyn has to expose the WHO and the WHY of 9-11.
Lack of resources and stylistic problems apart, Bollyn’s book is chock full of key information, and he has made it available online for FREE. http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book
You should consider making the link available in the updated version of the above article.
Bollyn also has a new book out, titled ‘The War on Terror: The Plot to Rule the Middle East’, with a foreword by Dr. Alan Sabrosky.
Bollyn has paid a heavy price for digging into the WHO & WHY of 9-11.
http://bollyn.com/the-bollyn-trial-2/
I said Israel and its agents, i.e, the US Zionist network and its allies within the ZUSA… they sure as hell did and do have the capacity to pull something like that off.
Thanks for your civil logical reply. I think I was put off the Silverstein connection early on by the nonsense some commenters came up with about his “pulling it” remark and overstatement about his insurance arrangements. But he does seem to be rightly in the picture if he/they really got a major financial win while adding value enormously by clearing up the asbestos problem once and for all. I can believe that it wasn’t expected that the impact of the planes alone would be expected to be enough for a total write off but would want to know the detail. Other loose ends include the use not made by the insurance companies of evidence of demolition.
… Regarding PreZident Trump’s Shanksville memorial address, I noted how he mentioned Flight 93 passengers having conducted a democratic (popular) vote that unknowingly weighed heavily upon the PNAC’s public & diabolical Middle East foreign policy-aspirations. (Zigh) That was a no-no…, Precious… Nonetheless, by a landslide margin, including a weird drop into Shanksville earth, the hijackers lost! And, later, according to the on-scene County Coroner, so was evidence of mass-casualty bodies. (Zigh) … At present, I reckon Larry Silverstein would have been better served if the A-rab multiple-virgin seeking terrorists had top gun Neoconservative representation during the aerial voting. (zZigh).
I tip my hat to you for your colorful description. Let me see if I can identify what you say is fabricated in more plain words. This is what Trump said verbatim…
The passengers and crew members came together, took a vote, and they decided to act.
Do you believe the passengers and crew members did not act at all? Do you believe they sat in their seats and passively awaited their final fate? Or do you believe they did act in some manner, but that they didn’t vote beforehand? Do you think an alpha male on that plane simply said, “This is what we are going to do…” ?
I will also point out what Trump says a bit later…
They stopped the forces of terror and defeated this wicked, horrible, evil plan. Flight 93 crashed yards from where we stand, just 20 minutes from the US capital. Through their sacrifice the 40 saved the lives of countless Americans and they saved our capital from a devastating strike.
Even though flight 93 was likely destroyed by an air-to-air missile, Trump’s statements above are not fabricated reality. The passengers on flight 93 did still stop the forces of terror and defeat wicked, horrible, evil plan. For all we know, the missile only gets an assist. Or it may have catastrophically killed them just before they could radio they had taken back the plane.
And Flight 93 did crash yards from where Trump stood…it also crashed hundreds of yards from where Trump stood…and it also crashed thousands of yards from where Trump stood…in fact it could even have crashed as much as 8 miles from where Trump stood. But the fact it crashed in an 8 mile area does not mean it is fabricated reality that it crashed yards from where Trump stood, because in reality it did crash yards from Trump stood. He didn’t say it only crashed yards from where he stood.
You can accuse Trump of not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth…but I find your claim of “fabricated reality” to be mostly wrong on my fact check.
David Ray Griffin has written some dozen books on the topic and has spent years researching all the nooks and crannies. But if you believe that he is wrong in some of his conclusions you are free to say where.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has over 3,000 signatories.
https://www.ae911truth.org/
I would think that we do, or should care. Know your enemy!
No, fire is a proven mechanism for bringing down buildings. Nano-thermite is not. Again – has it ever been used for demolition? Why isn’t thermite generally used for demolition. Has nano-thermite even ever been used in a weapon?
I am aware of no evidence for either of those.
I’ve never seen it. I’ve heard people saying they saw it in videos, but I never saw it in those videos. A lot of people don’t know what they’re looking at; they have poor powers of observation and poor judgement.
You misunderstand the hypothesis. That is conscientious staff with an inadequate budget “knowing” that there was an Al Qaeda attack which led to the collapse so concentrating on showing how the connection worked causally. That sort of human weakness crops up time and time again.
First of all, you do not know me nor anything I’ve been through so spare me your diatribe and misdirections from what YOU have proposed–UTTER NONSENSE FAIRYTALE BASED SOLELY ON IMAGINATION AND SUPPOSITION BUT VOID OF FACTS OR SUPPORTING MATERIAL I’ve tried to point out the flaws in your argument in hopes that you would intuitively get it, but it seems that you’ve doubled-down on your delusions instead.
In trying to play the role of a protagonist you’ve just exposed the thin lining in your argument and by extension your desperate attempts to obfuscate my rebuttal to you, which is grounded in reality. Do you care to respond to by rebuttal with some sort of an argument based on science and not a diversion, which you seen to be accustomed to?
Is Ed Asner an architect or an engineer?
While I am convinced that the Nazis did single out the Jews for extermination based on evidence I discovered in my career as a historian, I accept that as a parallel effort the Nazis cooperated with zionist founders of Israel and that a number of the survivors of the Nazi extermination effort were as a result of purchase. This was notable in Hungary. I also find convincing that the Israeli Mossad was the prime mover in the 9/11 affair, though more parts of the official story may be true than the truthers would have us believe, i.e, the Israelis likely used Arabs they had coopted as the plane highjackers. The actual details are less important than the essential truth that the Mossad likely steered the effort and we are still living with the neocon takeover which to this day is threatening our future existence, so this article is essentially correct even if we can’t fully reconstruct factual details. I also concur with Mr. Unz that a government conspiracy to create the false flag, as has been alleged by many, is unbelievable while some form of controlled Mossad operation is the most likely explanation. If the belief in this becomes widespread, then this becomes extremely dangerous for the establishment and its Israeli minders because the implications of this are beyond any series of events which has ever occurred.
That is a ridiculous assertion. Stuff is going to move any way it is not constrained from moving. And huge amounts of stuff didn’t go up; huge amounts of dust went up. The fact that stuff went out is itself evidence of the progressive pancake collapse mechanism, and not of a controlled demolition. A controlled demolition doesn’t require a lot of energy; it works by severing key structural elements.
Ah so, but you did say originally
I seems you’re trying to have it both ways, eh?
Anyway, Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones et al declared in their paper:
(my bold)
Yes, substantial indeed. Maybe even a little too substantial to be believable, eh?
Anon or not what is the basis of your argument? You seem to label any challenge to your wild theories as some sort of ‘troll’–without any sort of reasonable refutation. Your position, as such, is untenable.
A recent interview by James Corbett with Neils Harrit about war on terror lie:
Pepe’s column would be a great addition to UR.
FB: unfortunately, you have been placed on the “Commenters to ignore” list by Eagle Eye and no doubt by many others given your repeated puerile and rambling postings:
Final comments:
(1) Take your meds and go for a long, calming walk.
(2) Re-read your own posts in light of the careful guidance you have now received at the hands of Peripatetic commenter and Eagle Eye, e.g. here.
(3) Don’t expect casual PowerPoint presentations by FAA functionaries to answer deeper questions and what is and is not technically possible.
Good luck and good mental health.
Seen it many times. But, a nuclear explosion does not explain (a) the lack of radiation found at the scene, (b) the lack of the “upward push”, (c) that the WTCs dropped from the top down (maybe a satellite directed energy weapon? lol), (d) that neither WTC dropped over / fell over sideways after its core supports were eliminated, (e) lack of a large enough seismic event, …
But, there are lots of these nuclear explosions every year around the world, designed to lower the sperm count in humans and reduce global warming, they usually detonate them in mountains. Here’s a nice test (lol):
Silent explosives? Click on this link, dude:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=9%2F11+Eyewitnesses+to+Explosions+video
So so so many witnesses talked about all the explosions going off. Oh, you’re mainstream media let that slip down the memory hole after the first hours, when the script was finalized and heavy censorship kicked in? Color me shocked!
But yeah, one of the reasons for using nanothermite is that you can cut through steel without a resulting loud explosive sound.
Why do you make conclusive assertions when you obviously don’t know the first thing about the NIST inquiry? It’s posted here several times in this thread, but since you appear unusually dense, let me scream it:
NIST DID NOT TEST FOR EXPLOSIVES OR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUE, INCLUDING NANO-THERMITE.
NIST’S MANDATE WAS TO ASSUME THE BUILDINGS WERE DESTROYED BY FIRE AND TO FIND A WAY TO MODEL THAT. THE MODEL WAS NEVER PUBLICLY RELEASED AND IS “CLASSIFIED”. AGAIN, NIST DID NOT TEST ANY SAMPLES, WHETHER DUST OR STEEL, FOR EXPLOSIVES OR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUES.
REPEAT: NIST DID NOT TEST ANY SAMPLES FOR EXPLOSIVES OR EXPLOSIVE RESIDUES.
Is that loud enough, for crying out loud?
Agreed.
Yes, also for WTCs 1 & 2 [see my proposed 45° cuts, above]. It should be noted that IF there were any alleged ‘Arab/Muslim’ hijackers, indeed, any aircraft impacts at all [no ‘reliable’ = visible, checkable proof; videos can be ‘faked’ as we know], THEN the alleged ‘passenger jets’ could have been guided by their internal navi-autopilot systems, rather than by any amateur hijacker-learner-pilots. That would ensure precise ‘hits’ corresponding to the pre-loaded explosives’ detonation sequences. Some proof of explosives is the ‘iron-rich’ micro-spheres generally present in the WTC dust.
My “best fit” was in context, building a ‘frame’ for CanSpeccy, in my response to the Q: ‘Who rules?’ What we were discussing was actually ‘who gave the 9/11 action-orders?’ Here, we may theorise a) Saudi rogue-regime [IMHO impossible] OR b) some covert cabal within the US/Z rogue-regimes [another “best fit” thesis, recall also ‘inside job’], then IF (b) THEN either some US-national(s), IL-national(s) OR a ‘mix’ including dual national(s). One could say to that: ‘May they roast in hell,’ but since I’m no believer in putative supernatural deities – and neither can any in (b) be [premeditated mass-murder = ‘mortal’ sin], I am left with utter condemnation, in the strongest of terms, and IF that covert cabal is ever identified, tried and convicted THEN I would expect them to be executed. rgds
There are conspiracy theories and there are conspiracy theeories.
)/11 is pretty much not a conspiracy theory if you dig in an inch deep. No, it is not the official story, bu science used to be the method of proving facts. 9/11 is the measuring stick to judge American gullibility and stupid, science clearly stating it could not have transpired according to the official story. But nothing has really changed in 15 years, since the truther movement started, indeed nothing has changed since november 1963.
We are asked through official channels to disregard fundamental physical principles and laws and just accept a official story.
Unfortunately for the official storyline, we are not all retards or ignorants, some of us have been to rather good schools, colleges and universities, and are quite capable of critical thinking, and are also in the know of fundamental laws of physics.
In the event of 9/11 the perpetrators are not caught on video (2) more that once ? How?
in the event of 9/11 a ordinary arab becomes a airliner captain overnight? How
In the event of 9/11 almost freefall was seen and recorded. How did this hsppen?
In the event of 9/11 3 buildings were virtyally turned into dust. What did this?
In the event of 9/11 the collapse of three buildings caused huge pools of molten steel in the basements. What did this?
In the event of 9/11 a crashed plane is atomized, virtually completely removed from this world ? how ?
In the event of 9/11 there is still classified documents. Why?
Something rotten is going on in the state of the US. Dear american UNZ’ers you are mushrooms; live in the dark and are fed shit. What we are told is simply not true, in fact it is physically impossible.
Take a math or physics course if need be, and realize how f@cked over you are.
Love Bollyn’s reference to Le Carre’s “Little Drummer Girl”. All who don’t understand the nature of Palestinian resistance should read it.
It was seminal to my own understanding. Before reading it I swallowed the cartoonish image of Palestinian “terrorism”.
Bollyn is very credible. Unfortunately the interview is too short to tease out all of the ramifications of the facts he presents. There is a vast array of History and background knowledge necessary to fully understand what is actually possible, what has precedent, what people (such as the perpetrators of the Hotel King David bombing, to cite just one example) are capable of.
It is both simple and extremely complex. Most of us want simple answers. Reality is not simple. Le Carre’s contribution to our understanding of power, covert agencies and political machinations is valuable
On Sept 11 the phone rang in the Pentagon when permission was asked to send fighters up, but it was not answered
I would be very pleased to be provided with more evidence which is the sort that might, after testing by cross-examination and any truly expert technical evaluation, cause a jury to accept, preferably beyond reasonable doubt, whatever charges are being brought. So…. for starters
Would you please give usable references to
1. the three intact flight recorders and the non disclosure of what they show;
2.the 90 per cent claim wrt Flight 93
In 1978 I flew back from LA to the Netherlands.
Passengers could listen to the conversation between the pilots and the flight controller.
There was a warning just after take off ‘there is some unidentified traffic in your vicinity’.
The answer was ‘we do not see anything’.
So much for radar.
The battleships, scrap iron, as the fate of the British Repulse and Prince of Wales made clear.
Twin towers security was done by firm owned by a brother of president Bush
The assertion was, in the days immediately after Sept 11, that quite a few radar tapes of the day fell into dust bins.
Because the Sunni plot in progress was already running. Mossad just picked it up and ran with it. My guess is they made sure the buildings went down, the hijackers could board the planes and they hit their targets. Anyway Iraq was seen as more of a threat at the time, and the intifada was in full swing.
It is a mystery why WTC 6 and 7 were also destroyed. Destruction of evidence seems the only hypothesis.
My point is that it isn’t just Israel, as Israel alone didn’t have all of the faculties needed to pull it off.
Having said that, if you want to skip the fine points and get medieval on Israel anyway then go for it. No objections from this end. God knows they’ve got it coming.
And how much respect does your real name command in real life? Are you as much of a chump there as you are here?
Still waiting for U238/RDX.
Soon after Building 7 collapsed a read a piece, in the New York Times no less, that in the basement of building 7 the DOJ had housed the paperwork of a 10 year investigation of Wall Street insider trading and was preparing indictments. Poof… all gone… what a coincidence….
Yes Thomm:
And the Ramsif Yousef in the twin towers 1992.
Yousef is also K.S.M cousin.
And Usama warning “you cant talk with words to the likes like Clinton,we have the way to communicate with him”
This is a very superficial conclusion and the motive ,could be,they cant grant to a rag guy in a cave the merit of such a masterminded act.
“Kite Hit Steel Plane Must”
This is what the school children were repeating faster and faster to George Bush precisely at the time the Jets “hit” WTC. It is more evidence that 9/11 was just another satanic ritual.
It really starts at about the 30 second mark.
You inbred Nazis get more idiotic by the day. They knew 7 was going to collapse because it was bulging and creaking and there were cracks in the facade.
Just as a matter of strategy, it took many years to get a second investigation of the JFK assassination. The thing that triggered the second investigation was a movie called JFK by Oliver Stone.
Maybe a movie similar to the JFK film would get the ball rolling. Meanwhile, we have a miniseries on Hulu supporting the government narrative.
https://www.bustle.com/p/how-accurate-is-the-looming-tower-the-hulu-series-about-911-is-devastatingly-real-8346793
A German demolition expert: the three towers were destroyed by explosives
” In the event of 9/11 there is still classified documents. Why? ”
Why are the 1941 Rudolf Hess documents still classified in UK ?
Why in France are Oradour sur Glane court records, 1953, not available until 2053 ?
Why are you asking me questions that the NIST has already answered? The resistance came from the accumulation of rubble underneath the north face.
The NIST model shows the interior of the building. Again, the interior collapsed first. You can see the east penthouse drop several seconds before the north face and the rest of the building collapses.
I’m sure the NIST model is not entirely accurate since we don’t have perfect data to input into it, but calling it fraudulent is nonsensical.
The building’s facade would prevent us from seeing any dust or debris, but the interior obviously collapsed first as evidenced by the drop of the east penthouse. Unless you think WTC7 was equipped with retractable penthouses or something.
https://kenfm.de/akademische-naivitaet-und-der-11-september/
Translation: academic naïvity and Sept 11
Es dauert dann lange, bis ich die Zeit, die Muße und den Mut hatte, mich den Berichten des NIST über den Einsturz der Zwillingstürme zu widmen, nur um festzustellen, daß das NIST es auch nicht wußte. Aber es gab zum Einsturz der Zwillingstürme ein paar Arbeiten des Bauingenieurs Zdenek Bažant, jetzt emeritierter Professor der Northwestern University in Chicago und Ikone seines Fachs. Bažants Aussage ist einfach zu erklären: Die Dimension der tragenden Stahlstützen der Zwillingstürme sei viel zu schwach gewesen, um einem einmal begonnenem Einsturz standzuhalten. Ein paar fehlerhafte Annahmen in Bažants Berechnungen waren zu der Zeit schon länger bekannt, aber als ich die Einsturzmodelle schließlich studiert hatte und darin noch mehr theoretische Fehler und wichtige unterlassene Messungen feststellte, die, wenn man sie ausführt, das Gegenteil von dem implizieren, was Bažant behauptete, wußte ich, daß das kompetente Fachpersonal, hier nicht die kritische Wissenschaft ausübt, die es sollte. Offensichtlich gab es außer mir niemanden, der die Modelle zur Gänze auf Herz und Nieren unabhängig geprüft hatte. Warum?
” Ein paar fehlerhafte Annahmen in Bažants Berechnungen waren zu der Zeit schon länger bekannt, aber als ich die Einsturzmodelle schließlich studiert hatte und darin noch mehr theoretische Fehler und wichtige unterlassene Messungen feststellte, die, wenn man sie ausführt, das Gegenteil von dem implizieren, was Bažant behauptete, ”
In a few words: some wrong assumptions were already known, but after studying the collapse models I found more theoretical mistakes and important ignored measurements, taking these into consideration one gets the opposite of what Bazant asserted
Correct. But this also means that in areas beyond “primary radar” coverage, “secondary radar” (i.e. transponders) is the ONLY way that aircraft are visible to civilian radar. If the transponder is turned off, an aircraft becomes effectively invisible. See my post above and passage quoted there.
Thanks! In return, I thank you for all the analysis and information you post here. It is very valuable. It’s a bit “in your face” but my take is that it is all in fun, and your style certainly keeps things here interesting and entertaining. Thanks again!
As I don’t have reason or inclination to do the basic research needed to get to the bottom of the still unresolved 9/11 questions I have to hope someone of sound judgment will. Reading that extract from Bollyn only emphasises that the now numerous secondary sources need validation too. From what you quote there is no assurance that he is not a paranoid crank. I’ve known people with degrees and careers who confided to me that their telephone was being tapped. As they didn’t persuade me that it was clearly true I was left with suspicion about any judgment they made. So with Bollyn on the sample you present.
Thank you. This alone should have gotten a second investigation going.
This revisit of 911 reminds me that the crime is ongoing. Indeed, if you think about it for a minute, what is Mueller doing now but fighting a rear guard action for the Bush-Cheney crowd?
It puts Trump’s recent threat to “declassify” information in a new light and—depending on interpretation–explains the insanity going on in Washington these days.
The NYT had to know. WaPo had to know. Muller, Rumsfeld and Chertoff had to know. Ashcroft found out and it put him in the hospital and later probably killed him.
It seems to have escaped your attention, but I have not even mentioned NIST previously in my comments here.
Rather I have been talking about tests conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, and Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, et al.
To make it clear for you, USGS is not NIST.
I have read more than once that 1941 UK Rudolf Hess documents are still classified. Now from you. Can you give me any reason to believe it? Copies of FOI application and response for example?
It meets resistance when the intact internal structure above the bottom eight floors is crushed. There is just too much evidence showing controlled demolition.
But here is the take away question:
Do you support a new unbiased forensic investigation of 911?
If not, why not.
Sorry, I should have read it closer. I agree with you. ‘Zionist’ is a pretty reasonable umbrella term although it doesn’t necessarily imply a Zionist motive. It could still have started as an insurance fraud that later got integrated into the Zionist political narrative. Who knows? But these are details. In the end, I agree with what you said and the guilty parties are the same.
Of course various suggestions about records that were intended to be destroyed have been made but presumably not been pursued even by the most imaginative speculators because the plotters wouldn’t have been able to count on their being no duplicates elsewhere. Still, can you give the D o J investigation theory just a chance to get off the ground here by at least providing a link to the NYT story.
Questions I might ask include
1. How does it fit with fires which burned for six hours being started by debris from one of the Towers?
2. Wasn’t the basement of WTC7 a power station?
3. Were the inside traders so special that not a single D o J lawyer has made a big fuss about the case being dropped (if it was)?
4.Why couldn’t the case be reconstructed? We’re all original and copy documents exposed together in that basement?
5. Was no attempt made to save the documents?
Have you checked the tribal affiliation of the CEOs of the insurance companies? Aside from that, no law firm in Jew York City was going to argue in a Jew York court that Israel and treasonous neo-cons in D.C. brought down the WTCs, lol.
If the info in the image is correct, it wasn’t even his problem until a few months before the event. Apparently, he deliberately bought the property for a knock down price (no pun haha), took out an insurance policy, and then almost immediately went about rigging the towers for demolition (the outwardly visible sign was the changing of the security contractor).
If anyone was central to the entire 9/11 operation, it was Silverstein.
Skyscrapers are designed to stand up to a plane impact. Using planes alone would create a bit of a mess and may or may not be substantial enough to get an insurance payout, but it wouldn’t have solved the asbestos problem. To score full points, he needed to create damage large enough to get a full insurance payout and solve the asbestos problem without incurring extra costs. He excelled, for he scored TWO insurance payouts and he got the government to clean up his mess, at no financial cost to himself and no liability for the injuries incurred by the clean up workers.
Remember, it’s critical that the towers came down. If they were standing, the asbestos problem would have gotten even more expensive as working conditions would mandate danger pay (plus the tenants would be suing).
Yes … ostensibly, it would be in their best interests to refuse the payout and try to prove controlled demolition in the courts. But realistically, if a criminal organisation has already murdered countless civilians and jeopardized the long term health of an entire city, would you really want to take them head on just to score some points on your Resume? Perhaps the insurance agents in charge smelled the winds of change and decided to keep quiet or perhaps they were advised to do so or perhaps they were remunerated? Who knows? This seems unimportant. The key point is that expecting the insurance agents in charge to stand in front of the biggest false flag terrorist attack in world history and all of it’s associated political momentum is absolutely absurd. That’s Rachel Corrie on a gigantic scale.
You wrote: “They knew 7 was going to collapse because it was bulging and creaking and there were cracks in the facade.”
Is there any contemporaneous evidence of this? Or is this just all after the fact, speculation to “fix the facts” around the narrative? Remember, this type of collapse has never before happened and has never since happened. I’d say it was extremely insightful (cough, cough) to predict something that had never happened before in the whole history of steel high-rise buildings (decades) to within 30 minutes or so of the actual event.
Someone told the networks Building 7 had collapsed. That is obvious from watching the live broadcasts. Only after seeing with their own eyes that the buildings had not collapsed did the anchors start backtracking on that claim. They did not say, the buildings are creaking, or the facade is cracking – none of that. They did not say the buildings might collapse at any time due to structural weakness from the fires. They did not say any of that. They made a simple declarative statement. Building 7 had collapsed
Building 7 had collapsed is an awful weighty assertion to make, especially given the circumstances. 3 separate television stations made the same assertion at around the same time. You seem to be implying that the likelihood of this being incredibly well-timed simultaneous innocent mistakes, misstatements, etc. is more likely than what actually appears to be happening, even to demolitions experts, even to Architects and Engineers, – a controlled demolition.
Now add to that, Larry Silverstein’s (patsy) otherwise somewhat inexplicable order to “pull it” and other miscellaneous circumstantial evidence, and the odds against the “official” story get even longer.
Nobody can make you believe anything, but as for myself, I’m going with the most likely explanation. Prove to me that my probability estimates are wrong and I might change my mind. Call me an “inbred Nazi” and I’m not likely to be impressed with your intellectual power or be persuaded.
Was that human weakness or self preservation? If the national is going crazy and the president is already planning a war, would you really want to put yourself on the line over some niche technical point? Better just to find a way to make the data match and go with the flow.
Well I suggest you start a new company.
Because demolishing a skyscraper (just the demolition, not the clean-up) costs millions of dollars.
All you need is a few gallons, or a few thousand gallons, whatever, of kerosene to do the job. Even diesel fuel will work, that’s even easier to get!
So start puttin’ in your bids for your proven demolition technology! You will be rich! You’ll underbid everyone and make a killing in the process! I mean, you can even get 1,000 foot tall buildings to collapse into their own footprint with this brilliant technology!
By the way, before your invest too much in your incredible new business opportunity, watch this fire not bring down a skyscraper (I can send you 20 more just like it):
Two days to work through this thread. Mexican murder rates and primary/secondary radar aside.
IN your research, don’t get caught up in finding the right authority to “believe.” First convince yourself and use what you know. No background in physics/thermodynamics? Either educate yourself (outside the debate) or leave those things aside. Consider all sources false, some intentionally so…
LOOK at the aftermath: IF NORADs air defense system had four oopses in one day, wouldn’t the fella in charge be sanctioned, retired? What became of that fall-guy? Oh, he was promoted to Joint Cheifs of Staff….hmmm.
WHAT other mass-murder in US History (or any other history) had the government paying the survivors for their silence? The southern district of Manhattan…skeevy.
I was in the nuclear navy, rode a sub, learned a great deal about metallurgy and heat transfer. I worked in fabrication and metalworking afterward. I KNOW that the official story is bullshit. I SEE the aftermath and all the trusted institutions useless now, without the public trust. But god forbid I am asked for “proof.”
I liked that “Anatomy of a Great Deception” included the film-makers journey. He followed the research (as did I) and found himself a pariah.
I had to chuck plenty of identifiers on the journey. You had better take more than two weeks. I spent over a year on it and had to walk away, my despondency was so deep.
Eh well, good onya for starting the journey. Watch out for normalcy bias, avoid “belief.”
Not really. ‘completely’ is a good first approximation, and ‘no reaction goes 100%’ is a refinement. #F0F0F0 is still white, even if it’s not #FFFFFF.
What I really meant by ‘consumed completely and rapidly’ is that the exotherm on the DSC trace is very sharp, with no tailing.
Howso? They must have needed a hell of a lot to cut all that steel.
Hahaha, you would post an answer without bothering to watch the clips. The reports were that the WTC 7 HAD collapsed, not was ABOUT to collapsed (there were those reports, too).
The one with the BBC has the reporter standing with the WTC 7 in the background as she is reporting that the WTC 7 HAS (past tense) collapsed. It would not be demolished until 20 minutes later.
I get the feeling that President Trump would gain many more supporters by instigating a proper investigation into 9/11 and taking the appropriate actions.
Thank you for your plain spoken response! So now we have established that:
The official government story of 1/4 of the planes, i.e. flight 93 “let’s roll” is a fabrication
It follows that the government, with intent, lied to the public about the events of 9/11. From that, it follows that one should look very closely at the rest of the government story about those events.
In one sense, it is impossible to critically evaluate the rest of the government’s story and doubts must remain, and trust must be withheld because much of the critical information necessary to form an opinion remains classified or was destroyed.
What remains are attempts to parse the truth out of the limited information available. This leads unavoidably to assumptions and inductive reasoning, and that situation is the fault of the government. In turn, the government pounces on those same assumptions (necessary due to the government’s lack of transparency) and uses them to discredit those seeking the truth. It’s all very beautiful, one must admit.
OK then, same answer, USGS also did not test for explosives or explosives residues. Here are their results: https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/WTCchemistrytable.html .
I am missing the row for “thermite” and “nano-thermite”, TNT, C4, etc., etc. Can you please point me to them? Not even asbestos, kerosene or glass is listed. It’s only elements. Hmmm.
On the bright side, we do see concentrations of aluminum, iron, and – yes, there’s silicon, manganese and sulfur! – all of which are the components of nano-thermite or its incineration.
Too bad they didn’t test for nano-thermite or any other explosives or their residues, huh? (Or if they did, kindly provide a link to their claim, their test procedures, and their results, thank you kindly, nobody else seems to have discovered this revelation.)
Are they trying to obscure who was responsible?
One Man’s Quest to Prove Saudi Arabia Bankrolled 9/11
I started to read one of the books that Mr. Unz put up. What I read was an account of the actions and locations of President Bush and Vice President Cheney on the morning of Sept. 11th, purported pointing out inconsistencies in the various accounts. Why anyone would find differing accounts of who saw whom when on one of the most chaotic days in recent history as being suspicious escapes me.
Anyway, my point was this: the article implied that the staff who wrote the Popular Mechanics article had no qualifications to evaluate a technical matter. Well, neither does a professor of theology.
So? Yes, I have no doubt that 3,000 people, some of whom are architects and engineers, some of whom ostensibly are, some of whom (probably) are not ascribe to any particular belief. Why should I care? Why should I care what architects think? Engineers? I’ve known a lot of engineers who are credulous and gullible. Anyway, Truther always like to make this argument from authority, but if their opinions are countered by some other authority, they just say – why that’s just an argument from authority. If you want to claim authority from the opinions of engineers, then what is your claim about a theologian like Griffin?
And to compromise major structural members by severing them with a fully loaded jet aircraft moving at 500 mph, and blow off all the fire retardent on the beams by scouring them with debris. I think the cost of a couple jetliners is considerably more than the cost for demoing a building.
(Zigh) Preciously illogical, Precious wrote:
“Even though flight 93 was likely destroyed by an air-to-air missile, Trump’s statements above are not fabricated reality. The passengers on flight 93 did still stop the forces of terror and defeat wicked, horrible, evil plan. For all we know, the missile only gets an assist. Or it may have catastrophically killed them just before they could radio they had taken back the plane.”
Greetings from Scranton, Pa, Precious!
… Fyi, my life as a part-time public school bus driver is spent on one (1) long effort to escape from the commonplaces of ZUS Jew deception.
… Your tin horn comments here at U.R., for one example, the words quoted above, fail to even allot me any serious practice! (zZigh)
… Following, Precious’s precocious comedy, “For all we know, the missile only gets an assist.” Hee-hee. Such assessment would make even Trump’s son-in-law laugh!
… Selah, Corrupt Atty. Arlen Specter’s “Magic Bullet” theory downsized JFK’s assassin Lee Harvey Oswald’s action to a mere “assist.”
Excellent…that settles that then…
Thanks doc…I actually binged a bit late last night on your essays…kind of addictive…if I may offer a compliment myself, I really enjoy your writing style…and the substance of your message is coming from a very nice place…
“And to compromise major structural members by severing them with a fully loaded jet aircraft moving at 500 mph”
If done properly, no jetliners are necessary. This has been proven in a sample of 1/3 of the total number of cases. Your counterpoint, therefore, fails.
I could not agree more. Thanks for bringing the discussing back on track!
The info on the flight recorders and the ‘recovered’ wreckage is precisely documented in the film ‘The New Pearl Harbor’…by award-winning Italian filmmaker Massimo Mazucco…
This film is nearly 5 hours long and is scrupulously factual…the storyline is presented in the ‘adversarial’ form of ‘debunkers’ vs ‘truthers’..with both given equal time so to speak…the only ‘conclusions’ are reasonable questions posed after a discussion segment on a particular issue…
All the major issues, or topics, are addressed systematically…but it would be handy to have a timestamp reference to each particular one…and I intend to do that for easy future reference for questions like yours…
But you don’t need a jet plane. You can just cut through the building in a few random spots. Or use dynamite in an airplane pattern. Suit yourself. It’s still a lot easier than wiring the whole building! (Though the whole truss collapse theory really has nothing to do with the airplane hitting, the claim is the heat from the tiny, oxygen-starved fires made the trusses soften which caused the collapse.)
But, alas, WTC 7 didn’t have an airplane strike it. That was purely fire. That’s your model! A proven success!
And there’s no proof whatsoever that the insulation was blown off anything, and certainly not in the trusses in the areas where the collapse started. But it’s a nice assumption to make, right? Are you so generous with assumptions on alternative theories? Even paying someone to scrape some insulation away is not that difficult. In fact you can use large blow torches to heat the steel, supplementing your kerosene, which will burn away within a few minutes, and some office paper and carpet! With insulation on, to keep all that heat “in”!
Here’s the Shanghai tower fire (got about 19 more …):
No. That would have produced uneven and unpredictable damage and that’s the last thing you’d want in a demolition. CalDre is right. You should patent your fairy-tale.
No, building 7 was also scoured by debris. It also had two diesel fuel bunkers in it, and the fires burned longer there. So your counterpoint fails (to use your strange idiom).
While your point is logical, the problem is that the exact murder weapon is hard to pinpoint and prove. Ryan Dawson is pointing the way to far more concrete and provable evidence that points directly to Israel. See his videos for more detail. The forensic investigation proving the existence of explosives and molten metal is already saturated with proof enough for us now to turn our attention to other clues that have already been provided by others.
Watch Ryan Dawson’s videos. The point is that there is already way more conclusive evidence pointing to Israel and its zionist allies within the pentagon as being culprits. All this discussion of nano-thermite and mini-nukes is drowning out other voices trying to take us in more productive directions.
See that’s just the sort of statement that misses the point. For example, only the US was supposed to have nukes but there was a multi decades long effort on the part of Jews within our government to proliferate that technology and material, first to the USSR and later to Israel, and from Israel to India and China.
I’m sure the Israeli’s have access to thermitic compounds and other advanced explosives as well. Whatever technology used is probably possessed by the US, Israel, Russia, China, etc.. It’s not going to prove as conclusive as you think.
Look at how our Jewish neocons are trying to blame so much these days on Russia.. the shooting down of planes and everything. You have to start at some point asking questions like “who benefited”, who had the means motive and opportunity.
I have to say that I tend to agree with Ron’s point here. It seems pretty obvious that the wonky physical science sorts of treatment of the discussion have gone way past the point of diminishing returns.
Once you understand that the official account of what happened is not physically possible, there really is not that much useful to add. So, yeah, there is a need to shift tack and look at this from some other angles, no?
Hmm, well, let’s say for the sake of argument that the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have proven at a 1000% level of overkill that the official story is false, that it cannot possibly be true. However, this has not caused the U.S. Justice (sic) system to do anything.
Is it not quite dubious reasoning to say that if they keep trucking on and now prove the case at a 2,000% level of overkill, now something is going to happen!
I mean, look, if you’ve proven your case at such a high level of overkill and people still don’t react the way they should, it just seems naive to think that you will get the result you want if you add more layers of proof.
You’re missing his point. Of course if you are trying to convince and average-Joe voting republican that the government is lying, the quickest route to this is probably to show them footage of WTC7. While David Chandler and others have done an excellent job scientifically debunking NIST on this, you don’t even have to go that far. All you have to do is show them the 3 separate news casts of the building falling AFTER they just announced that it ALREADY FELL. Next, you can show footage of prominent media personalities interviewing the head of the fire department on TV on 911 saying “And you guys were expecting this building to fall all day long… well yes…” (paraphrasing).
It’s simply not necessary to go get published in a scientific journal with hundreds of architects and engineers to realize it’s a lie.
The rest of us on this thread are already on board with that. The ones here who are not, like Lot and Wizard of Oz, Tyrion 2, etc.. are just not relevant to the discussion anymore. They refuse to believe what their lying eyes are telling them. It’s better to ignore them rather than drag everyone else down in the murky details of chemistry and physics.
Yes, but they didn’t have the magical ingredient!
Diesel fuel bunkers on the roof!
Excellent point which backs Ron’s. If you don’t want to get suckered next time, take of your blinders focusing you on nano-thermite versus thermate, versus mini-nukes, versus..etc.. and start focusing on the geo-politics of it: Who benefited?
And yet, most of these buildings had much greater conflagrations in them and didn’t fail, and certainly didn’t fail in a way that looks like a controlled demolition.
What? I thought we were talking about the need for fully loaded jets to “compromise major structural members” (we were in fact) Funny, I can’t seem to find mention of that in your reply. Well, never mind then.
Dear Mr Anon…not that I have any inclination to disturb your peaceful slumber…but perhaps you may want to reconsider your ‘facts’ about ‘compromising’ major structural members…and ‘blowing off ALL’ fire protection from the beams…
WTC 7 had not a single hair disturbed on its structural members by wayward airplanes…nor did any dastardly gnomes decide to huff and puff on the fire protection covering its structural members until it all came off…nor was there any jet fuel involved…yet it still came down at amazing freefall speed…
As for the towers that were hit by jetliners…you may want to read up a bit on the actual design of those structures and the loads and impacts they were designed to withstand [including fire]…this engineer availed himself of the original building design documents, which he describes thus…
A good place to start…[math alert]…
Certainly seems exactly so. Thnx+rgds
His point is not that this research should not be carried out by someone qualified to do so. His point is that there are already many more fruitful lines of inquiry that can be carried out that don’t involve a laboratory, like geo-political analysis: Who benefited? If Israel benefited, by how much? What were their risk to benefit ratio? Did they have aids on the inside of the government to help them carry it out and mitigate the risk to them?
These all have affirmative answers. Most truthers don’t seem to even be aware of any of it but they can tell you at what temperature melting aluminum turns from a silvery color making its appearance indistinguishable from liquid mercury to a bright orange color making it look like molten steel, etc.. all simply in an attempt to prove that the material poring out of the South tower was steel, not aluminum. All the while there are many very simple observations that prove the government’s case is false regardless of whether the substance pouring out the buildings was molten aluminum or molten steel.
Why not quit beating a dead horse, broaden your horizons, and move onto a more fruitful geo-political oriented discussion that might paint a bullseye on the likely culprits?
For example, an Israel citizen, Michael Chertoff was made Secretary of Homeland Security shortly after many Israeli Mossad agents had been arrested and detained. These Israelis were caught red handed not only celebrating the collapse of the towers but also with bombs in their vans. Two were caught in the process of trying to blow up the George Washington bridge. All of them were drivers for “Urban Moving Systems” and they were all attempting to flee the country. The FBI detained them subjected them to lie detector tests (which they failed) Michael Chertoff forced the FBI to release these spies and he transported them safely back to Israel so they could undergo no further interrogation by US officials. This is just one of MANY examples of Israeli involvement and zionist infiltration of key positions within our government on and after 911.
Hey look there’s a squirrel (let’s talk more about the evidence for nano-thermite and/or mini-nukes!!!)
When your enemies have managed to counter your current weapons you need to develop new weapons.
In the same vein, perhaps we need a new weapon.
For example, Judicial Watch has been very successful at ferreting out information from the government by submitting FOIA requests.
Maybe that will reveal useful new info about the coverup.
Yes, you are right. Ron agrees. Now let’s move on to the Who and Why. There is plenty of evidence there to discuss as well. Discussing the forensic evidence is running into diminishing returns here and becoming a bit of a distraction, since as you mentioned, just a few bullet points proves the government is complicit in a coverup.
Right. Ron, I’m similar to you in this regard. For 15 years I mostly ignored all of this but on the rare occasion that I paid even the smallest attention to the debate raging on about all of the minutia regarding the building, I just assumed the debate was going in circles because the evidence was probably inconclusive, and besides (I thought), who in the world would think that “W” would even be capable of something like this?!
The truth is that, for whatever reason, many of the people arguing about how the buildings fell on the government side (NIST, Popular Mechanics, to name but two) are not debating in earnest. Engaging them creates the false impression in the minds of the uninitiated that they had something credible to say to begin with. These organizations aren’t making intellectual errors, they are dishonest.
I disagree…there are many more technical/scientific aspects and much work still to do…
The work is in fact ongoing at a very serious and scrupulous level…the University of Alaska Fairbanks study on the WTC 7 collapse is ongoing right now as we speak…there are links to two interim reports at the bottom left corner of that page…
Science tends to move slowly, for reasons of thoroughness and peer acceptance…but when science does eventually say something…it has the power to change the world…
Silly arguing about who might have benefited etc…does not have this kind of power and clout…
As to the question of what can be done at the legal level…this is indeed the crux of the matter…will we ever ‘get there’…?…I don’t know…
But even if we don’t it may be enough to bring the enlightenment of scientific truth to everyone on earth…just as Galileo fought to do and as we all now benefit from his efforts…
Right. At some point people have to get organized to accomplish something, knowing of course that when the time comes, they have more than enough video footage and “proof” to demolish, or sidestep, the liars at NIST and Popular Mechanics, while they go after the culprits.
Greetings from Scranton, L.K!
… Apparently a stalwart Republican, Ron Unz’s inability to find 9/11 fault (complicity) with GOP titan, V.P. Dick, Cheney strikes me as similar to how the conservative Paul Craig Roberts cannot criticize his former boss, Ronald Reagan’s Israeli proclivities.
… What’s greater handicap now, PCR maintains there’s distance separating PreZident Donald Trump’s M.E. foreign policy and international Jewry.
… Fyi, an easily missed gem in “Solving 9/11” is C. Bollyn’s brief allusion to Le Carrie’s great fiction novel, “The Little Drummer Girl.”
… As you might know, a response commenter praised Le Carrie’s book for providing key information on “Palestinian terrorism.”. Evident to me that Christopher Bollyn’s noted “The Little Drummer Girl” for its indispensable exposure of Mossad deception!
… To conclude, & as you are maybe aware now, the deep-pocket Gambler & “stylistic” author, Jonathan Revusky, has offered an articulate & repentant-comment that supports Ron Unz’s blackening of 9/11 details, which of course might include the farmer’s valuable article on “Black Betty” Ong.
… Nonetheless, as a magic (“The Who”) school bus driver, I support Ron Unz’s great “American Pravda,” and J.R.’s potential Unz Review comeback.
… Thanks!
Yes, I forgot that little coincidence.
With regards to Building 7, I watched a YouTube video some years ago that made a persuasive case that Building 7 did collapse due to fires. Here it is:
https://twitter.com/Blaisewell/status/1039676531872813056
I agree with you. I view David Chandler’s short, persuasive expositions as nice little “gateway drugs” to win over the uninitiated who, up until now, have earnestly assumed that the government had a rock solid case.
Arguing with Wizard of Oz and others about this has gotten pointless.
Alan Sabrosky is great! So is Ryan Dawson.
Have you got a chance to listen to Jeff Gates’s youtube videos? He’s not exactly a 911 “truther” but he has done years of research on the organizational mechanics of just how (and for how long) Israel has been puppeteering the US government. A highly qualified lawyer and former advisor to 30+ countries, his work adds credibility and fresh insight into how Israel brought about 911 even if he’s not directly addressing that event. I highly recommend it to every “truther” who has already absorbed the primary evidence surrounding 911 and who is looking to broaden their understanding of how we got ourselves to the point of not having a government incapable of honesty with its citizenry.
Here we apply simple logic…does the known fact that the tower with the bigger weight above its damage height collapsed first change the actual physics involved…?
I leave it to you to ponder if you are in fact asking the right question…
But consider this analogy…does Jules Verne’s amazing 1870 story ‘20,000 Leagues Under the Sea’ mean that the Mariana Trench may actually have been discovered by Captain Nemo…?
Sure, go for it. Maybe you can verify the ‘Give us twenty (20) years and we’ll take over your media and destroy your country’ claim from the other thread.
‘Been there; done that. In fact there’s probably no aspect of 9/11 I’ve not addressed at one time or another at UR.
Indeed, few regular posters here could claim to have been as active and outspoken on 9/11 at UR as I have, so I’m sorry you’ve missed it, but I do not need your guidance.
The horse is not dead until it is.
Meanwhile, I suggest the exceedingly clever, eminently simple, and entirely effective technique of simply scrolling past those comments that you do not care to read.
LOL
This is an altogether typical 9/11 piece, with an altogether typical set of comments.
An ill-informed author, indeed a self-confessedly ill-informed author, brings nothing new or interesting to the discussion, introduces gross errors of fact, while stipulating what logical inferences about the events of 9/11 are inadmissible on grounds that they are “too ridiculous,” “beyond ridiculous,” “preposterous,” or ” patently absurd.”
The only distinctive feature of the article is the contra-factual though by no means original theory that the 9/11 attack was an act of war by Israel intent on inducing the world’s dumbest but most powerful nation to wage war on Israel’s enemies. The idea is not only stupid, but entirely contradicted by well-known facts concerning the then US administration’s plans for war in the Middle-East and on Afghanistan, for which it needed, in justification, “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
The discussion of the article also follows the usual course: no-nothing opinionation; complacent upholders of all that they have ever read in the New York Times or heard on CNN who demand critics present every possible item of evidence against the official nonsense for their delectation in endless nitpicking, without ever troubling to inform themselves of the relevant facts or expending the most trivial mental effort to discover what the facts must mean; trolls and the dupes of trolls with their crackpot theories about space-based beam weapons, mini-nukes, radar transponders and other rubbish unending; plus a handful who, to no avail amidst the bedlam, endeavor to inject some actual facts and logic into the discussion.
When the history of the 21st Century is written, 9/11 will surely be held to have played a significant role in the mushing of the American mind.
Here is something very interesting that caught my attention in regards to the supposed AA-11 Boeing 767-223ER that supposedly struck WTC1 (north tower). As we all know there is scant footage of the impact and the footage of AA-11 is grainy at best.
Please look at this video and pause @2:47-2:56. Please pay attention to the engines of the plane! In this video the engines are NOT ON THE WINGS, as one would expect in a Boeing 767-223ER (also here, here , here, and here is a comparison of different Boeing models), but the engines are located on the end of the 1/3 section of the fuselage (in BETWEEN the wings and the tail section). Also notice there are NO ENGINES ON THE WINGS.
Then the I’ve looked at a Boeing 727-200 and an AA Boeing 727-200 as a possible plane in that video shot, but this too is impossible. Notice that a Boeing 727-200 the one-third to one-half of the engine on this type (727-200) intersects the tail section (when viewed from side or below). That is NOT what is in the video still. The video still CLEARLY shows the engines in between the winds and the tail section without ANY INTERSECTION whasoever! So what is this type of a plane? A hybrid type, a military plane?
This footage proves that both the plane that struck WTC1 is NOT AA-11 (Boeing 767-223ER) but some other type of airplane.
Well Mr. Anon, I welcomed you to use diesel instead of kerosene, it is much easier to find. Still, my friend, a lot cheaper than wiring with explosives, and with such fantastic results! Even most controlled demolitions I have seen do not fall nearly as cleanly as WTC 7! That one gets a perfect 10!
Oh, as to the debris, I have seen video of the entire skeleton of WTC 7 after WTC 1 and 2 had fallen. There was very minor damage, a few broken windows.
If you want to include a few broken windows in your patent application, I think that’s a good idea. And I also gave you the tip on the blow torches, they provide much more heat than paper and carpet! No need to thank me, but, the future is yours!
Especially because your technique also works on 1,000 ft tall buildings. Those are extremely difficult to take down with controlled demolition, in fact, I think nobody has done it before! Because these buildings are so very huge, the danger is that a conventional demolition from the bottom up (only) could still allow the building to fall over since only a small error in column removal could result in a “domino effect” of neighboring buildings falling down! Common understanding is that you would need to collapse them from the top down using a precisely timed sequence of detonations! But your fire, that solves this perplexing problem! Just a few thousand liters of diesel, and down she goes! From the top, just like it needs to happen! Brilliant! Now some might say you also need to destroy the core columns, but no, you have it all figured out! Just some fire on the top floors, that’s all she needs!
Where can I make my investment in your fabulous project?
Save that video in case YouTube disappears it.
It definitely seems to be a rear-engined plane, like a 727 or an Embraer ERJ145
Or perhaps the CRJ100
That’s hardly persuasive. They compare a 10-story high rise to a skyscraper? LMAO. And even that one came nowhere near to collapsing at freefall speed into its own footprint. The other fires they show, the building didn’t even collapse, some part of the scaffolding came off.
Fail.
Also if you watch a real video of WTC 7, there were hardly any fires in there. There was one area where the fires were larger for a short while, but that wasn’t anywhere near the area where NIST said the collapse started. Even the NIST collapse model, absurd and classified as it is, doesn’t have the building falling down even remotely the way it in fact fell down. So obviously the NIST model was completely wrong.
I grant you that we have plenty enough evidence already for concluding that the official story is false, and also for giving an approximate outline of the true events. However, I still feel that, the more detail is known, the more compelling that approximate truth will become.
Also, I see nothing wrong with people engaging in a bit of detective work. Beats watching the latest Netflix hollow-hoax soap opera by a mile. A while ago, there appeared a story on this very site about a certain flight attendant that may or may not have been real – I quite enjoyed that bit of detective work, even if we might argue that it was not central to the overall story of 9/11.
Cheers, M.
Yes, but the plane in that video seems longer than any of those (look at the comparison–length of the plane–chart I’ve linked in my original comment). Also notice the the engines in the video have a lot more girth (wider) when compared to the tail section (almost disproportionately so). The rear engines in these commercial planes are thinner and longer in proportion to what is seen in the video still. What is more, is that the engines do NOT appear to taper off in the in the rear portion as is normally the case.
Here are McDonnell Douglass MD-88 and MD-90, as a comparison:
https://thejigsawpuzzles.com/img-puzzle-4075820-1024/McDonnell-Douglas-MD-88-near-Buenos-Aires
Did you see anywhere a publication about with what propositions Hess came to Scotland ?
In the mid nineties a member of the British government stated in parliament that these documents still were a danger to Britain.
In case you want to read about it
Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince and Stephen Prior, ‘Double standards, The Rudolf Hess cover-up’, London 2002
Do not know if I stated this here before, the man present at the Neurenberg trials was not Hess.
The USA Spandau prison doctor wrote a book about this.
The mentioned book explains why the allies needed a patsy.
The very probable fact that he was not Hess also explains why he was suicided, shortly before his release.
Thanks for that anonymous video…apparently a homebrew production…with exactly zero presentation of any kind of formal expertise of any related engineering subject by the anonymous video producer…
Here is the thing…he talks about steel vs concrete…saying that steel is more susceptible to collapse from fire…
This is an assumption that does not even BEGIN to be discussed at an expert level in this silly video…
The main issue in a building fire is the intensity of the fire, ie how much of the building is burning, which speaks to issue of total heat energy released…
Then we have the fire temperature…the latter is a well known quantity since fire testing is regularly done under strict scientific conditions by safety authorities…
The total amount of heat ENERGY released in any fire is crucial and buildings are designed to withstand a heat energy load…as discussed by this engineer in this technical article…
we note here that heat energy is not the same thing as TEMPERATURE…the arctic ocean contains millions of times more heat energy than even a house-sized vat of boiling water…
But let’s talk about fire temperatures…an open fire will only reach about 500 C…a room fire can reach about 1,100 C AFTER FOUR HOURS…
Now we are talking about PEAK temperature…that peak is only seen in a very small area of the flame itself…
The second issue, which most laymen and many engineers and scientists overlook is the issue of HEAT TRANSFER…how does that heat energy in the fire physically move from the fire to the object nearby…?
A rocket engine flame burns at a temperature of well over 3,000 C…and that is a temperature that is EVENLY distributed throughout the flame…not in spots as with an open flame or house fire or office fire, where the fire temperature is very unevenly distributed…
That rocket engine flame flows through a very large bell-shaped nozzle that is constructed typically of stainless steel material that can withstand a temperature of about 1,000 C before losing its strength…this nozzle is cooled by rocket fuel flowing through it to keep its temperature beneath this point…
But the inside surface of that rocket nozzle is subjected to a constant temperature of over 3,000 C yet that surface does not reach even one third of that temperature…the physics of heat transfer are very precise because this is a science that is vital to our modern world…we would not have automobiles, refrigerators, airplanes and many other vital things if we did not have a deep knowledge of the precise mathematics of heat transfer…
Now here is the thing…do this little experiment take a small piece of steel bar or plate that you can hold in one hand and an oxy-acetylene welding torch…which burns at 3,500 C…now hold that torch one foot away from your hand and see if you feel anything…
Now bring that torch very close to the steel and begin heating…eventually the end that you are holding in your hand will warm up also…this attests to the fact that the steel is conducting heat through itself, like a wire conducting a flow of electricity…in fact heat transfer is highly analogous to electrical flow…
Here is a simple rule…heat flows from an area of high temperature to an area of low temperature…just like electricity and voltage…the heat also encounters resistance while flowing through that steel, but not much, since steel is a very good heat conductor…just like a copper wire is a good electrical conductor…
So the greater the amount of heat [not temperature but the quantity of heat energy] that is present near that steel the more that heat energy will flow farther and farther through the steel, away from the point where the heat enters…and as it flows farther away, the heat energy is DISTRIBUTED over a very large part of that steel…
Just like you holding a small piece and holding a heat source close to it…
Now when you consider that structural steel retains HALF its strength at an INTERNAL temperature of 600 C…and the fire is mostly well below that anyway…and furthermore the heat transfer from an open flame is very low to begin with…
Then we ask the important question…just how hot did those steel beams actually get…?
There is in fact a very precise science that allows us to make such calculations with near perfect confidence…here is the graph showing steel strength versus temperature…
And guess what… the NIST did in fact do SOME SMALL AMOUNT of such math…namely the flame temperature part…but NOT ANY calculation of heat transfer and just how hot those steel members actually got…
Here is their model of flame temperatures…[which model they incidentally DID NOT allow anyone to peer review…]
We can clearly see that their model shows only small areas of the flame that reach 1,000 C…most of the floor space is nowhere near that…again, a reminder that this is flame temperature…it says nothing about how much of that heat got into the steel…
Keep in mind what I said about how heat is transferred and how it flows through steel..able to absorb massive amounts of heat energy due to the fact that it offers little internal resistance to its flow throughout…and is it flows throughout the structure, the internal steel temperature gets lower and lower…
So here is what the NIST said itself about its measurements of steel columns it tested…
Here is a chart showing the strength of steel vs temperature…note that at 250 C, structural steel [green curve] is actually 30 percent stronger than at room temperature…
Also look at the Madrid fire that is shown very briefly in that video you linked to…here is a much better video showing the entire building engulfed in flames….it burned for 18 HOURS…
Did the towers burn like that…did the visible fire energy of those two look at all similar…or did we see in the towers mostly black smoke…and on just five or six floors…and in fact very little of what one might call a huge blaze…?
So even as a layman, one can see that there is a HUGE difference in total energy between those two fires…
This is not meant as even a basically adequate primer on the science of thermodynamics and heat transfer…but simply a starting point…it is also clear that the video you linked to is completely ignorant of even the basics of heat science, as any expert will immediately tell you…
Backed by visual evidence, tac wrote: “This footage proves that both the plane that struck WTC1 is NOT AA-11 (Boeing 767-223ER) but some other type of airplane.”
… Stylistic greetings from Scranton, Pa, tac!
… The evidence provided in your comment suggests the following two considerations:
1. “Whodunnit” had no fear of getting caught as the real 9/11 perps.
2. Unaccountably empowered, “Whodunnit” wanted to get caught just to rub-it-into pissed-off dumb goyim faces.
… Fyi, on local talk radio WILK this morning, the show’s male host fussed up & declared disbelief in P. Zelikow’s official 9/11 Commission Report.
… WILK’s incoming call-lines were jammed with “high information” talkers (voters) who agreed! Uh…, does either Bolton, Pompeo or Jared Kushner care? A.: Nope.
… Thanks, tac!
https://kenfm.de/akademische-naivitaet-und-der-11-september/
Nobody seems to have noticed that Ansgar Schneider is a German phycisist who came to the conclusion that Zdenek Bažant model is full of mistakes, that when these are corrected one gets the opposite outcome.
Schneider: no doubt whatsoever about controlled demolition by explosives.
A Dutch and a German demolition expert had the same view.
This, with the molten iron, what are we discussing any more ?
Thanks for the link, and I’ll definitely do that.
However, there’s really an important point to consider. Just because somebody writes something on the Internet or even in print doesn’t necessarily mean it’s actually correct. It’s very important to try to scrutinize the credibility of the source.
Now Bollyn certainly was one of the earliest journalists collecting information on the possible Israeli Mossad angle, as I fully emphasized. But the fact that his published book was so appallingly edited would tend to make me somewhat cautious about accepting all of his controversial claims. After all, why didn’t he just take an extra week to read the manuscript and correct some of the horrendous problems?
Also, Bollyn had been employed by the American Free Press, but was fired in 2006 with all sorts of nasty accusations and counter-accusations. AFP *also* believes in the Israeli Mossad angle, so that sort of bitter break would lead to further caution on the part of any reasonable observer, including myself.
https://rense.com/general73/bollyn.htm
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bollyn_dismissed.html
http://www.sott.net/signs/editorials/signs20061010_AmericanFreePressFiresChristopherBollyn.php
By contrast, Dr. Alan Sabrosky and Alan Hart seem to be extremely credible individuals, so I think their claims would carry much greater weight. Similarly, Profs. Niels Harrit and Steven Jones are highly-credentialed academic scientists, and Prof. David Ray Griffin also has a strong academic record, though outside the sciences. And as a former high-ranking CIA analyst William Christison’s opinions obviously carry an enormous amount of weight.
I’m certainly not saying that any of Bollyn’s claims are incorrect, just that I would be much more cautious about implicitly accepting them.
I think that when we can’t personally check or properly evaluate claims on highly controversial topics, we need to at least try to evaluate the credibility of the source.
I don’t see how it proves anything…that is a still frame, and from a camera angle I had never seen before in any 911 video…do you have any information as to the provenance of this image…?
And yes the airplane clearly has tail-mounted engines and looks to be about the size of a mid to large bizjet…
I agree with this in principal. The key is to achieve a critical mass of opinion to pursue the “who”. Until that happens, there will be no movement on this issue because there are many in positions of influence who will obstruct any such action. To increase this critical mass of opinion, a couple things would be helpful.
1. As stated above, encourage those who see the charade as it is to stop debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, and instead, put their efforts towards being convincing to the uninformed.
2. Repeatedly drive home a simple, convincing, easily understandable message to the uninformed/unconvinced – classic marketing. My suggestions, as I have pointed out are
– Flight 93 – with 8 mile debris field, “lets roll” was a fabrication
– Building 7 – prior knowledge, controlled demolition
There are other simple possibilities for such a marketing message. Ron stated he was of the opinion that there were more than a dozen. I would like to see them, collect them disseminate them.
Mr. Ron Unz gives two possibilities with two motives, these options being:
Option A: Inside Job, motive being oil and money.
Option B: Israel, motive being achieving Greater Israel.
There is a third option with motive being:
Option C: Inside Job, motive being to pin it on Israel, and Israel happily walking into it for achieving Greater Israel.
Several stories of phone calls from Flight 93 are credible. https://911timeline.s3.amazonaws.com/main/dayof911.html
The true story probably is a govt. coverup, though. The plane was shot down *after* passengers had retaken the plane. Embarrassing for Cheney and Co., especially since one of the passengers had a commercial pilot’s license.
This is the only way to reconcile the plane being shot down (likely) with Cheney & others not claiming credit for it.
LOL…pretty good summary actually…
I do agree strongly with you on the laughable Israeli theory…however you are being a tad harsh on Mr Unz…whose apparent clumsiness may seem laughable to those who have long ago learned to crawl, walk and run…but apparently now forget the exertions of going through those paces themselves…
Overall…this is a tremendous discussion and I am all for the opportunity to give the ridiculous sleepwalkers a soapbox, so that we may gauge the strength, so to speak, of their ‘arguments’ [so to speak]…
Yes, mostly it is an amazing display of human intellectual laziness…what else is new…?
And yes, some of the whacky ‘theories’ are quite strikingly off the wall…but this too is good…throw it all up in the air and see what flies…
Credit where credit is due for an honest article tracing your escape from immersive state propaganda. For years, every time you see new evidence establishing the US regime as a criminal enterprise, cognitive dissonance hits you again. Clearly you are hitting the last doctrinal barriers of US civic religion.
1. “fraught with risk.” If you have impunity in municipal law, there is no risk. One government organization has impunity: CIA. Since the original Congressional deliberations establishing the legislative intent of the National Security Act and the Central Intelligence Agency Act, the chartered impunity of CIA has been black-letter US law and regulation. Agency operations are exempt from review of any court.
An attack on the US civilian population is certainly tricky – you have to be able to thwart investigative efforts of civil society and all levels of government. Only CIA has that capacity. But CIA has more than enough capacity to get it done. The cover stories are ridiculous, but it’s OK as long as CIA can get away with it. It still justifies intensified repression.
2. Notice how you start with the assumption that CIA takes orders from a presidential administration. And somehow, maybe implicity, you tack on a corollary that CIA will balk at criminal orders. That’s the biggest thing you need to get past. Clandestine activity is inherently criminal. That’s why it’s secret. CIA is chartered as transnational organized crime. By now it’s undeniable that CIA impunity extends to murder (look up Judge Robert Vance,) torture (the incumbent DCI’s a torturer,) and aggression. That gives CIA sovereignty in Lansing’s outmoded absolutist sense: absence of responsibility. CIA controls all three branches of government with national security regulations, with CIA moles called ‘focal points’ or ‘dotted-line reports,’ with bribery (remember Tongsun Park?) and Kompromat (champeen cherry-popper Hastert was third in line for presidential succession,) and in a pinch with murder (Wellstone.)
As for no shred of evidence on 9/11: CIA infiltrated and protected foreign terrorists in the US after specific warnings of their intent were received.
http://911truth.org/disconnecting-dots-911-allowed-happen/
3. Israel. CIA uses cutouts.
It all comes together when you let go of the remnants of your grade-school civics. Your government has one branch, CIA. They’re not public servants, they’re your rulers.
I have come across this video only recently, so I do not have much info about it. It has about 14.5 million views though (so it appears that not one person of 14.5 million viewers challenged any aspect in that video until you chimed in today).
Did you watch the video in its entirety? It certainly does not rank anywhere in the conspiratorial genre, and could have been produced by any MSM source–given the presentation of the material. It avoids any controversial aspect that would make one suggest it is of any sort of conspiratorial nature (i.e. nothing in this presentation appears to be doctored, so it certainly lends itself as reputable by any stretch of the imagination, unless you have evidence to the contrary.
The eyes do not lie, the plane in that still is NOT AA-11 oeing 767-223ER.
– Flight 93 – everyone calling from Flight 93 but there were no phone on flights those days to call, nor people had cell phones those days.
– Flight 93 – everyone calling their relatives instead the authorities.
– Flight 93 – steward calling from the flight phone, reporting that they are upstairs, which suggests the flight was in a hangar. Only 747 have upper decks.
– Passport – One of the terrorist conveniently leaving his passport, which is found intact.
I don’t believe that is the second option Ron mentioned, at least if I understand the concept of Greater Israel.
I believe he said that it was to stop the Islamic countries around Israel from financing Palestinian suicide bombers and thus causing the destruction of Israel through out-migration of fearful Israelis.
Well, I’m not sure that really makes sense, but I can replace it with a somewhat similar possibility:
Option D: Even though Israel was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks, for some unknown reason the Israeli government decided to do absolutely everything it could to persuade people it was guilty.
For example, Israel sends 200 Mossad agents to America and orders them to believe in extremely suspicious ways, with many of them spending months living within walking distance of the alleged 19 Arab hijackers. Then on 9/11 itself, Israel orders some of them to celebrate the attacks and take souvenir photos, while others are apparently ordered to drive around Manhattan in vans containing explosives and maps to other major NYC landmarks.
As I emphasized, I’m very much a newcomer to actually investigating this issue, and here’s a nice video I just now watched for the first time laying out some of this information. Someone produced it a two years ago and it already has nearly 400K views:
Except for the little fact that the President needed Congress’s approval to wage a war like that, and absent a new Pearl Harbor, was unlikely to get it in the time frame required.
In the year 2000, not very many had cell phones and there was no facility to call from the plane. Especially, domestic short hop planes.
I tried to follow your link, but the page is impossible to read…any page that still uses all kinds of different typeface colors and densely spaced text is anathema to the human eye…and will actually cause a headache…
here is a much better article on the cell phone issue…with abundant footnotes and very nicely written…
We note here also that the official story about the cell phones CHANGED drastically over the course of a couple of years between 2004 and 2006 [the Moussaoui trial]…as outlined on the same site in a subsequent article…
Mr. Ron Unz,
Thanks for your reply. The preparations for 9/11 most probably took years, and Mossad was probably aware of it. Maybe, they did inform the USA administration. Here is a good article how deaf the Bush White House regarding the 9/11:
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html
I remember your suggestion about JFK murderer. The 41st. President receiving death threats. Add to it all the ills for the last 100 years. So, most probably a decision was taken that enough is enough and a plan was hatched to destroy Israel, which btw Israel willing walk into it. This will become obvious pretty soon. As per Dr. Philip Giraldi, “Bad Moon Rising”.
Interesting statement:
At your convenience, you might want to look at the Sept. 2017 progress report of Prof. J. Leroy Hulsey (UAF) and his remarks about the assumptions made by NIST in NCSTAR 1-9. To get the 44-79 girder to fall off the seat at column 79 (in the lower several floors above floor 8), NIST required that the north and east walls of WTC7 remain fixed in space. This would in turn require a 9,000-ton gorilla outside WTC7 to be pushing back against the expanding girder. Without the gorilla, the girder expands in both the NNE and SSW direction and remains on its seat. Unfortunately, this reader did not find explicit mention of such gorilla or similar deus ex machina in NCSTAR 1-9. Hulsey found other problems with the NIST analysis as well.
Of course, Hulsey is not a “truther”; he and his students did a finite-element analysis of an entire floor, not just a NIST-like cherry-picked segment avec gorilla, and played it against the NIST thermal model. Their purpose was to let science decide if fire could take down WTC7 as NIST “showed”.
I agree about the basic orientation of Cheney and Rumsfeld. But evidence of their complicity, both before and after the fact, is quite strong. So how did they get hijacked into a neocon-Zionist plot? I think Laurent Guyénot has offered the best hypothesis, the “hijacked provocation,” which I discuss in this presentation beginning at the 1:48 mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=hCGHSbnRLmI
As Peter Dale Scott of UC-Berkeley has shown in The Road to 9/11, Cheney and Rumsfeld had long been part of a COG group dedicated to overthrowing/bypassing the Constitution in the event of a nuclear attack or other national emergency. Though totally illegal and unconstitutional, they might have seen it as their patriotic duty to ensure the survival of a state capable of keeping order in a post-emergency world. 9/11/2001 was pre-scheduled as the biggest National Security Special Event Day in US history, with a total of 46 drills of which about 25 were running on the day itself, including live-fly plane-into-building exercises. My assumption is that Bush’s order to prepare an invasion of Iraq, “show me a way to get it done,” issued in Jan. 2001 according to Paul O’Neill, led to the scheduling of a hybrid event designed to create a national emergency under which COG would be tested, together with a false flag to pave the way to war on Iraq and Afghanistan. The false flag plan almost certainly did not include the murder of almost 3,000 people. But Israel and its US assets hijacked the plan, greatly amplified its destructiveness, and thereby gained leverage over the US leaders who had indeed planned a technically treasonous, but far less murderous, act.
This hypothesis explains many things, including why then-CIA Case Officer Richard Fuisz, while watching the Towers burning and then blowing up, started screaming about “the goddamn Israelis!”
Ron:
Here are very interesting and reputable articles for your review.
The first is about the Israeli ‘Art Students’ who, leading up to 9/11, were actively spying on members of the DEA, DoD, ATF, FBI and others:
This is what is known as the Shea Memo sent to Congress:
https://www.scribd.com/document/66321077/Gerald-Shea-Memo-to-the-9-11-Commission
The third set are already posted here–if you look at my #1 and C&D #83 posts in this thread (the last three links of my #1 post). A group of lawyers for 9/11 Truth (The Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry) filed a Grand Jury Petition with the US Attorney in the Southern District of New York in April 2018.
In the year 2001….
I did skim through it to try to find more airplane footage and found only the footage we have all seen elsewhere…if you have any more timestamps to share that show the same image you flagged then please share…
I have bookmarked the video and intend to view it in its entirety…but as I have said before the only film that I personally endorse is Macuzzo’s ‘New Pearl Harbor’…both for its very professionalism and its rigorous treatment of all the issues…also the fact that this man is a respected filmmaker…
I will note that your reply has nothing to do with my question…which is quite simple…is that photo real…?
That question cannot be either proved or disproved by the number of people who have viewed the video, nor by ‘eyes lying’ whatever that means…
As for my ‘chiming’…I think it does bear noticing that nobody has ever seen this photo before…the image is not actually moving…and the camera angle has also never been seen before…all of which is indeed noteworthy if we are genuinely interested in separating wheat from chaff…
Kevin:
Nice to hear from you. I’m a fan of your weekly broadcast on noliesradio. You may want to look at some new potentially explosive evidence in my #1018 comment on this thread about the plane that struck WTC1 . Please let me know your thoughts on it.
Yes you are right that USGS did not look for thermite in its chemical analysis, and I concede that USGS probably did not have the spectroscopic signatures for thermite or other exotic compounds, but photomicrography should not have suffered from any such limitations.
Beyond chemical anaysis, USGS also conducted several other tests, and provided various results in its Environmental Studies of the World Trade Center area after the September 11, 2001 attack. Version 1.1, Published November 27, 2001, and also the previously linked Particle Atlas where it states:
(my emphasis)
Comprehensive but not complete leaves me scratching my head, but apparently it means they couldn’t or didn’t ID everything yet.
The Particle Atlas has a couple dozen images– or photomicrographs–of particles that were analyzed, although none are in color, and HFJ state:
You can look at the images and decide for yourself if any of the allegedly substantial amounts of unreacted thermite have managed to photobomb any of the photomicrographs.
Even if we now throw out USGS’s WTC dust work as inconclusive, that still won’t establish a chain of possession for the haphazardly gathered samples analyzed by HFJ.
Nor will it establish that this special nano thermite has the destructive force necessary to turn concrete and steel into dust, or to account for the demolition of the twin towers as seen on TV.
This special thermite is supposed to ignite at relatively low temperatures, yet substantial portions of it somehow managed to avoid ignition and turn up in the samples gathered by four of NYC’s finest dust conscious citizens.
Thermite is reputed to burn with a very bright flame, yet there is no evidence of any such bright flames or light during the demolition sequences of the twin towers.
All that thermite, so little light.
By the same token, I would expect to have seen bright flashes of light if nuclear devices had been used to destroy the twin towers. Of course it’s entirely possible that those doughty nuclear weapons designers toiling away in their weapons labs might have come up with say neutron bombs or some other type of wee nuclear firecracker or ladyfinger, perhaps even types capable of largely releasing their energy in a part of the EM spectrum not visible to humans or cameras either one.
Or, maybe they just didn’t show those parts on TV, and it was cut, cut, cut all the way down.
I wonder why people here make the motive so difficult.
Senator Hollings, in his 2004 speech, explained that Bush jr promised AIPAC the war on Iraq if he got the jewish vote.
In order to be able to wage war he needed the ‘new Pearl Harbour’ PNAC of AEI had been demanding.
Then someone writes that Sept 11 took years of preparation.
I wonder why.
Putting the explosives in the towers, and under the 47 story building, two months ?
It still is my idea that whole planned operation went wrong, no big passenger plane flew into the Pentagon, no passenger plane crashed in Pennsylvania.
The two planes that did fly into the towers, I suppose they were unmanned, and flew towards beacons in the towers.
I further suppose that the CIA does have such planes.
Flying an unmanned single engine plane towards the Pentagon, even in WWII Germany had tv guided missiles, USA cruise missiles were capable in Iraq of flying through designated windows: Scott Ritter discovered it.
Pennsylvania, an air to ground missile was heard fired by a Vietnam veteran.
This leaves the question of the fake phone calls, but also here no problem: voice cloning software, names of passengers were known, not difficult to have a small database of regular passengers.
One question then remains: where are the four ‘hijacked’ planes, and why were they not used ?
How they were hijacked, as I wrote before, even in 2001 control of the plane could be taken away from the crew from outside, but not enough, in hindsight, to let the planes fly as intended.
In the MH370 case, my idea is that it succeeded perfectly.
Once one has the Sept 11 plan, knows how to do it technically, why years of preparation ?
In July of 2001 the procedure for sending jets to ‘missing’ planes was changed, only allowed after Pentagon permission.
This points to a few months preparation.
If the, what I call emergency planes, the ones that did fly into the towers, were held ready, I suppose so.
That no big planes flew into the Pentagon, or crashed in Pennsylvania, I suppose the CIA did not have them, and if they did, even if they had the number of bodies required, identification problems would arise, not needed for the tower planes.
Those conspiracies that were recorded in history never took years of preparation, all of them no more than a few months.
Wait, what? Please provide a sane “reason” for something like that. The reason is “unknown” because the theory is insane.
First of all…even a building brought down by controlled demolition cannot possibly fall at free fall acceleration…
This is a basic fact of physics…if you throw a billiard ball off the roof of a building at the exact same moment that the building is imploded…the billiard ball will still hit the ground first…
That is for the simple reason, that a controlled demolition cuts the supports of the building at ground level or below…so the mass of the building falling down on itself encounters resistance from its own crumbling…
A billiard ball dropped from the roof encounters no resistance [well negligible air resistance]…
As for what the NIST said…that is all on the record…from their own website…
I’ve posted this before on another thread (in response to Eric Zuesse) but it is worth reading and it lends credence to what you just wrote to Ron Unz:
[…]
Who authored PNAC, Who authored ‘The Clean Break’, ‘A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties’ (aka Oded Yinon Plan), Who were the leading figures of the Office of Special Plans (OSP), who controlled access/security/ownership stake @ WTC , who was comptroller of Pentagon, who where the leading figures in the cover-up/911 commission, who was behind the anthrax attacks,,,???
“In 2003, the Post named the then-U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz — an architect of the Iraq War — its Man of the Year.”
http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/369496/4-things-to-know-about-jewish-new-york-times-columnist-bret-stephens/
Also a recent Alan Sabrosky May 2018 on the Realist Report:
US Army General Albert Stubblebine III (passed away early 2017) who was the highest-ranking officer (in charge of ALL of Army’s Strategic Intelligence Operations around the world–including photo reconnaissance analysis) who came out publicly against the official 9/11 narrative (Start @4:26):
And here’s my favorite part…question 7…
Here are those AIR temperature models from the NCSTAR 1…
NIST has never shared their mathematical models for this…ie peer review…
But here is their FATAL MISTAKE…
Now here is a simple physical fact…heat transfer occurs only in one direction…from hot object to a colder object…it is impossible for any object to reach the temperature of a flame surrounding it…see if your fireplace poker gets red hot if you leave it in the fire…
So how exactly did we get from an AIR temperature of 1,000 C…and only in a few localized hotspots [assuming we take their word for the veracity of their math models]…to those steel beams reaching that exact same INTERNAL temperature…?
As someone who is very conversant with the physics of heat…I can tell you that there has not yet been devised a heat transfer device, no matter how carefully engineered, that can accomplish 100 percent heat transfer…that is a real world fact of engineering…
NIST admits itself that it found zero evidence that any of the steel beams reached a temperature anywhere near even 500 C…
So yes…NIST really ‘knows what they are doing’…in fact they should get a Nobel prize in physics for their work…the very first time that 100 percent heat transfer has ever been accomplished in the history of science…LOL
Fyi, my life as a part-time public school bus driver is spent on one (1) long effort to escape from the commonplaces of ZUS Jew deception.
… Your tin horn comments here at U.R., for one example, the words quoted above, fail to even allot me any serious practice! (zZigh)
No deception on my part, and no illogical or tin horn comments from me either. I made an honest, logical, straightforward analysis based on the facts and let the chips fall where they may. You just don’t like the answer.
If it turns out the cell phone calls were fabricated, then I will admit I was wrong.
But here is a 9/11 conspiracy theory that accounts for all the cell phone calls being authentic, which would explain why the families of victims who made phone calls on the flights never questioned their authenticity.
HYPOTHESIS:
A self-powered cell phone repeater the size of a shoe box is placed on board Flight 93 within a piece of luggage. The repeater is sufficiently powerful to establish reliable connections with ground stations for several minutes at a time, and forwards all the communications between the cell phones aboard the plane and ground stations. The repeater is programmed to broadcast on a separate encrypted channel a duplicate of all the call data in real time, which is monitored by operatives who have ability to block any of the calls at any time.
Besides being technically straightforward, this method would have afforded the attack planners great benefits with little risk of exposure. Genuine reports of the theatrics of the red-bandanna-wearing bomb-displaying Arabic-looking patsies aboard Flight 93 could be allowed to get through as long as the operatives wanted, adding realism to the hijackings so central to the official account. But the same operatives could “cut the feed” at the moment events took a turn threatening to evince something other than that account.
An excellent article by famous Robert Fisk, exposing the Fake News of MSM regarding Idlib. According to him, no massing of Syrian troops around Idlib, no bombing of Idlib, just quiet.
Another good news on Al Manar TV
With out any wavering on this issue, have condemned 100% any of the stupid Nano-therate and mini nuke garbage in every single comment on said topics.
i don’t know where you came up with this thinking about me, But your mistaken.
I also saw and have been down a whole line of stuff about Mr Dawson.
If you think he is the shit, Fine, I do not.
Or, put another way, consider the effect on Congress persons who had to accept that it was Israelis compared to the Saudi alternative.
No, you’re just sounding off speculatively. I prefer the answer of Anonymous [321]. (Lawyers come in lots of individualistic, commonly high ego, packages, and you could as well make a case that it would be amongst smart aggressive NY Jewish lawyers that you would find someone to make a great name for himself. Consider the Jewish mavericks that seem at least to have a better survival rate than Russian oligarchs and ex KGB people in the UK).
Kevin Barrett wrote: “This hypothesis explains many things, including why then-CIA Case Officer Richard Fuisz, while watching the Towers burning and then blowing up, started screaming about “the goddamn Israelis!”
… Good evening, Mr. Barrett.
… Never heard of the words spoken by the CIA Case Officer, above. Thank you!
… Down in command-chain, this restores some confidence that the present CIA has patriotic officers on duty like Richard Fuisz.
… Must look into Director Tenet’s earliest responses to the 9/11 attacks!
… Fyi, I agree that Cheney & Rumsfeld were (at minimum) “complicit,” and maybe it’s not too great of a leap to assert that so was the W. Bush administration’s CIA Director.
… Thanks again for your intervention here!
If you can show video of this you may have something, But as it looks from that presentation it looks like a composite image made to sex up this video with.
One image used to make a claim that you have no idea where it came from or if it was a produced image to misdirect does not a truthful basis for you assertions… The landscape of this event is littered with BS that is just meant to confuse and misdirect in ways the imagery if in context would not do… Perhaps this image was taken BEFORE 9/11 of a aircraft that is flying ABOVE the towers at a low altitude for some reason like emergency approach to LaGuardia Airport…
Context and source is very important in single images like this one.
Looking at the image it looks like it is well over the top of the tower.
Actually, my statement was intended as satire.
Thanks for more joined up thinking to punctuate the punctuated non evolutionary outbursts on these threads. The trouble is the mad speculations are not entirely misconceived. It is after all worth considering that things may have started up with Larry Silverstein having a bright idea (before buying the buildings) and also having a direct or indirect Mossad contact. Then, if you suppose (surely very plausibly) that Mossad has infiltrated Al Qaeda, or at least affiliated Saudi jihadis, you can even link it back to ObL being asked for his blessing on a bigger and better version of previous attacks (unnecessary you might say but actually better for keeping the jihadis in line). Then you only need one or two suitably placed neocon traitors to remember the PNAC Pearl Harbour reference and you’re away. It keeps it simple in a sense. You have four hijacked planes to attempt appropriately symbolic attacks on America. You don’t seriously have to explain the air force not shooting down passenger planes no one knows are heading for the WTC. WTC 7 is essentily a peripheral accident. Enough calculations have been made so that the weakening of steel by heat plus gravitational force can be presented as the cause of collapse in circumstances where everyone knows that the planes have hit the towers. OK but what about not knowing exactly where the planes will hit? Well that’s going to require really sophisticated placement of explosives, wiring, wireless controls maybe, and timing. Sure, we know a genius who can handle that. But what if one of the planes doesn’t hit? No worries. We’ll have our team in on some pretext to strip out the demoition charges. Anyway these cunning well funded Saudi backed terrorists were backed up, thanks to Saudi money, with demolition experts – some of whom, we are shocked to say, may even have been Israeli criminals. Have I shown myself adept with Occam’s hatchet?
I am in the camp that Cheney ordered a standdown, Flight 93 was to hit WTC 7 (not the White House, that story was concocted to sever the obvious link between that plane crashing before hitting target and the WTC 7 collapse), and some “rogue” National Guard pilot took care of business. But …
If I had been in charge and ordered the shoot-down of the plane, and were as venal as most politicians, I would credit the passengers so nobody accuses me of killing 200 people without cause (why didn’t you try to coax it down? etc., similar to claims made against USSR when it shot down the Korean airliner). To avoid that controversy, I probably would not take credit.
Also, worth sharing another hypothesis: I think there is also a deep state “backup explanation” for the WTC demolitions. The argument goes like this: after the 1993 WTC attack, the authorities pre-wired the buildings with explosives in the event of a terrorist attack that threatened to topple those buildings. Why? First, they were tempting targets. Second, if someone successfully attacked them, you would not want them to tip over sideways – because, given their immense size, they could take out many many other skyscrapers while tipping over, causing them to tip over, and the ensuring domino effect in an area where tall skyscrapers are one after another across the street from each other. I.e., instead of just losing one building, you might lose 20. Then the argument would be, of course we would evacuate first, then bring it down, but there would be no time to actually install and activate the explosives.
So, then the argument would be, we determined with high confidence that this “domino collapse” was going to happen, we had no choice but to activate these pre-wired explosives. We are very sorry for the lost lives, but just like shooting down one plane to prevent it from flying into another building was justified, bringing down this building was justified, look, only a few thousand casualties (ignoring passengers, who were dead already) instead of 100,000 or 200,000.
Must depart company with you here. This is actually the one theory having overwhelming evidence.
(1) Israel had in fact remote control technology for the Boeing 767/777. Boeing had provided it to them.
(2) Someone had to wire the buildings with explosives. I doubt Americans military experts could be counted on to keep this quiet. Israeli military operatives, however ….
(3) Nano-thermite was something in Israel’s arsenal.
(4) The Five Dancing Israelis, who admitted on Israeli TV that they were in the NJ parking lot filming to “document the event”, the furniture movers (a Mossad front), and the Israeli Art Students.
(5) The “white vans” driven by Israeli nationals on that day with explosive residue in them. One of the things gone down the memory hole, and I remember very well, was the claim on that fateful morning that terrorists had white vans which they would use to blow up bridges/tunnels leading into Manhattan. There was an all-out alert for them. A couple were stopped, and guess what, both had Israeli agents in them. All released to Israel by Jew supremacist Chertoff.
(6) Zionist Jew Silverstein getting control of the WTC a few months before 9/11.
(7) Evidence that Mossad was tracking the patsies – errh, “Islamic terrorists”, the fundamentalists who snorted coke, drank alcohol, smoked cigarettes and frequented strip clubs right before their holly mission to Allah.
(8) Control of airport security in all the relevant airports by an Israeli security company founded by “ex-“Mossad agents.
(9) Advance notice to certain people of a certain tribe, demonstrated either by conspicuous absence or text message notifications.
(10) The motto “By way of deception, thou shalt wage war”
(11) Ability to cover up the crime and blame patsies – a/k/a all the radical Zionist Jews in positions of power
(12) Cui bono?
Etc., etc., etc. A great link that goes into far greater detail:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it
Rumsfeld “getting a little elderly”. I’m not sure that is pertinent to the 2002 Rumsfeld of the unknown unknowns. But I recall a visit by Arthur Laffer to an Australian think tank where I was in a minority in finding him glib and intellectually unimpressive. A video was shown which I am pretty sure was this one of a 2014 reunion lunch wth Cheney and Rumsfeld. It may help firm up your views of Rumsfeld’s susceptibility to being taken for a ride by plausible neocons.
Watch “Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Arthur Laffer on the Dinner Napkin that Changed the Economy” on YouTube
Oh, never mind then. Apologies for calling you insane.
That video is interesting, although the Tehran building collapse is not symmetric, and not initially at free-fall speed or anything close. It’s not obvious how random damage causes symmetric collapse of a long, irregularly shaped building like WTC 7.
The simulation apparently shows NIST’s model of the beginning of the collapse (interior columns), then they show a cartoon of how the exterior collapsed. Not very convincing.
And so this is all rubbish?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/20/uk-pressed-for-rudolf-hess-release-from-spandau-prison-soviets-hitler-thatcher-national-archives
What do the Russian archives show concerning this fantasy for the credulous?
The hypothesis is that almost all the thermite was installed in the elevator shafts (were crews were working every night after Silverstein took over the WTC 3 months before the event), to cut the core columns (which surrounded the shafts), hence, the light would not be visible from outside the building.
As to the dust samples, both USGS and NIST have huge, chain-of-custody compliant samples still available. It’s a simple matter to test them for all kinds of explosives and their residues, which is what Dr. Jones strongly urged (he admits to weaknesses of chain of custody and really did the whole exercise to call for a true investigation, not to categorically announce the “truth” – i.e., he, shockingly, used the scientific method). But they are under strict political orders not to do so. Why?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Also here is another factor. WTC 1 and 2 were supported by the core columns, which were, even by skyscraper standards, massive. Indeed, they were designed so that the core columns alone – without any assistance from the perimeter steel – could sustain the entire building (at least, if there were not hurricane class winds, which the towers were also designed to withstand). So if there were a pancake collapse, I would expect the floors to collapse around the steel core. I.e., at the end of the day, you would still have the steel core standing, and the rest of the building on the ground around it. I.e., the floors would just “slide down” the core, like a ring would slide down a cylinder. Instead, the entire core was pulverized and no single piece remained which was longer than the trucks used to haul the pieces away, lol.
Now look at the picture below, which I also had previously linked. See how the top of the tower has significantly tilted? Aside from the angular momentum (“it should have fallen over the side of the building” observation I made in my prior post, the only way this is possible is if the entire core steel column – this massive, super-strong steel column that, all by itself, could sustain the entire building’s weight – had been completely severed at the very beginning of the “collapse” (demolition). Which part of the truss theory would account for that? I am not aware that NIST ever addressed this amazingly bizarre behavior in context of their imaginative (because politically mandated to assume fire caused the collapse and no explosives were used) “collapse by fire” theory.
While I am of the mind the actual planes were used for the event … already in the Yugoslav war they could shoot a missile through a window. Chinese consulate ….
There is also, of course, the rather extraordinarily remarkable coincidence that, on the very day of the attack, a simulation was in progress about flying planes into buildings. This simulation permitted the initial stand-down (my guess is all the planes were supposed to hit more or less at the same time, but some experienced delays, including taking off), and due to the delays, Cheney was actually required to deny the shoot-down order. This simulated event greatly helped the plan achieve success. I’m sure Mr. Dialysis in Afghanistan cave knew about this top-secret plan months in advance and was able to time the attack perfectly to coincide with it, lol. But … maybe Israel knew about it? Anyone think US might share such intelligence with Israel? Maybe the neo-con folks in the Defense Department? I wonder ….
I don’t understand what point you are making with your supposed analogy.
Is there any other physics involved than the fact that a bigger weight will cause a weakened steel beam to fail wuicker than a lower weight?
Actually I am not being speculative at all, I have some personal experience to back it up, though I will not reveal it to maintain my pseudonymity. Don’t expect you to believe me so I will make more general arguments.
If you even suggested such a scenario – if the insurance companies did, as well as the law firms – they would be immediately castigated as evil anti-Semites who do not deserve to live, let alone have your business. Moreover, even if you had a taped confession from Netanyahu, no Jew York jury (which would be at least 50% Jewish) would vote in favor of this having happened. Also, given the official declaration of what happened that day, as well as classification of all the data/evidence and refusal to let anyone else investigate, there would be no way to “prove” the theory in a court of law. E.g., legal courts have taken “judicial notice” that the Holocaust happened, meaning, they don’t even permit you to try to prove it didn’t happen. Finally, as I noted, insurance companies, like banks, are often in Jewish hands. The law firms and the lawyers in the case were all likely Jewish. They would not even contemplate the idea that Israel was responsible – it would be equivalent to asking them to destroy Israel, they would rather fight to the death than have that happen.
So at the end of the day, your analysis is fundamentally flawed.
Anybody analyzed (5) in context of subsequent narrative that no explosives were in WTC and it were the planes that brought them down?
Why would Israeli operatives have been traveling in vans in NJ and NYC on the day of 9/11 with traces of explosives and why stories of blowing up G. Washington Bridge or Holland Tunnel were spun on that day? The stories were very counterproductive for the official narrative that did not involve explosives anywhere on the ground. Perhaps they could have been useful for chaos creation on that day. Yet, I do not think it was in anybody’s interests to spin the story of planted explosives in the towers unless their purpose was to accelerate the evacuation of the towers that the plane hitting the towers were not the end of the show. But apparently it did not work because NYFD behaved as if the towers were not coming down and the damage in the impact zones was local and could be extinguished.
He is a troll who is trolling an behalf of his never satiated ego. When he runs out of ability to make any substantial points for which he could be noticed and recognized he moves to a meta-narrative of putting everything down which gives his hungry ego a sense of superiority and temporary satiety.
Would never have expected to see you advocate censorship.
Mr. Unz certainly deserves credit for tolerance. But he needs to be tolerant of correction if he is to learn anything about history. As for myself, as Sam Johnson put it, “at seventy-seven it is time to be in earnest.” I’m not yet seventy-seven, but if I get there, it will be soon, and my patience with nonsense is correspondingly short.
In particular, if he is to be take seriously, Mr. Unz must abandon the notion that what is outrageous, grotesque, impossible to countenance in the behavior of government, will not happen. On the contrary, in matters of national security, governments do whatever will work. Government is generally the work of psychopaths, or of those who understand that at the highest level politics is played by the rules of the psychopaths. That is why no government hesitates to send their own citizens, by the hundreds, the thousands or even the millions to face death or mutilation in war. That is why, during WW2, Winston Churchill shocked his own generals by complaining that British casualties were insufficient. He was right. If the Americans came to see that Britain was having an easy war, they would inevitably question the justification for sending Americans to do and die to get the Brits and the French out of a hole entirely of European making.
Concerning 9/11, I would guess that the only alternative to flying planes into the Twin Towers that would have been discussed on the golf course or in government back rooms as the necessary pretext for multiple planned wars of aggression would have been a false flag nuke attack using, most likely, an ex-Soviet back-back weapon. Of the alternatives, killing a few thousand US office workers was the humane option.
If he is to be taken seriously, Mr. Unz must also abandon the notion that Israel controls the US. Yes, Jews in America wield great political influence, often on behalf of Israel. But so what? America is, and always has been, a plutocracy where the political representatives of the people are all more less bought by the Money Power. Jews in America have a lot of money and they spend it generously on political causes, thereby wielding great influence, often on behalf of Israel. But they do it according to the rules. The politicians they own they bought and paid for. The folks who don’t like that better put up more money in opposition to Jewish power.
As for 9/11 being an Israeli attack on the US, the idea makes no sense whatsoever. The American elite may be largely bought by Jewish interests but they are not, for the most part, craven traitors. The role of Israeli agents in 9/11 was entirely comprehended and depended on by the US Government, which ordered a NORAD stand-down on 9/11, organized the confusing terror drills on 9/11, drills that involved planes flying into buildings, and arranged for George Dubya to be out of town where he could not botch a tightly orchestrated operation under the direction of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.
That the US government knew exactly what happened on 9/11 is obvious from the fact that no judicial inquiry was conducted to determine responsibility for the attack and no forensic investigation was conducted to determine the cause of the collapse of the buildings, the evidence being taken away and shipped overseas as a matter of the utmost urgency; the high-fiving Israelis being shipped home without undergoing investigation or a court appearance, the Gelitin crew who likely wired the Twin Towers never being questioned. And then there was Cheney’s order on the plane at the Pentagon:
If Mr. Unz wish to achieve a useful comprehension of modern history, he will have to abandon his beloved NY Times and the magazines with long articles by journalists mostly under the thumb of the CIA, and read some serious historical scholarship. As a start, he might enjoy the works of Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s history mentor at Georgetown University, a Harvard grad, and a math wiz, who, as an undergraduate, got a B on a history elective and decided to switch from biochemistry to history, going on to become one of the most interesting historical commentators of the 20th century. His great work, Tragedy and Hope, is still relevant to understanding the American drive for world domination, a drive that Quigley believed entailed a risk of the loss of Western civilization, a fear amply justified by trend in US politics.
You are such a typical Zionist. Only Jews say such things and then pretend someone else said them.
Wrong. The NYFD made no effort whatsoever to put out the fires (which were propane fueled) since those buildings would be brought down. They were there to evacuate people. The NYFD themselves evacuated because they were told “another plane is coming” which of course was not the case since there never were any planes but the time had come to bring the buildings down since the propane was running out.
The known facts are conducive to satire. And also open to the interpretation that Mossad knew something was going on with unusual movements of suspicious Arabs and sent special armed surveillance teams to try and find out if it could be turned to Israel’s advantage. It may not have been realized that this was not merely an Al Quaida information gathering junket but actual Arab terror operation in progress, and there could have been a quite late realisation that the Arabs were actually going to do something. One option would be to make sure there was a spectacular expose including perhaps an apparent “accidental” explosion during IED construction by terrorists intent on trying another 1993–style truck bomb attack at the World Trade Center for example.
If the Mossad teams found this was an actual terrorist plot, they might be told to merely watch and let any plot develop as long as it did not involve for example blowing up the Israel Embassy; that is quite possible at first blush. If Mossad are good enough they may even have known all about it from an early stage and being hidden accomplices to an Al Queda plot they let develop rather than directing it. The dancing and filming suggests the people on the roof (who were low level) had no advance knowledge of events, but that does not mean that Mossad chiefs did not.
True but most organisms infected with parasites pursue their own strategic-genetic interests and the parasite goes along for the ride and might even help its host. For some tactics of the organism’s genes, an infection with parasites can be an advantage by making them more adventurous and spirited for example. What I am trying to get at is it’s more likely Israel watched or even helped a plot along rather than built it from the ground up.
What about Brennan? He was the guy that signed off on the Saudi terrorists strange visa approvals… then is rewarded with becoming the CIA chief and proceeds to do Netanyahu’s bidding in formenting the Arab spring, Lybia, Syria, and isis attacks in the region. If we are looking for an inside jobber then we need look no further than that deep state operative…..
You want to sound like the mastermind behind 9/11 but you are just a small bit player.
How silly can you get?
Yes, that is rubbish.
These are good questions, but you really should read Khalezov’s book. There was plenty of radiation at the scene — it was not prompt radiation, but filtered up through the debris covering it, as is typical in deep underground explosions (his book talks about 150 kilotons. a little over 50 meters below the very bottom of each tower and its subterranean garages etc.). The upward push is the blast waves crushing and dustifying everything above until the waves ran out of steam (about 2/3 of the way up). Once the blast waves did their job on a tower, the part of the tower not so destroyed then fell freely into the dust and pebble cloud below it pushing parts of the cloud out and throwing big pieces not dustified long distances laterally. Thus the tower was really destroyed from the bottom up but then appeared to collapse top down (gravity eventually wins the battle).
All that was left of a tower after the blast wave came roaring through was the top part of the tower. All of the core supports (especially in the bottom third or so of the tower) were gone. The middle third were pieces of varying size from pebble on up to large pieces of steel beams. That’s why Judy Woods is so close with her explanation. There’s really no “hinge” for a sideways fall.
Although Khalezov does not know that WTC7 was destroyed with an underground nuke, he believes so and I agree. It looks different from the towers simply because it’s a much shorter building and “all” of it got dustified. I put “all” in quotes because there’s a part of WTC7 that did not get dustified. A look at the WTC7 rubble pile shows a part of the periphery of the building that just fell inward, landing on a jumble.
That behavior is actually further proof that a subterranean-origin blast wave took down WTC7. The structural footprint of WTC7 and the apparent footprint were not the same. Part of the bottom of the building that showed as its exterior was really a “curtain wall” that was not deeply connected to the ground. The curtain wall could not have the blast wave through it because the blast wave would have to do a 180 to go through the curtain wall from the top (impossible) and the curtain wall wasn’t well enough coupled to the ground far enough down for the blast wave to go through it on the way up. The blast wave follows the path of least resistance.
I’m skipping the seismic event objection simply because seismic events can be faked by commission or omission. I’m personally inclined to put more weight on objective phenomena not susceptible to government influence.
Getting back to the radiation question, which I responded to summarily, there were plenty of indications of radiological activity at “ground zero” — which Khalezov likes to remind you meant the site of a nuclear event. For one thing, shortly after cleanup started workers at the site were watched dosimetrically. Does anyone seriously believe this was due to smoke detector radiation? Cancer has killed more first responders since 9/11 than died on 9/11. A particularly disturbing form of cancer has been thyroid cancer. It’s a cancer with a sole-source etiology: Radio-iodine exposure. Guess where that came from.
The insidious thing about ground zero radiologically is that most of the problem was in alpha and beta radiation not the gamma radiation we think of in nuclear explosions. Underground nuclear events do a good job of containing any gamma in the cavity produced by the event. Our body is well protected against alpha and beta unless we breathe/drink/eat an emitter and that’s exactly why so many first responders and cleanup people either had problems or, later, were watched with dosimeters. Those vapors coming from the “pile” (interesting choice of noun) were far from clean radiologically.
As an aside, Khalezov used to be a Soviet military intelligence officer involved in monitoring nuclear test blasts and peaceful uses of blasts. In that capacity, he was informed about the demolition scheme for the towers (which was also used he thinks at Sears Tower and the UN building). He says he knows there was a nuclear demo system for the towers.
If you think through how underground nukes would be used to take down the towers, you understand why the sequence in which the buildings fell was the wrong order. Logic would have WTC1 fall first. It was hit first and had a worse fire. The sequence was backwards because the delivery system for the nukes (underground mini-rail system?) was controlled from 7 and had to take 2 down first. If WTC1 had fallen first the mini-rail would be likely compromised so WTC2 could not be collapsed later. I can go on, but reading Khalezov will answer further objections very well. He might be off-putting to some people because he believes in “no planes” but the rest of his book stands with or without planes. Using planes makes the 9/11 attack more iffy — suppose one of the planes smacked into a wrong building through pilot error, e.g.
By the way, dustification is weird. There was a video out years ago showing a dustified piece of some core columns which stood for a few seconds and then fell apart disappearing as it went. The piece was called the “spire”. It may have been CGI or it may have been real Dustified matter will behave the way the spire did. The material in an underground nuclear cavity will behave this way until it cools, reforms, and becomes glassy.
There is much more in his book that I’m not even touching upon. It’s quite a read.
You are not worth whatever they pay you.
You are a great kidder. The unusual movements of suspicious Arabs were Mossad agents pretending to be Arabs with stolen identities pretending to learn how to fly airplanes.
I accept that you sound as though you know what you are talking about (though I am a little surprised that you write of a jury case). I would add that the defence would have had to implicate the plaintiff(s) and I have no doubt that Silverstein would have demanded that he couldn’t be provably connected to it. While I have previously expressed doubt that Mossad could persuade him that nothing could go wrong that was on the starting hypothesis that it was initiated by Mossad, not him.
So, yes, the insurance companies might have seen a problem in positively proving that there would not have been enough damage caused by the terrorists (however the final collapse was brought about) to justify the plaintiffs’ claim. That reinforces your argument.
How silly can you get?
As silly as I need to be to communicate with silly people.
You see, not everyone can reach high levels of discourse like I can. So when I am dealing with someone who can’t handle serious discussion, but does understand silly, I use silly rhetoric to make sure they understand me.
It is a skill I learned.
Well, the comment total has now passed 140,000 words and is still going strong, but I have a question for those more knowledgeable about 9/11 conspiracy theories…
It looks like a few people have raised the familiar claim that the Saudis were actually behind 9/11, or at least very heavily involved. Frankly, I’ve never understood this argument, except perhaps as a strange means of deflecting attention from Israel.
The Israeli motive is extremely obvious and the Bush Administration was filled with ardently pro-Israel Neocons, who might have assisted the plot.
But in the case of the Saudi government, what was the possible motive in attacking the WTC and the Pentagon, and then blaming the attacks on Arab hijackers, many of them Saudis? Why would the Saudis wish to make the American people so hostile to Sunni Arabs in general, and the Saudis in particular?
Perhaps those who have spent many years focusing on 9/11 can answer this puzzling question for me…
Early in comment # 1078, Canspeccy pontificated: “If he is to be taken seriously, Mr. Unz must also abandon the notion that Israel controls the US.”
… Later Canspeccy backpedaled, said: “Jews in America have a lot of money and they spend it generously on political causes, thereby wielding great influence, often on behalf of Israel.”
… Greetings Canspeccy!
… For me, organizing American oligarchs/billionaires who don’t like Israel’s “great influence” is a great idea to break the control that YOU (!) have informed Ron Unz that Israel does not have. W.T.F.?
… Naturally, “Jewish Power” incentivised wealthy “opposition” to play by their rules- of-engagement or else they become not “too big to fail.”
… For one example, Ted Turner. Might be mistaken here, but while stud Ted was about ready to pasture his marriage to Jane Fonda, I think he had pie-in-the-sky (grandiose) ideas about forming a major news network, uncontrolled by Jews.
… Otherwise, I cannot name a late-20th & 21st Century American tycoon who put distinct distance between themselves and “Jewish Power.” Uh… could you, Canspeccy?
… Thank you. Hm. Leave Ron be?
If it was all America all the time in regards the ENTIRE event, It would be a very natural tendency to blame others and have any elements you control keep the doubts going at the maximum rate the public will accept.
I have see so many thing that condemn the US government at the top levels, i have ZERO faith in any of their claims and cannot trust any evidence they produce.
I doubt ALL israeli claims in this thread, I doubt ALL Saudi claims as well.
But those that do buy these claims have made the Mid-east a bombed out ruin with the notable exceptions of Saudi Arabia and israel. You have to wield some very hefty USA level power to sell this fact and have these ‘Scapegoat’ lands come out with most favored nation status. They both have huge deals in action today. Why?
Great comment Can…what can I say, you nailed it every which way…
One thing we ordinary folk can never understand is what is really going on behind the curtain…all we ever get to see is a Potemkin village…a kind of disneyland from which you never leave…
We are actually getting a plain look at this fact lately as some kind of brouhaha behind the scenes has caused the ‘steady state’ to flip out and come right out from the shadows and pen opeds in the NYT…not to mention the putchist book by CIA man Woodward…
The budget for the intel agencies and homeland security etc is what about 200 bil a year…?…that’s enough to run a not-so-insignificant country…what do we really know about what is possible with all those people and the capabilities and resources they possess…there is no ‘law’ for these people…no police you can call…because they are above all of that and well beyond the reach of ‘justice’…
I would say the media and Hollywood especially are a big part of this machine…they build the sets for our Potemkin village, day in and day out…how does it all work…who are the shot callers…?
It’s something we cannot know…but it surely works on a need to know hierarchy…with a very large class of enablers at the bottom…for instance in the media and ‘entertainment’ industries who earn their bones by being faithful koolaid gulpers…and as you go up the pyramid…the characters get more mysterious and heavy…and all they do is push buttons and these directives cascade down the ‘chain of command’ to the ordinary fools by the million who are all working unwittingly to keep the whole dinseyland ride going…
There’s a few of those everyday fools here too…they want to be ‘respectable’ and not be shunned into the ‘conspiracy’ camp…these are the Kapos of our society…they will rather embrace the ‘wisdom’ they receive from the ‘credible’ authorities way up on that pyramid, than to listen to their own inner voice…
The very nature of the beast is such…any very large social grouping of humans tends towards opacity with respect to its inner workings…whereas a small place the size of of a village say…not so easy…or even a small nation like Iceland, where things still get done by pitchfork on occasion…
And each one of those people was Jewish. Imagine my surprise.
You have correctly identified a number of commenters who are here just to sow confusion and doubt, Lot, Wizard of Oz, Tyrion etc, to name just a few. These loathsome pond slime devalue this valuable website by encouraging diversions off topic and puerile responses to sincere comments, which is made all the easier by allowing the use of anon and its variants.
Ron Unz could not have made it easier for people to pick a user name and it would really help to identify and ignore these types if this was rectified and user names be required by all so that the comment histories and commenter to ignore functions could be employed to their greatest advantage.
Because diesel fires melt steel? At least make some effort to not be a complete idiot here, try to have some self respect.
Not necessarily me, but Ron Unz asked: “Why would the Saudis wish to make the American people so hostile to Sunni Arabs in general, and the Saudis in particular?”
That’s an easy one, Ron!
… The Saud Royal family knows better and they understand that a large percentage of Americans hate their own government, each factional “other,” & their own shitty lives.
… Experienced Saud Royals know who counts in America! And it ain’t you, Ron! And it ain’t Brother Nathanael’s RJN!
… In conclusion, the realpolitik Royals understand how the American-street’s hatred for Sunni Arabs can instantly change to hatred for Iranian Shiites.
… Good night & thanks a lot for enabling such a steamy comment stream!
But the calls were probably made from Airfone, so the point about cell phones not working at that altitude is moot. Cell phones weren’t ubiquitous in 2001 yet anyway.
If the calls didn’t actually happen, you have to explain how so many family members and others on the receiving end of those calls reported them. These are real ordinary civilians who haven’t wavered on their stories. Crisis actors? Paid off? Fame seekers, all of them? It’s a lot harder to reconcile. Airfone is the most logical explanation.
Troll canspeccy:
It is little idiotic comments like the above that fully reveal your true colors, you miserable shill.
I guess you must not like Giraldi much either, eh?
So, Unz horrified you repeatedly, most recently with his excellent article on the holohoax and now with this one… your desperation is nearly palpable… puts a smile on my face.
Well, since it is so terrible here, you can always f–k off to “nicer” locations, why don’t ya?
Perhaps you could now add your thoughts on the persuasive case of how two of the Three Little Pigs houses collapsed in the Warner bros produced video. I’ll be keeping an eye out for it. Thanks.
Yes, you got it. I have been aware of the issues surrounding 9/11 since 2003. After seeing the collapse of WTC7 for the first time I really started wondering about 9/11. There weren’t too many high quality truth sites at the time but the ones I did find seemed to make really good arguments for demolition. When I read the “debunking” side it was merely hand waving, childish antics and name calling.
No problem chuck. BTW don’t let the rude a**holes on this site who call you names and belittle you get to you. Glad you can contribute to the mass awakening that is taking place now; hence the paranoia with all the trolls who try to distract from the truth, and when they fail completely in doing so, will revert to hasty little ad hominems and take out their anger on others.
Here is C-SPANN having to answer to an onslaught of callers calling in with 9/11 (building 7) questions for guests and/or hosts. Perhaps more of us should do they same….. Beat them down with the truth while raising awareness! enjoy:
It has occurred to me that your comment was sarcasm in which case I apologise and ask that you disregard mine.
Cheney probably gave stand down orders for the plane that hit the Pentagon (based on Mineta).
But Flight 93 took off 45 minutes late, and three targets were already hit, the jig was up. If Cheney didn’t relay Bush’s shoot down order too many people would have questioned him. Cheney definitely gave the order, and F16s we’re in the air. That is confirmed. The only question is did they shoot down the plane or did it go down from action in the cockpit.
I say it was probably shot down, based on Shanksville eye witness testimony and other info. But I suppose this is the sort of distracting debate about 9/11 that clouds things up, as the WHO is certainly much more important than the HOW.
Well, FB, how can I prove the photo is real in a documentary in which I had no part in, nor in uploading the video? I thought that would be obvious to most readers.
I do not blame you for your hesitance, but since the video is produced with factual information throughout and with little to no controversy, plus the fact that it has 14.5 millions views (there was no overt attempt to censor it) leads me to believe the picture is real. Moreover, given the fact that there exists no photo, that I am aware of, which clearly shows the airplane that hit WTC1 there is nothing to compare it to. The video itself is ALL about the events of 9/11.
Now, let me ask you this, if the photo were proven to be authentic, would you say that it was a smoking gun type evidence that the plane that hit WTC1 was NOT AA11? Whatever way you answer, does the existence of this photo, along with the many other unanswered questions and blatant lies in the government story, necessitate a call for a real independent re-investigation into 9/11?
Can is a troll deflecting attention from Zionist power and influence…
Much LIKE YOU.
FB has a solid record of obfuscation re Jewish power and of Philo-Semitism and, obviously enough, these types do NOT want the truth about the perpetrators of 9-11 to be revealed.
Not long ago FB(Fart Blossom) completely spammed a Giraldi comment section with his ridiculous attempts at demonstrating that Israel is simply a US military bastion in the M.E and all these wars, like Iraq and Syria, were really largely merely US imperialist actions.
Anyone reasonably well informed knows fully well that this is BS.
For example folks, take a look at what this lying imbecile FB wrote not long ago
“Back in 1967 we had the USS Liberty incident…it was the POTUS that hushed that up…back then the Israeli lobby was tiny compared to today”
The Zionist lobby was already extremely powerful in the 1940s, and it was decisive in pushing the ZUS position re Palestine.
Read ‘The Real Story of How Israel Was Created’ by author Alison Weir
https://ifamericaknew.org/history/realstory.html
Plasma cutters are way cheaper than aeroplanes. Add a bit of diesel and you’re good to go!
Ron Unz: “It looks like a few people have raised the familiar claim that the Saudis were actually behind 9/11, or at least very heavily involved.
Frankly, I’ve never understood this argument, except perhaps as a strange means of deflecting attention from Israel.”
That’s all there is to it, you nailed it.
I believe it was 800.
Hi, Ron. There is one serious writer who has the proper credentials to refute the arguments put forward by David Ray Griffin.
His name is Ryan Mackey, a NASA scientist. Here’s his bio:
Here is Mackey’s rather long (300+ pages) white paper, On Debunking 9/11 Debunking: Examining Dr. David Ray Griffin’s Latest Criticism of the NIST World Trade Center Investigation:
http://www.jod911.com/drg_nist_review_2_1.pdf
I’m curious to see if you find his analysis persuasive enough for your liking.
Well this is what happens when people are just too lazy to expend any mental effort whatsoever…
This cell phone issue…like many of the issues surrounding the official 911 story has some very PRECISE wording of the ‘official’ narrative…
I pointed you to a very thorough article with complete footnotes of the entire official narrative…
But did you bother to even look at that in order to acquaint yourself with the BASIC FACTS of the issue…?…of course not…it’s so much easier to just stay planted at your keyboard and continue emitting clouds of gas into the air…
Here is a question for you…let’s say a small child who is learning math comes to a parent and says he is unsure of a homework problem…the parent says ‘ok, what’s the question…?’…and the kid says he doesn’t actually know what the question is because he hasn’t actually ever OPENED THE FUCKING BOOK…
So how is the parent supposed to help this kid…you tell me…
I know the complete official story and it is right there detailed with all the dates and facts and footnotes in that article I pointed you to…and now you come back and say you don’t understand what the problem is…
Well I do retardo boy…the problem is that you don’t even know the fucking question…it is NOT about airphones…IT IS PRECISELY ABOUT FUCKING CELLPHONES…because the actual cell phone bills have been presented into the ‘official’ record…
And now if you knew these basic fucking facts then I would not have to deal with a retarded fucking child…
And as for anyone who is working on pointing out the blatant technical mistakes in the official document supposedly ‘needing to explain’ anything…then that makes you a double retard…because the issue under scrutiny here is the official story…not those trying to get to the truth…
If the official story does not add up then that is the end of the story right there…we then know that it is bullshit…and on that basis we demand an investigation to find out the TRUE FACTS…which obviously are NOT KNOWN AT THIS TIME…
If a lawyer is defending an innocent client who is accused of a murder…is it the defense lawyer’s job to now also find the real murderer…?
It doesn’t work that way sonny…and you have wasted enough bandwidth here without even bothering to even get remotely familiar with the actual facts of the issue…
Except, Sidney Blumenthal claims that Woodward was an FBI assed:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/sidney_blumenthal_bob_woodward_has_been_an_fbi_asset_since_deep_throat_.html
May I suggest that the cell phone problem has points of resemblance to the thesis that Rumsfeld and Cheney were prime movers. It is unbelievable that so many alleged recipients if calls would have made up the fact if calls from husbands, wives and friends. I have followed a link to a well expressed analysis in a series of which the one in question was PC4. In the end it seemed to come down to two calls that the recipients thought were from cell phones but maybe could not have been. One account didn’t explain why a recording negated the use of the phones which did work in aircraft and the other depended on believing the recipient’s claimed memory of seeing her husband’s cell phone number on her phone when he called. It is so easy to recognise the kind of mistake she may have made that I am inclined to regard the cell phone anomalies as no significant problem. The alternative is mind boggling.
It’s certainly credible.
Not really. The key element is just to repeat it as often and possible and have people like Mark Walsh inject ‘structural failure mostly because the fires were too intense’ at a key time. It was pure psyop, no science.
Wifi network of detonators and software which could have been off the shelf or it could have been custom made. It would have had basic patterns that adjust to exact aircraft entry point. That’s low tech, even for 2001.
Given the implausible maneuvers taken before impact, it’s absolutely certain that they had a high degree of control over their trajectory. Given this, why would they miss?
No. You involved ObL without any reason to do so. Where’s the evidence?
I’ve never seen any evidence for this, Ron.
I think if Stalin were to have been watching all the post-911 TV he may also have remarked: Quantity has a quality of it’s own.
Yes if the photo can proved to be authentic then it would help…but proving a photo is authentic is much more difficult than proving a photo is fake…there usually has to be some kind of corroboration, as in several people at the same time taking the same picture, as with the tower 2 video…
And yes again…the whole point of continuing to investigate is to gather ever more evidence of the falseness of the official story…that is what I have been saying all along…in an earlier comment I pointed out the very careful and precise scientific work being carried out by the University of Alaska at Fairbanks…
It is vitally important to continue exactly this kind of factual work…I disagree very strongly with those who say we have enough evidence and we can now move on to ‘catching’ the perps…well that is just silly…because it is all about what the people actually believe…and these perps just happen to be so powerful that they do whatever they want anyway so who are you going to call to arrest them…it doesn’t work that way…
The only thing to do is to keep on plugging with hard science…
Agreed, not because the evidence, to the extent not classified, is weak, but because, for urgent political reasons, nobody was prepared to make those arguments (it would destroy them whether or not the argument won, would have a massive material adverse effect on their tribe if the argument did win, and at the end of the day it wasn’t their money being paid out, all of US was “insurance taxed” to pay for it).
It would be like saying the Earth is Round in the Middle Ages, to be burned as a witch, even if you were convinced beyond doubt that it was true; but in addition to being burned as a witch, your entire clan/community/family would suffer a great loss of power and prestige, maybe even war. So I think for the Jew tribalists, this was a very easy choice, even if they were open-minded enough even to contemplate that Israel was behind it (lots of Jew “patriots” don’t necessarily know what’s going on, just like many Americans don’t, but their “patriotism” is a huge asset to the tribe/country nonetheless).
Or, you can learn to evaluate what’s being said without relying on reputations and hand-holding from above. It’s a very valuable skill in today’s online environment. The flip side is even better – “anons” can say whatever they want because their own reputations are non-existent.
If you want a hug-box, go somewhere else. The rest of the Net is filled with them. If you want a messy but open discussion – where you’ll have to personally evaluate reason and data – stay.
This is why this site is growing in terms of traffic. True free-speech is a rare commodity nowadays.
how so? do provide insight as to how you are so easily able to ascertain this from the photo?
Now when watching this Noncontroversial video in its entirety what strikes you as false–besides the photo that you insist is fake in order to give it some extra zeal?
This observation certainly takes the cake….it is as if your thoughts have become more paranoid. So the producers decide just before showing this photo AND ZOOM IN ON IT–show a large screen TV with WTC1 aftermath of the plane striking it while onlookers watch in disbelief right in the center of Times Square, and the banners reads: ‘Tuesday September 11, 2001’–as a segue to a photo of a plane flying VERY CLOSE overhead of WTC1 (in a restricted airspace) on its way to LaGuardia Airport on a different day altogether (notice the proximity of the plane to WTC1)?
That is the most implausible and outright idiotic suggestion I’ve ever read–one that has some sort of shred in plausibility at least. Yet this does not surprise me nonetheless coming from the imagination of a person who–on this very thread in comment #2–suggested that a Tuned Mass Damper full of U-238 (placed there originally when the towers were built as a means to destroy the towers when their life-cycle reached its end) was placed on top of the express elevator shaft near the roof line that reached the basement level (a substantial mass–“600 tons” by his/her own statement–without any extra supporting beams to account for that in the blueprints) causing the U-238 to fall (by his/her own account: “perfect drop chute from the bottom of the damper to the lower parking levels of each tower”) all the way down, combust along the way, and cause inferno-like fires that lasted for 99 days.
Now, I am being portayed as some kook by this very same person….that is RICH!!!
No, we are not arguing for authority, unless you consider the laws of physics to be an argument from authority. It is very simple. Is there any experimental evidence to support any aspect of the government’s story regarding the collapse of the towers?
1) Can anyone replicate the destruction of a steel-framed high-rise with fire and impact damage? To date, No.
2) Can any of the preliminary causes of collapse be verified? Such the inward bowing of the perimeter columns due to the catenary action of the sagging floor trusses? To date, No
3) Can regular office fires lead to ntergranular melting including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel?
4) Can you get a period of 2.25-2.5 second free-fall collapse with fires only?
Demolition can explain all of the above phenomenon.
“Why anyone would find differing accounts of who saw whom when on one of the most chaotic days in recent history as being suspicious escapes me.”
Haha. You obviously are quite the newbie to 9/11 research. The location of Cheney on the morning of 9/11 is of the utmost importance to the official story. You might want to learn a little bit more before you start sounding off.
Here’s how I would look at it if I were appointed prosecutor of this case (dream come true job!).
I do not know who did this deed (and this is honestly speaking, if you got a different impression from my comments so far). I know from the publicly available evidence what I believe is the most likely theory, but there is no doubt in my mind that many aspects of it, perhaps the entire theory, would change after a proper investigation.
Such investigation should have the powers and much greater funding than the Mueller inquiry. Subpoena power. Interrogation power. Criminal charges power. Power to review all classified materials.
For example, many respondents to your question have maintained Saudis played no role and it’s Jewish deflection. I can’t rule that out, but it also does not seem like the most likely possibility. But there are specific claims made regarding Saudi participation (or Israeli participation), and those can be investigated. For example, did the Saudis, or did they not, transfer money to the alleged hijackers? Is there any other connection between them? If not, it is likely the Saudis were not involved, but you would want to see the full classified report on the 9/11 Commission to see what credible allegations have been made, as well as do an independent investigation. The number of Saudis involved in the operation alone is enough to justify the House of Saud as a suspect. But then we also have a long history of Saudis sponsoring Wahhabist extremism and terrorism, including the Afghani mujahadeen.
For a whole lot of reasons I mentioned, you could do the same for all the areas where evidence, motive, opportunity, etc. point to Israel.
There is just a tremendous amount of evidence that has not been made public, and that has not been explored. It’s impossible to come to an authoritative conclusion until that has been done. And even if it is done, and publicly, nobody is going to agree on the result, no matter what it is, but at least the entire process should be made as transparent as possible with classification only for extremely important national security concerns. All of the videos of Washington that were stolen by the FBI must be immediately and fully released, it is incomprehensible that there could at this juncture be any “national security” reason to hold back their release – EXCEPT, for the fact that the official story is a lie. No doubt the perpetrators consider their arrest and punishment for their crimes a threat to national security. I would bet my life on that.
I can’t answer that question but will simply add these…
Who had the power to bypass existing security measures? (Such as the drills mimicking the actual attacks)
Who had the power to control the narrative almost immediately? (Many live reports suggested controlled demolition but were exercised from the much more viewed evening news accounts)
Who had the power to stifle genuine investigations and effect a cover-up?
Who had the power to destroy the evidence?
Who has the power to maintain that cover-up right up to this day?
There is an effective technology that permits one person to speak through an AI computer that transfers the voice to that of another person (artificially generated). It requires a good amount of original voice recordings from the spoofed person, depending on the quality of the algorithm.
Remind me, in the transcripts you have seen, were their any conversations that involved intimate details that no third party could have known? I recall it was all the “I love you I’m scared there’s terrorists fuck” kind of conversations, and then call drops. But find me one conversation that looks like no third party could have relatively easily faked it (remember mass surveillance on 9/11 was already on a large scale, and many private things, like calendar events, email contents, SMS contents, etc. were known by the spooks in a searchable database anyone with a clearance can access).
But of course this is what a real investigation would uncover. What were technical possibilities at the time? You would subpoena the airliner, wireless network carriers, and wireless phone manufacturers records to see what they claim about calls from airplanes, no doubt many tests have been done for this over the years. As well as getting at the best software for speech conversion and testing how well it works, and if it can fool family members over a low quality line.
Etc. 🙂
So what (you say)? you must be a Isreali-firster. Here, take a look at this video which I’ve already posted here (Notice Tony Judt’s reaction towards the end of the video–something to be aware of):
It’s more likely the Saudis organized the hijackers in conjunction with the Israelis.
The thing that stands out for me, is the incredible amount of Zionist Jews involved in this thing. From Amdocs, to the Airport security company, the trade Center ownership and security… the comptroller at the Pentagon… A duel citizen Israeli Rabbi???(wtf!)… it just goes on and on. I realize there are a lot of Jews in NY and floating around the government.. but they seem to show up *everywhere* in this story in a way that seems almost unbelievable. If it doesn’t raise big suspicions, it probably should.
I suppose the tine has come to posit another theory….
What was the intended target of flight 93?
In looking at the official records the intended flight plan had the aircraft heading cross country on a normal routing for that flight.
If you have been buying all the claims in the media and from the top levels you might be thinking the capitol or the White House was the target… BUT.. the planners must have been serious morons to think that the aircraft could cover the distance it was at from D.C. without being intercepted in the theater they were operating. They would surely know Stingers or worse was waiting at the presidents crib.
So i did a whole series of flights from Newark to the field in Shanksville… About the fifth flight i started to think as i flew..What if the D.C. area was not the target? What if the target was close to Alternate divert point relative to the path of this flight as it would have been if it was a normal day.
What Target would provide a similar target close to the logical divert alternate along that routing… KORD?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hare_International_Airport
Well after a few circles of the runways at O’ Hare i saw a very logical target..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willis_Tower
Much of this tower is constructed the same as the WTC, It’s one of the worlds tallest buildings, It holds an iconic status and is in the range one could have a realistic chance of being a target like the WTC.
I looked at the Hancock and many others but if i had to say what would have the heftiest shock value target on that list it was the Willis was the only one that made any sense.
Did forces that did not want to allow this to happen shoot the flight down? Was an in air intercept the cause of this flight diverting from the flight plan and turning south?, Much of the whole thrown together story is demanding a look at the thrown together look to the entire story, the fake ‘let’s roll’ propaganda crap they pushed, the films to sell it, On and on and on, you become nauseated by all the lies about this flight if you spend any time looking at the record.
From the first few flights i did to replicate flight 93, the time i spent during those flights trying to fathom the thinking going on in the cockpit if it was as advertised… not one of those sessions made any rational sense if D.C. was the intended target, But if the intent was to look like a divert to O’ Hare and a over shoot and impact with the Willis tower i could fathom the way it would easy to appear to enter a landing pattern and then simulate a problem like a flap malfunction or a gear problem , what ever and a need to execute a go around putting the aircraft into a envelope to strike…
Chicago has always had their own levels of control. Life is not like a normal city, thinsg at the upper levels happen with a Chi town bent in most things that go on there, I could see why they might not want to have their city involved like Manhattan was.
Now if this is what was intended to happen, Three cities attacked New York,Washington D.C. and Chicago… the story would have a much better tone to it if it was so.
Now i can already hear Tac having a shit fit, the anon bunch blowing a gasket… But anyone thinking the flight 93 thing was a weird assed story and some serious big lies are involved in all the top stories about it and its end, NO cockpit recordings, Very questionable cell phone calls and a narrative made for the movies and A MOVIE about it…
Well thinking the entire flight 93 story is a response to a failure drove those initial discovery flights i conducted in my flight simulator. What would have been the results if things went to plan…?
If i am correct, There is a very large building sitting smack dab in the heart of Chicago chock full of evidence that cannot be removed from this building, Concrete floors laid on top of similar floor pans, In fact there is most likely more structures built with this issue of liability in mind in regards their end of life plans.
When one has a wide look at the perhaps and what if, brand new realities start to come into light.
Would a building like the Sears tower; sorry Willis tower have a vastly different thinking involved in their life planing versus the WTC towers? The similarities of the two sites necessitate similar requirements to all aspects of their lifespans and eventual removal.
So if you want to prove some of these things, there is a whole series of floors to have a real good look at in that tower, perhaps other places too. All you need is a hole saw,a ladder.a battery drill and a real heavy set of balls and you can blow this issue wide open with one core sample from under one of those floors in the Willis tower.
Much is worth investigating given all the lies we have been told and all the subsequent lies being told today to further hide the truth and muddy the waters, Much of it appearing in this thread.
Collapse of the World Trade center one,two and seven is an obvious lie, every time you hear collapse you can be assured it’s a lie, EXPLOSIVE demolition is the fact of those buildings NOT collapse, This lie seems to be the hardest one to die BUT die it will as more and more truths come into the view of all persons wiling to see those truths.
This event is going to be a huge problem eventually to the powers that brought it about. America is in very deep trouble and dealing with this event is NOT optional if America is to survive.
Now to the attack of the trolls…
No…the cell phone story is not so simple that it boils down to whether or not someone saw or thought they saw, their husband’s cell phone on the caller id…
The Mazucco film ‘New Pearl Harbor’ shows the actual phone records from the phone companies that were produced by the government as purported evidence…some of which have strange anomalies in formatting that deviate from the standard…
Also there is a PC3 article that accompanies the PC4 article you mentioned that gives a lot more material…you can’t dance around these issues by trying to present some kind of reader’s digest condensed version here…
One image, looking like it was from some other point in time, used to bolster another event.
If you can prove this was not this, i suggest you do so.
You said kook, not me.
What is so paranoid in making an simple observation about a possibility of an image capture used out of context?
It’s not like we don’t have a long list of similar uses of imagery being used in similar ways…
But Tac knows all right?, Forget the record shows no other imagery to support this single image in a produced video has anything to do with 9/11 attacks..
“No, fire is a proven mechanism for bringing down buildings.”
Can you tell which demolition company uses fire to demolish steel-framed high-rises? The NIST report on WTC7 even said that WTC7, “was the first know instance of the total collapse of a tall building primarily due to fires.”
“I am aware of no evidence for either of those.”
See Appendix C of the FEMA report,
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.”
This piece of steel was from WTC7. Can fire do this? No. This is a signature of a thermitic reaction.
“they have poor powers of observation and poor judgement.”
Indeed, many people do.
The Short Reign of Ryan Mackey
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/b/MackeyLetter.pdf
At first glance I like your reasoning based on the strength of the core. And I haven’t taken enough extra or sideways glances to produce doubt. However I am interested in your “they are under strict political orders not to do so [i.e. not to test the chain-of-custody-secure-dust for chemical residues]”. That’s the sort of statement I don’t believe from the average conspiracy theorist on the internet. But you give me reason to suppose you can support that allegation. Sources please.
A test that would impress me is for litigants against the Saudis or whomever to seek to have the dust tested and, to that end, seek a court order. Then one would have on the record the official reaction to that and that would put us well ahead of where we appear to be now. Is there not already some such evidence to support your allegation?
Si1ver1ock,
I’ve debated with “debunkers” for years. You must understand that they do not care about discovering the truth of 9/11. Their arguments are disingenuous and always made in bad faith. They will make up the most ridiculous nonsense off the top of their head just to hand wave the evidence.
If the “debunkers” really wanted to prove the government’s side they would do actual experiments to show the validity of their claims. But 17 years after 9/11 this has not been done. We know why. Because the NIST story contravenes the laws of nature and real world experiments will never replicate their claims.
“Galileo wrote to Kepler wishing they could have a good laugh together at the stupidity of the mob’; the rest of his letter makes it plain that ‘the mob’ consisted of the professors of philosophy who conjured away Jupiter’s moons, using ‘logic chopping arguments as though they were magical incantations.”
Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy
You point plausibly I believe to a Saudi involvement which would be fairly remote from the King and those closest to him. There are a lot of very rich Saudis who could easily have rounded up a few million dollars to pay for the operation, or at least the most observed parts. There could be relations of the King who are quite as cranky as ObL.
I accept that there is more but PC4 was after PC3 and left unexplained how the recorded message (from Brian Sweeney I think) could be thought to be from a cell phone. And it did rely on the Burnett call having appeared as from the husband’s cell phone number. Occam suggests not believing that a pseudo cell phone call was created with a perfect simulation of the husband’s voice….
The Short Reign of Kevin Ryan
https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-missing-28-pages/#comment-1405740
I think I said “mind boggling”! I find It hard to believe the technology would have been well enough advanced in 2001 for anyone to take the risk of incorporating it in a plot with the risk that something completely inessential could fail in a way which pointed incontrovertibly to skulduggery.
Are you trolling to waste time as you accuse others of doing or can you give coherent and at least plausible answers to your questions with even a little convincing reasoning thrown in?
I would look into the Visa Express program we had with Saudi Arabia,
May 2001: Five 9/11 Hijackers Take Advantage of New, Anonymous Visa Express Procedure:
The US introduces the “Visa Express” program in Saudi Arabia, which allows any Saudi Arabian to obtain a visa through his or her travel agent instead of appearing at a consulate in person. An official later states, “The issuing officer has no idea whether the person applying for the visa is actually the person in the documents and application.”
Five hijackers—Khalid Almihdhar, Abdulaziz Alomari, Salem Alhazmi, Saeed Alghamdi, and Fayez Ahmed Banihammad—use Visa Express over the next month to enter the US. Even 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed will successfully get a US Visa through the “Visa Express” program in July (using a false name but real photograph), despite a posted $2 million reward for his capture. Only three percent of Saudi visa applicants are turned down by US consular officers in fiscal 2000 and 2001. In contrast, about 25 percent of US visa seekers worldwide are rejected. Acceptance is even more difficult for applicants from countries alleged to have ties to terrorism such as Iraq or Iran. The widely criticized program is finally canceled in July 2002, after a public outcry.
p.s. We did remove our forces from Saudi Arabia after we invaded Iraq in 2003 so maybe that was part of the deal.
One possible motive could be there are certain anti-infidel beliefs of the family cult that rules Saudi Arabia as a dictatorship that they keep from outsiders, and if not actually a motive, their assessment that they were so important to American grand strategy to be untouchable after doing 9/11 and leaving no direct evidence of Saudi “government” involvement. The latter seems to have been an accurate assumption, whether the Saudi family dictatorship actually were responsible or not, because they have not suffered an invasion.
Lack of any nontrivial motive is not an alibi, for many terrible crimes are commited out of a warped self-assertion. The main reason for thinking that the Saudi Arabian family cult “government” probably were innocent of 9/11 is not that they could have expected no benefit in their own warped minds, but rather that they probably just do not have the technical and human resources to have pulled 9/11 off.
The crucial resource the Saudis lacked is an Israel lobby type prestige permeating the American armed forces, CIA, NASA and State Department that would make it career suicide for anyone in those institutions to suggest that Israel might have been responsible for 9/11, or even to identify and surveil Israeli agents in the US to see what they were up to prior to 9/11. Subservience to a benign-Israel paradigm means there is probably far less certainty about what Israel was up to back then than there is about Saudi Arabian activities. It is absolutely possible the Saudis could have had a tight little operation that went unnoticed, but that would entail believing that an aluminium jet airliner and fuel fire could bring down a WTC tower in an hour without additional explosives and a controlled demolition.
Neocon assistance would have been after the fact in their frogmarching of Bush into invading Iraq, which they did in fact do. The Israeli motive is very much more obvious, to a materialist Western mind at least, and I suppose Ron Unz knows the way Israelis and Neocoons think, but for all anyone knows the Saudi inner party/family cult might be satisfied with their 9/11 plot in some ethereal–thumostic way we cannot understand.
So you’re not going to answer any of my questions.
Noted.
“I am aware of no evidence for either of those.”
Yes, in the presence of heat, chemistry happens. That doesn’t mean thermite was present.
“Thermitic reaction”? It’s called combustion. There’s nothing special about thermite. It has a fuel and an oxidizer. You don’t seem to know what you are talking about.
You, for example.
That’s exactly how I feel about “Truthers” like you. You not only have no respect for the truth, you don’t even know what it is.
I don’t believe you know a single thing about physics. I know a lot more about it than you do.
Yes. The recent building collapse in Iran. The collapse of a freeway overpass in California a few years ago.
See above. You’re wrong.
They weren’t “regular office fires”.
You don’t know how fast the building fell. You only saw grainy YouTube videos of it falling. You don’t know what the actual timing was.
No, I’ve read lots of material. Most of it provided by demented idiots like you. I’m quite familiar with it, and it is still all a bunch of crap.
That’s just a still picture of a plane flying over the WTC towers. It isn’t from 9/11. It was used to make a point discussed in the narration (skyscrapers and the airline culture of New York City).
It’s a logical assumption to make. There is no evidence for the use of thermite.
First we have the fact that NIST expressly stated that it did not test for explosives or explosive residue. Second the mission statement for NIST was to figure out how fire collapsed the building. I.e., it was not instructed to find the cause of the collapse, it was instructed to figure out how fire could have collapsed them. It took them several years to finally come up with a (classified) model that shows how WTC 7 collapsed. And even in the video of that model, which has been posted several times on this thread, the collapse looks nothing like the actual collapse. Third we have a number of people suggesting it was a controlled demolition, including Dr. Jones, who also provided a peer-reviewed scientific paper that demonstrated the presence of nano-thermite in the WTC dust.
Based on all of the above, and many other things (a lot of which have been noted on this thread, and I do not care to repeat them now), it baffles the mind that NIST would not test for explosives or their residue. It is not an expensive test. Scientifically speaking, it is just impossible to rule out explosives as a possibility that would warrant the tiny expenditure of money to conduct it. Indeed, it took many years for them to actually find an allegedly feasible explanation for how fire brought down WTC 7. Surely a controlled demolition is a much more feasible explanation, if you had no political instructions and no “official story” to uphold. Indeed it fucking boggles the mind that they did not test for explosives. It proves beyond even the slightest shadow of any doubt that the entire investigation was utterly corrupt and a cover-up.
The same can be said, BTW, of the 9/11 Commission. It’s mandate was to study “the intelligence failures that permitted the official story, assuming it is completely true in each and every respect, to occur”. It has no mandate whatsoever to establish what in fact happened on that day. This criticism was made by the 9/11 families and the commission members, among many others (lack of access to evidence was a huge sore point).
I don’t have links for you, though I could provide them (I have a fairly large 9/11 archive, obviously 🙂 ), I have spent too much time to search them out, but you can find critiques by the 9/11 family and the commission easily enough on the internet, as well as the NIST report. The fact of no testing for any explosive materials or residue was published as a FAQ on NIST’s website, and is available as FAQ 22 at https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster-failure-studies/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation:
As to the “responses to the previous questions”, you can read those yourself. They are so entirely insignificant that scientifically speaking it is absolutely unacceptable to come up with the conclusion they did. Sure if they try really really hard they can find other explanations for the phenomenon that occurred, but just because with lots of imagination you can find an alternative explanation for what looks like snow falling, doesn’t mean you can scientifically conclude that it is unnecessary to test for snow. That is an absolute corruption of the scientific method, indeed, it is its negation.
May i again thank you Mr Unz… This thread is proving to be a vast treasure of the lengths forces on the other side will go to keep sowing the misdirection they have been tasked with regurgitating.
Any truth seeker has to learn these many angles to hone their bull detectors to a fine point.
If the other side is using these sorts of commentary threads to hone their A.I. machines, We also have to use them to hone our thinking and logic muscles.
I have noticed the tendency in the ones willing to post comments is to antagonize and ridicule. I have seen this effect in many such commentary streams over the 10 years i have engaged them, The massive amount i have learned about them over that time span i would not trade away for all the tea in China.
This one is much the same,Has the same personas at work, and most of all i notice a feverish bent to their commentary. A desperation i have not seen this bad in a very long time. The days and weeks after the events of 9/11 produced similar top level pissing contest participants… back then they had a heavy fog of shock to sell their wares, But this time they are slugging it out in a very intolerant crucible, Folks are getting wise to their tricks and manipulations, Have a series of previous examples of BS to judje there current offerings and reject them.
I never needed to spar with anyone of them, But i chose to for the many onlookers that never ever comment about any of it, They are the real reason anyone should wade hip deep into the Shill and Troll set and let blast with the BFG set on holy-F#@k.
In reality anything i might have to say will never be commented on by anyone that will say one word about it, But i know the doing of it reaches far more than i ever realize. This is the path of doing this work, Having all the shit fall on your head and mess with your life…. Those that need a story to see the path to truth.. They are the work this bunch of paid shit disturbers are failing so much at convincing, That fail is my gain every time i engage them, They never know when they screw up because they have no empathy towards the others they are trying to communicate. They want to force upon you a meme, and a supporting stream of receptive regurgitation’s of all the things they have seen as successful from past sessions.
I have learned the thinkprint of many of these users at work in places like this, They are not too hard to identify and make note of if you do enough of it. Like fingerprints they tend to remain unchanged and static, thus making them easy to see for one with enough experience doing it.
I have to say again, Thank you Ron this chance to tell some stories and trigger some enlightenment really does mean a lot to me and others like me working this issue on many forums.
This thread is going to be a very good study after all the muck has hit the wall. And be sure to than all the others helping you to moderate these comments, They rock too. 😉
As I noted elsewhere a few posts up, it’s simple enough to check that with an actual investigation. Simply get copies of all commercial, private and military voice generation software available in 2001 you can get your hands on and test it on some folks using a low-quality line and see if family members can be fooled. Interview people who allegedly got calls and figure out how authentic the voices sounded. You know, investigate.
Speculation is not a basis to accept or discard a potential theory of the case, particularly where a scientific approach is hardly unduly burdensome. I figure a proper investigation would cost about $100 million.
Then you didn’t see all the video, or you are a poor observer. There was significant structural damage to WTC 7, and extensive fires which raged all day:
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html
Not a bad theory, assuming (some of) the calls were genuine. Temporary cell phone base stations were commercially available in 2001.
Intriguingly, the official reports refer only indirectly to billing records associated with calls.
Calls to cell phones were paid and logged at both ends in 2001.
In 2017 the Guardian was Soros property.
So why should I read what Guardian writes ?
As to the hunt for explosives, USGS does not anyplace indicate that it tested for those. Given the large incriminations in the Truther community about lack of such tests, do you find it a bit odd that they would not come out and say “we tested for that”?
As to your Particle Atlas, a large number of materials have no picture, particularly the suspicious ones (the metal oxides – oxides being formed in the incineration process). Perhaps this is intentional, because they look like nanothermite? Or perhaps not, as the “master” page for the Particle Atlas indicates, the study was conducted by the EPA for a particular purpose, the potential adverse health effects of the dust. “Other laboratories are currently studying WTC dust for other purposes.” Unfortunately it does not tell us who is testing for explosives or their residues, presumably because nobody did it, this being an item of great interest to observers.
On the plus side, they have provided the particle spectra per an Oxford ISIS energy dispersive spectrometry system, as described in the “master page” I linked above. Now I am going to compare a few of the spectra to the Dr. Jones research paper available here. If you compare the equipment and settings description under the heading “Methods” of the “master page” against the equipment and settings description on page 9 under the heading “Chip Size, Isolation, and Examination” of the Jones paper, you will find the equipment and settings were quite similar.
The result of the scans of the gray and red components of the nano-thermite in the Jones paper are presented in Figures 6 (p. 13) for the gray and 7 (p. 14) for the red, as explained on page 8, left column.
I find that on the Particle Analysis, there is a remarkable similarity in the spectra between Figure 6 and Iron 2 – indeed it looks like a perfect match. Some of the other Iron ones in the Particle Atlas may match as well, with slight variation.
As to Figure 7, for the red chips, the closest seem to be Iron 1 (for which we have no picture; the single anomaly in the spectra is the lack of Aluminum), then Carbon 02 (though the associated image looks completely different from the nano-thermite shown in Figures 3-5 of the Jones paper) and some of the ones marked “Concrete”, particularly samples Concrete-03*.
But none of them matches as perfectly as the gray particle, presumably because samples also contained cross-contaminants. If you were actually looking for thermite you would need strictly to isolate the red and gray particles and test them separately, and it is not clear the EPA did that. The EPA “master page” also notes: “It is recognized that different laboratories will have different equipment, analytical conditions, and capabilities which may result in differences in the energy dispersive x-ray spectrum for a given phase. Particle size and shape can also affect relative x-ray peak heights. ” Also, in light of the preceding sentence, note Jones’ observation on p. 17 of his paper that “a significant migration and segregation of aluminum had occurred in the red-chip material”.
All in all, it seems to me that the Particle Analysis is consistent with the presence of nano-thermite, particularly in samples Iron 1 and Iron 2, but more specific testing for the isolated thermite particles would need to be done to arrive at a firmer conclusion. Note also that Jones tested 4 samples of each of the red and gray layers, whereas EPA seemed to do only one test. Particularly in the red chips, the Jones tests showed much more variation than on the gray layer, though every layer indicated Aluminum, though this was highly segregated, as Jones observed, and we don’t know if EPA tested the entire chip.
The obligatory Sept 11 debate this year was interesting, did not know that among physicists in Germany and the Netherlands, maybe in other countries over here too, there is consensus that the collapse of the the towers can only be explained by the use of explosives.
Alas, our media suppress this, a physics professor who told this to his students in the Netherlands was immediately ridiculed.
It was not very wise of him to say also that Sept 11 was perpetrated by the USA government, this is not a physics subject.
Did not see he was fired, but if he was, it would not surprise me.
This is the freedom of expression in the west, as about gas chambers, the Armenian genocide and migration.
First:
I believe that the “how” is at least as important as the who and why. Let’s say Building 7, if not the the two WTC Towers, was brought down by zionazi Mossad war criminals, *without the knowledge of the Bush regime*. Well, then, how was this feat accomplished? Even a lorryload of explosives wasn’t enough to seriously damage the WTC in an earlier attack. A controlled demolition needs a lot of explosives, carefully planted in calculated positions, and detonated at predetermined times and a fixed sequence. How did a few, even a few hundred, Mossad war criminals achieve this *without the knowledge of the Bushy gang*? If the Pentagon was hit by a missile, *how was this missile sited and fired to do that much damage* without the active connivance of the Bushy criminal empire? It can’t have been a pipe stuffed with dynamite, slapped together in 15 minutes in a basement; that kind of missile has to be at least as large and capable as the average military cruise missile. How was this brought in, positioned, and used, if it was without the knowledge and connivance of the Bushy gang?
Second:
If the Bush regime did not perpetrate 11/9, if it did not at least allow the attack to go ahead with its full knowledge, it certainly went out of its way to act as though it had been eagerly awaiting the attack. That very day, Rumsfeld was asking his staff to “sweep it all up, things related and not”, remember? The “Pearl Harbour moment” the neocon cabal had been eagerly looking for to start on the wars for Afghan pipelines and Iraqi oil?
Third:
I do not believe for one nanosecond that George W Bush is a tiny fraction as stupid as he pretends to be. As I said on another occasion,
Fourth:
The article seems to pretend that there’s any difference between the zionazi pseudostate and the American government. No American politician can survive without zionazi money and approval. Zionistan runs America just like certain parasitic wasps regulate the behaviour of their caterpillar hosts. Simply put, if the zionazis ordered it, there is no reason to imagine that the American regime of the day, *no matter who ran it*, would demur.
Fifth:
There’s also a very simple question: if Mohammed Atta and the other 18 were actually the hijackers, if they did hijack four passenger planes to use in kamikaze attacks (*irrespective of whether those attacks produced the damage they allegedly did*), who incited and financed them? Could they have been steered into committing the attack by agents provocateur? If so, who were those agents provocateur? It’s hardly difficult to get a possible answer. How many stupid young Muslim men have been deliberately incited to commit terrorist attacks by FBI “sting operations”? Who has a record of doing this?
Lastly:
Has Unz never heard of Operation Northwoods? The idea that an American regime wouldn’t kill American civilians to further a political agenda is hilarious.
Enough said.
Ron Unz might want to check into the financing of American media companies as many of them are not profitable; it would make a great Pravda piece. Their continued existence and content/business models seem quite unusual for profit-seeking entities. For the most part, they seem to be funded by a combination of clandestine government subsidies and elite billionaires with government connections.
A few examples:
The Young Turks: popular economically progressive, anti-establishment YouTube channel; their main host was fired by MSNBC for not towing the establishment line, something they directly stated he should do; it was co-opted in 2014 by a rich billionaire with a $20 million dollar “investment”; their coverage went from Occupy Wall Street to a bizarre mixture of BLM and crazed Donald Trump videos. They are profoundly unprofitable and recently cut their staff. It would make more sense from a business standpoint for them to be less extreme, less offensive to the white male YouTube base, but they somehow have failed to understand this. Dave Rubin, their token white male, was driven off the program a few years ago. YouTube has been accused in the past, before the 2016 election, of unfairly promoting them and their fundraising activities.
BuzzFeed: this is an interesting case for study; BuzzFeed is a popular online and YouTube “news” site catering to millennials; however, as crazy as this might seem, their business model is based around a CIA-backed Twitter knock-off scam from 2010 whereby the US government tried to overthrow Cuba’s government. The scam was to use money filtered through Pakistani shell companies to fund a social media company that would get popular through mostly innocuous cat videos and the like. Afterward, the plan was to manipulate the platform’s algorithm to funnel politically-charged anti-Cuban material to Cuban influencers for dissemination. This is surprisingly like BuzzFeed’s model: noncontroversial YouTube clickbait + occasional left wing videos supporting the official government narrative filtered to viewers and recommended by YouTube algorithms. I believe BuzzFeed has been bailed out multiple times over the years. Most recently to the tune of ~$200 million by NBC Universal, I think it was. Their business model is profoundly unprofitable. Just who is paying the bills for all these employees over there? Google Adsense revenue cannot support a large outfit like BuzzFeed.
Vox: online “news” site + YouTube content creator; same situation and losing business model as BuzzFeed…but yet they are still in business somehow.
Vice: online “news” site + YouTube content creator founded by conservative Gavin McGuiness; it went extreme left after purging him and now also has the same losing business model as Vox and BuzzFeed: noncontroversial content + clickbait + extreme left-wing videos interspersed that back up the official narrative. They are cutting content creators, but still are somehow in business. How can these outfits afford to pay for all these people, even on the cheap?
Salon.com
: similar story; cut staff, moved to a cheaper location. It went off the rails around 2014 (strange coincidence as with the Young Turks and Marvel Comics). Since barely 1 in 5 of their most likely readership (white males) would ever vote for an extremely left-wing candidate, what sense did it make for them to go extreme left? And I mean EXTREME, anti-white left. Shouldn’t their model be center-left, instead? Who funds this nonsense as it is obviously a losing business model?YouTube: vitally important video hosting service bought by Google; barely profitable; regularly censors material and bans creators, including a bizarre incident where they down-ranked Russia Today in the midst of criticism from Hillary Clinton and other American government officials; the ADL and SPLC serve as censors for the site; videos now link to Wikipedia in an effort to delegitimize certain foreign media channels. They have also secretly removed several unflattering videos of Barack Obama and his wife, including one that comically claimed Michelle Obama was a man, despite no TOS violation; do they ever remove videos making fun of Donald Trump?
I also suspect that companies pay YouTube to uprank their content in the listings. There was a time when CNN’s channel barely had any views at all; then YouTube changed their algorithm after the 2016 election and now suddenly their videos are really popular, often garnering millions of views. Left-wing presenters like Jimmy Dore have pointed out this oddity. I also find that American late night show and Comedy Central clips are regularly promoted to me, despite me almost never clicking on any of them; they are all profoundly, and even offensively, anti-Trump by the way.
Washington Post: this is probably the most interesting case. Back when it became apparent that online competition was going to ravage the legacy print business, Amazon founder and billionaire Jeff Bezos bought it; his company, Amazon, is marginally profitable and mainly through extensive mail subsides provided by the US government; there have also been allegations that they have received other funding from the US government, including the CIA, and cooperate with the NSA/CIA. Bezos then later bought and now finances the WaPo, probably at a loss or near loss; the WaPo is known as the establishment’s mouth piece and that definitely hasn’t changed under Bezos; they ran a shameful McCarthyite front page story timed with Trump’s inauguration alleging a vast Russian conspiracy to elect Trump; they refused to name their sources despite coming under heavy criticism due to the scope, and implausibility, of the people named – basically, anyone who attacked Hillary Clinton; but that was just the beginning…their neocon editorial staff has continually assailed Trump for not attacking Syria and Russia, despite these not being popular policies among the public or even the Republican party, and many of their most rabid columnists are unqualified buffoons. Take Jennifer Rubin, for instance. Her previous job before the Post? She was a Hollywood lawyer. What qualification does she posses to speak on foreign policy…or anything? How is it that this person is allowed to advocate for war against Iran when that is obviously both unpopular and unwise? Especially considering her horrible promotion of the Iraq War disaster.
*Another interesting coincidence with the WaPo is that many high profile government leakers don’t just simply leak to this newspaper (and the NY Times) but to specific employees of this company, usually a close personal friend or former acquaintance like a roommate (see James Comey leak). It’s strange that these prominent newspapers would have so many personal connections to high profile government officials. It’s almost as if they were hired due to their connections and not their journalistic chops.
The Weekly Standard: this is the most obvious example at what I’m trying to hint at. This is media billionaire Rupert Murdoch’s personal propaganda outlet. Back during the run up to the Iraq War, it was losing about $1 million per year. It is still in business, however, as it is heavily subsidized by Murdoch due to its pro-Israel stance. Their promotion of the Iraq War was shameless. Just do an image search for their covers leading up to that war – cover after cover declaring Iraq had WMD and that the case was “closed.” Perhaps tellingly, their front man, Bill Krystol has made many public comments recommending for a deep state take over of the government against the people’s will; the overthrow of Donald Trump. In one MSNBC interview, he said in regards to public opinion “so what if they don’t like it” when challenged on this bizarre recommendation.
Newsweek: traditional news outlet with brand recognition; big financial loser put up for sale multiple times. They ran a big exposé of Bitcoin a few years ago. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies came under ferocious assault by Obama back when he was president. The US government does not want any anonymous sources of funding apart from their system of control, which regularly censors controversial content (see PayPal). The important point here is that the NSA often illegally and clandestinely funnels information to police departments procured from their spying and then helps authorities to cover up the source; I wonder if the US government did the same for this story as the situation – publicly outing the supposed creator – as some kind of criminal struck me as quite strange; there was nothing illegal or untoward in what he did, assuming they even had the right guy (what makes me suspect the NSA here: Newsweek’s evidence was called into question as unconvincing, but they were sure anyway, which is dangerous considering potential libel lawsuits that could ensue…it is almost as if the NSA couldn’t reveal more evidence without tipping their hand). Perhaps they were trying to make an example of this person. Expect more assaults on cryptocurrencies when the democrats take back the White House.
Polygon (perhaps even Kotaku): an online gaming “news” site that regularly produces far-left opinion pieces following the official establishment narrative; they have led a campaign to harass game developers into including story lines attacking Trump voters and conservatives in their very expensive video games + promotion of “politics” in video games (left unstated is that by “politics” they mean “their politics” as they often take hypocritical stances when game developers express conservative opinions). Including controversial politics into expensive games that have budgets rivaling Hollywood movies would obviously be financially unwise, especially considering that a disproportionate number of gamers are white male. Since white males make up a huge proportion of AAA console gamers (not including cheap mobile games) and barely 1 in 5 of them will vote democrat, it is strange how Polygon has based their business model around this obviously losing strategy of insulting their customers; apparently, they want game companies to do the same. There are rumors that they are funded by George Soros or one of his subsidiaries. I do expect them to win, eventually, however. The microtransaction model has given big game developers some small leeway in insulting their audience as they know they can make back lost revenue through scamming rubes.
American comic book companies: barely 1 in 5 white males will vote democrat but, bizarrely, Marvel Comics decided around 2014 to replace characters that catered to this audience with extremely politically-correct, race-replaced, gender-swapped, characters + infuse story lines with propaganda. Predictably, the results have been disastrous.
Even profitable companies have seen strange things about them pop up in the news over the years:
Google – bizarre case of Jim Mattis traveling to Google headquarters; the reason given was nonsense.
NBC – secretly recorded a tape of Donald Trump; a high-level NBC News executive funneled it to, you guessed it, a former roommate at the New York Times; no plausible explanation has been given and no credible investigation has taken place. NBC also covered up democrat donor Harvey Weinstein’s misdeeds, even lying about it afterward.
AT&T: a prominent American phone company that has a room dedicated to taping phone lines for the NSA.
Yahoo!: the Snowden documents revealed that their chat service (Yahoo! Chat) was hacked by the NSA and set to take pictures of participants through their computer’s camera; naked pictures of thousands, if not millions, of Americans are now stored in the UK for analysis by A.I. facial recognition software; no plausible explanation as to the reason for this was given; I suspect that this was a “digging up dirt” campaign; now, future politicians, business leaders, and political dissenters will have embarrassing information on them ready for to be leaked should they go against the narrative; and that’s all the more plausible for them to do after they’ve gone overboard with the Russian hacking thing. Skype, Microsoft Xbox and other services have been speculated as having been compromised in a similar manner.
Other bizarre media policies enacted by various governments in relation to these companies:
Elimination of Net Neutrality – will almost assure streaming monopolies by a few companies and billionaires with links to the establishment because upstart companies cannot afford large throttling fees imposed by service providers.
EU copyright directives 11 and 13 – impose a link tax on memes and certain copyrighted material; assures continued monopolies by Google, etc. because upstarts cannot afford to impose the strict regimen required by law; these monopolies can be more easily controlled by EU law than lots of smaller competitors and Google has now shown they’ll easily compromise and censor for the sake of profit as they have just done in China; this legislation also limits the type of online discussions believed to have contributed to Donald Trump and other non-mainstream candidates getting elected.
Then there are the myriad think tanks like AIPAC, JINSA, CAMERA, The Ford Foundation, CATO, the American Enterprise Institute, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy….just to name a few. Look up “Patrick Clawson + Iran” on YouTube and you’ll see what I mean. Ask yourself, “just who is funding these groups?”
——————————————
My personal theory here is that the American deep state is setting up for the transition away from a constitutional republic to a one-party state (democrats) that resembles China or ancient Rome; this state would necessarily have to suppress dissent and manage public opinion in various ways in order to maintain cohesion. Producing a conformity of consensus through various media outlets is one way to do this. Their motivation is quite simple: America is about to transition away from truly democratic elections due to demographic changes brought on by immigration and differential birth rates. Therefore, a system must be put into place to hold the “country” together. Perpetual war against Russia, clandestine funding of “news” sites, intrusive government spying, sponsoring large media monopolies, making examples of dissenters, and brow beating resistant white male culture is their choice on how to do that.
That looks to be an MD-80/DC-9, but as others have pointed out, the photo is an outlier of suspect provenance. I wouldn’t hang an argument on it.
In so far as your reference to a rag-tag collection of 19 Arabs armed with box-cutters” reflects a view that ObL and Al Qaeda couldn’t have been responsible for hijacking and crashing four planes on 9/11 I invite you to read about the Bojinko plot perhaps in the course of reading the Wikipedia entry for Khalid Sheik Mohammed (which certainly hasn’t been edited to make the US or the CIA look good). Obviously he gave much false information under torture or threats to his family, but there seems little doubt that he proposed and planned attacks using multiple civil aircraft and had close connection for a time to ObL. Accordingly there would appear to be no overwhelming objection to regarding the hijacking and crashing of the four aircraft as basically Al Qaeda/ObL/KSM’s contribution possibly facilitated by others whose real allegiances the Arabs and KSM wouldn’t have known or even suspected.
I write this partly to give strength to one of the few people who may be moving the 9/11 mysteries toward resolution. The legal action by some group of lawyers looks like a step in the right direction but I can see problems for it proceeding far.
I don’t know what evidence there might be for ObL’s active involvement though one Wikipedia article (I think it is the one on Khalid Sheik Mohammed) says ObL nominated Mhammed Atta for a leading part. I can only go so far as to feel certain that ObL would have been pleased to support any such plan and, as I noted, used, if only like Kaiser Söze, as a figure in the background to keep the jihadi suicide warriors on track.
Post of the day. Thank you, Anon 299.
Requiring usernames makes people accountable which means they had better think carefully about what they post. This encourages self-censorship and steers discussion towards politically correct outcomes. We’ve got enough sites like that already.
On the same note, I’ve been meaning to ask Ron why unz.com is http instead of https. I don’t think the server load would be that much more?
Before we even consider this question, I’d like to see some evidence that the alleged hijackers actually did something.
Repeating an allegation on fox news 3×10^8 times doesn’t make it true.
Is there any evidence that Saudis were involved or that the alleged hijackers did anything at all? Weren’t some of the alleged hijackers still alive and well afterwards?
The plane flight patterns were too precise to be flown by real pilots in commercial airliners, let alone amateur jihadis. This rules out the main function that the alleged hijackers are supposed to have performed. So what’s left? Any evidence?
What’s the melting point of the eutectic material in question? Can office fires get that hot?
(Spoiler: 1400 C, No)
Second question: Where did the sulfur come from?
(Spoiler: If you rule out thermite/thermate, I really have no idea!)
Thermitic reactions are special, and no chemist would refer to them simply as combustion.
They key is that there are no gaseous products to carry the heat away. This means thermites can reach much higher temperatures than reactions producing CO2/H2O/etc.
You must be referring to my statement that Unz should not have published Freddy Boy’s pathetic “Tin Foil Hats” article, no?
Well, I don’t consider that advocacy of “censorship”. I consider it self-evident that that article constituted pure intellectual fraud, because Fred Reed, quite obviously, knew nothing about the subject. He just didn’t know what the broad lines of debate were or anything because he had never read any of the 9/11 Truth literature.
What you’re arguing in essence is that somebody should have the right to write a movie review of a film he never even saw or write a restaurant review when he never even ate at the restaurant, because, if you don’t allow that, you are opposing “free speech”. Or advocating “censorship”. I don’t think free speech can include a right to engage in fraud. By analogy, “free market” don’t imply a right to commit fraud, does it? A free market of ideas tends to assume good faith on the part of the participants, so if somebody is engaging in fraud, I would say that all bets are off as regards “freedom of speech” or freedom of whatever.
Common sense tells you that freedom is constrained anyway. That we live in a so-called “free society” doesn’t mean that you have the right to “do it in the road”.
But actually, come to think of it, I wrote something more polished about this whole topic elsewhere. You see, I am trying to work up my own website (well, not just my own, with some collaborators) and I wrote a manifesto here: https://heresycentral.com/manifesto/
The relevant text from the manifesto is the following:
But, you see, the problem is that if you want to get anywhere in an intellectual venue, at some point, certain questions have to be considered to be factually resolved. Like, if you have a site devoted to astronomy, obviously you don’t give flat earthers any space in the name of free speech. If you want to have a venue for worthwhile discussion, you can’t just keep proving over and over again that the earth is round, say.
And that’s even assuming that the flat earthers are acting in good faith. A lot of this sort of stuff is a disruption agenda anyway.
So, I guess another way of putting this is that I’m not a free speech fundamentalist anyway. I believe in free speech, other things equal, but obviously, having a situation where you’re just completely helpless against trolls and disinfo agents, that’s not workable.
Anent comment 1091 from our host, a very apposite question regarding motive of Israelis v. Saudis: Israelis, sure, but why would Saudis do it?
The parasitic caste of Saudi royals owe not just their posh life but their existence to CIA. Read up on Miles Copeland (who did much of his official business elsewhere.) Every Saudi princeling knows, the day after he fails to meet expectations as a loyal henchman, he will be squirming neck-deep in a hole with rocks bouncing off his head.
Pleasing CIA might make Americans hostile. So what? Saudi royals deal with the people who run this country. They know Joe Blow is firmly in control. They are unfussed by induced delusions of popular sovereignty. Their complicity in attacking the US civilian population permits intensified repression that offsets any public animus.
The motivating interests are not national but institutional. Parasitic CIA kleptocrats need repression. Parasitic Saudi kleptocrats need repression. Repression keeps criminal states safe from the subject population. That’s why a new Pearl Harbor is win/win. The mutual benefit for criminal states is COG/COOP, the PATRIOT Act, the USA FREEDOM Act, secret law, and a permanent CCPR-illegal state of emergency.
Here is the segment in the film ‘New Pearl Harbor’ that deals with the cell phone issue…it is about 17 minutes long and gives all the details…
Tell me after watching this if your distillation of the story has anything to do with anything…the fact of the matter is that the FBI reports on the numerous cell phone calls are a matter of the official record and those FBI documents are presented on screen here…it is not just one person on the receiving end of a call that saw the caller id…these people are interviewed here…
We also note that the 911 Commision reports [plural] changed over time to downplay the cell phone issue, after it became clear it was bogus…but not actually saying it was airphones [since the SPECIFIC airphone calls were already on the record], just being ambiguous…
But the fact of the matter is that placing an airphone call involves talking to a GTE airphone operator…the famous ‘let’s roll’ call is placed by an airphone and the operator is interviewed here, about 13 minutes into the segment start I pointed to earlier…
So there can be no confusion between the airphone calls, which were labeled as such in the official documents and had to go through a live operator…and cell phone calls…
Again…we have here a case of laziness…people just want to comment BEFORE actually acquainting themselves with the details of the issue under discussion…
Possibly not needed.
The planes destroy the wi-fi boxes on some floors.
The command is sent from the lowest floors.
What ever floor finds itself no longer in contact with the next floor detonates.
And so it goes.
I knew some of them were loss leaders but I didn’t realize the scale of the problem. They’re all paid megaphones!
It certainly would make a great American Pravda piece.
First of all your question is wrong…because it does not take into account the SIZE of the two respective beams…if they are the same size, then the one with the bigger load will fail first…
If the beam with the bigger load is sized bigger then it will carry the bigger weight at the same amount of weakening loss due to temperature…in fact if the beam is much bigger than needed it will carry that bigger weight and not fail at all…
And this is how buildings are built…the building structure gets stronger as you descend, since more weight needs to be carried…
That stronger structure means MORE steel is used [in a steel frame building]…that fact, in turn, means that the amount of heat energy needed to bring that greater mass of steel to the same temperature of weakening requires a LONGER time of heating…since heat transfer from a flame to a piece of steel requires time…
The fires in both buildings burned at the same temperature…that is a physical fact [even according to NIST and I have already posted their flame temp models]…think of two identical stove elements both set to maximum…you place a small pot of water on one and a big pot of water on the other…which one is going to boil first…?
This thermal property of a material is called heat capacity [aka specific heat] and it means it takes a certain amount of energy to raise the temperature of one kg of that particular material by one degree…if you have a mass that is greater, it means it takes more energy to bring it to the same temperature as a smaller mass…
This means that the building with the fire at the lower level is going to need to burn LONGER than the fire at the higher level, because more steel mass is there…this goes contrary to the notion that the building collapsed first due to the greater weight…
From physicist Steven Jones’ 2016 paper in Europhysics…
Now he does not address the vital fact of just how heat energy from an open flame is transferred to surrounding objects…in fact neither does anybody that I am aware of…this is a MAJOR opportunity for new scientific investigation, based on the very solid science of heat transfer…
Heat transfer is a very precise and important engineering discipline and introductory info is available on wikipedia here…and here…
At some point in this discussion I may post a technical explanation of how heat transfer actually works…with a worked example of the math…
There would have to be a big payoff for taking such a risk with technology and the possibility of human error, e.g. mixing up names or m watching the wrong voice to a name. That would have to be the concealment of the fact that the planes were, even if hijacked, not flown into the WTC, Pentagon etc. You still have to dispose of passengers and crew. I don’t buy it.
Morning, geokat!
… Had Ron Unz not asserted to be deficiently versed on both US government-approved and revisionist 9/11 event reports/conclusions, I assume Ron would be familiar with the “credentialed” work of Robert Mackey to whom you offer respect.
… Fyi, Ron vowed to return to the drawing board on this article, and maybe, just maybe, & after his perusing Mackey’s “300 + pages,” David Ray Griffin’s criticisms of the NIST World Trade Center Investigations will undergo…, uh, scrutiny.
… To date, geo, am surprised you have not caught friendly-hellfire from L.K yet. Also, I suggest your fair-minded comment would not see Light of Day at Grand Inquisitor Revusky’s “Heresy Central.”
… As you know, I place more confidence in what’s beneath a scholar/professional’s rib cage than that which exists between his/her ears & upon their resume. Thank you, & be well & aware!
Hearsay. This should be inadmissible outright, let alone after considering that KSM was tortured.
From wikipedia:
In March 2007, after significant interrogations, Mohammed confessed to masterminding the September 11 attacks, the Richard Reid shoe bombing attempt to blow up an airliner, the Bali nightclub bombing in Indonesia, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the murder of Daniel Pearl, and various foiled attacks, as well as numerous other crimes.
What? How busy has this guy been? A real Dr. Evil? Or did he just confess to whatever he was asked to confess to? Was he even the real KSM? Would it make any difference if they just picked some random Muslim off the street and tortured him instead? Has ‘KSM’ spoken publicly, or have we heard everything from his captors?
Camp authorities have strict controls over the taking and distribution of images of the Guantanamo captives. Journalists and VIPs visiting Guantanamo are not allowed to take any pictures that show the captives’ faces.
As of 2017, the case is progressing through the legal system.
Wow so this ‘KSM’ is still in guantanamo bay 16 years after the event. This says that there’s not enough evidence to convict him, even in their kangaroo courts. It also says they’re careful to keep him away from the public. To me, this says two things:
A) He’s innocent
B) He may not even be the real KSM
Why do you feel this? Do you know him? Or is it because you’ve been relentlessly bombarded with anti-ObL propaganda for the last 17 years?
Who is the real ObL, as separate from the ever changing actors in the videos that kept surfacing? What did he actually do? Where did he live after 2001? Where, when, and how did he actually die? If we’re honest with each other, neither of us have a clue.
Just like KSM, his image is larger than life and, just like KSM, his image is not controlled by him; it’s controlled by the very same people who have always controlled the narrative of these events.
You might have read lots of book and probably are a book worn but you don’t know about US politics. Al Gore won both the popular vote and the Electoral College. He didn’t need Florida, nor he allowed to vote count to be continued in Florida, when the Florida State Supreme Court allowed him. He threw the towel in. He is from Tennessee, he didn’t get the Electoral College vote of 4, in his own State, which would have put him ahead winning Electoral College without Florida. He just wanted to make the statement that he was the real winner.
The Tribe has committed lots of in the last 100 years, even murdering JFK and threatening to murder the 41st. President George H. W. Bush.
Do you really believe that it is so easy to defeat The Tribe, that it will take only take 2 months. Go back to your books. Even Ron Unz agrees with his Freudian Slip that Israel didn’t do 9/11 and to quote him from his above post #1038:
So, both Ron and I agree that Israel didn’t do it. That’s leave the only possibility that it is an Inside Job. However, we don’t agree on the motive of Inside Job:
Ron Unz: Inside Job motive being money and oil.
I: Inside Job motive being to pin it on Israel, and like a fool Israel walked into it.
Doesn’t say very much about the Combined Tribe IQ. Does it?
So some relative gets an obviously fraudulent call and later realizes it’s all a big conspiracy? How does that set them aside from every other conspiracy theorist? No one listens, no one knows, no one cares, they die lonely and aggrieved.
Step one: gas them
Step two: feed the bodies into a mulcher, and wash them down the sewage system
Step three: a small crew with a lot of plasma cutters works full time for a few weeks to take apart the plane. The pieces are shipped off to China, or buried, or sunk at sea.
Like I say, it’s not logistically that challenging. You just need a team of (((complete psychopaths))). I wonder (((which country))) may be able to supply it?
Wow and wow, a must read article from Robert Fisk.
So, why is Syria claiming 100,000 troops around Idlib?
According to lots of research done by one of the Air Stewardess, the planes were in hangars. One of the Stewardess gets through to the Airline Desk and she reports the terrorists are upstairs.
None of the planes had upper decks!
Very good points. One of the biggest red pills for me was realisation that the companies in the hands of the Globalist “elite” are perfectly happy to lose money (and stubbornly lose it again and again) in pursuit of their agenda. Population control was the goal from the beginning.
Well…I don’t know about the other normal commenters here [of whatever persuasion on 911]…but the hubbub from the various ANONYMICE here has become a huge pain in the ass…
There is no reason to not use a fictitious handle, or even a fictitious email…what point does it possibly serve to come on here and post like that…?
It would not be so objectionable if the anonymice comments were also collected and individually sorted for easy reference by any of the normal participants here…since each of them already has a number, why can’t this be implemented…?
According to Evil Bubba.
Well Monika Lewinsky showed him who is the fucking superpower here.
I don’t think you know what a eutectic is. What you described was a chemical assay of a bunch of elements. Yes, there are many elements found in an office.
Then you are clearly pretty stupid. Sulfur exists in trace amounts in many carbon steels. It is also in drywall.
“Thermitic reactions are special, and no chemist would refer to them simply as combustion.”
No, chemists usually refer to combustion as combustion. I agree that thermite gets hotter. That’s why people use it. There is still no evidence of it being used in the WTC.
FB, with all your blathering and ridiculous example of homework, you haven’t explanied the thousands of calls from hundreds of people.
In addition to calls to family, there were thousands of calls to the 911 dispatchers. They started when the first plane hit and the dispatchers stayed on the line with the victims till they died.
I suppose you explain that by claiming that the police department and every single dispatcher who worked that day are part of the conspiracy
The problem with washing them down the sewage system is that blood coagulates and would block the sewer system.
It was a serious problem during the French Revolution. They’d set up the guillotine in the main plaza. The firemen would wash the blood down into the sewers. The blood would coagulate and the sewers would overflow.
A better solution would be Air Force cargo planes dump the bodies in shark infested waters way out in the ocean. The bodies would have to be slit from groun to neck very deep to cut through the intestines stomach liver and things to prevent them from filling with enough gas to lift the bodies to the surface.
Of course they’d have to be careful about the tides and to stay away from sea lanes and fishing grounds.
What with blood and yucky gore and contents of bladder and intestines splattered about the conspirators would have to soak the planes in vast containers of bleach for weeks.
Of course they’d have to kill the killers and dispose of the bodies. And then kill those killers
Her internship was arranged by wealthy Jew political activist Peter Lewis.m, second husband of her mother Among other businesses he owns, or owned at the time Progressive Insurance of those irritating TV ADS
Congrats; ‘nail on head’ = maximum significance. IMHO you, Guyénot and Machiavelli have the key. Try this:
QED
PS in considering ‘patsies vs. perpetrators,’ I would assign anything Saudi to the former. As for perpetrators, in defence of my own ‘inside job’ conclusion, I have always maintained ‘a covert cabal drawn from within the US/Z rogue regimes.’ rgds
I did read that paper by Ryan Mackey right after he released it. I used to debate with him quite frequently at JREF(James Randi Educational Forum) now at http://www.internationalskeptics.com. For those that believe the official story I always try to dig in to determine what they actually believe with regards to the collapse of towers. Oftentimes they will just throw around words like “pancake collapse”, “pile driver” without conceptually understanding what they are actually saying. After trying to get Ryan Mackey to explain exactly how the pile drive theory(crush-down, crush-up) occurred. This is what he wrote,
“After a few floors collapse, the upper block is riding on a cushion of debris, and relatively smooth behavior is guaranteed…It will quickly become larger than the upper block, and it is responsible for most of the crushing…”
Ryan Mackey
So now the upper block is not responsible for the crushing, but this “cushion of debris” is. Note that you cannot actually observer this occurring in any of the videos, this upper block riding down on a cushion of debris and this upper block of heavy steel and concrete being supported by pulverized concrete. Once I reduce someone to regurgitating nonsense I move on.
Dear Mr Unz…Please consider adding a ‘RETARDED’ button…
Why would anyone be accountable to a collection of women hating old codger 90 year old virgin crazy old coots?
Who gives a rat’s ass what you all think of my comments.
Nope. I want to see a demolition company take down a steel-framed high-rise with fire. Until someone can do this every thing else you are offering is just bluster.
“They weren’t “regular office fires”.
What made the fires in World Trade Tower 7 different? Please, inform me as to the actual temperatures of the fires in this building.
“You don’t know how fast the building fell. You only saw grainy YouTube videos of it falling. You don’t know what the actual timing was.”
It was measured by David Chandler and he calculated the collapse at free-fall acceleration for 2.5 seconds. NIST also measured it at 2.25 seconds of free-fall. So yes we know.
“No, I’ve read lots of material. Most of it provided by demented idiots like you. I’m quite familiar with it, and it is still all a bunch of crap.”
Translation: Stop destroying my illusions with the Truth.
Actually Woodward’s background before being parachuted into the WaPo was Navy Intel…not that it makes much difference…
Good article here…
Here’s question for some of the people here. I stopped watching TV many years ago because it seemed too stupid, and it seems to me that various widespread beliefs are largely based upon the empty conditioning of cable-news nonsense.
Take Nancy Pelosi. I’ve read that while Speaker, she became one of the most hated political figures in America, which seems quite odd to me. Offhand, she seemed a rather bland though partisan liberal Democrat, and as Speaker, I thought she did what pretty much any other Democrat would have done in her place. My strong suspicion is that the burning hatred among conservatives/Republicans was just due to the endless demonizing on FoxNews.
Similarly, Dick Cheney seemed to be an astonishingly hated figure during the Bush Administration. But offhand, he seemed a rather bland traditional Republican, though someone who sharply moved into the Neocon orbit after 9/11, probably because of all his top aides and advisors were Neocons. My guess is that he was so heavily demonized because “W” was universally considered too ignorant and stupid to be a good villain, and since virtually all the other prominent Neocons were Jewish, the American MSM didn’t want to focus upon them.
Is there anything about Cheney that’s so horrific that I’m missing? Or the same thing for Pelosi?
Does the steel hotplate in your BBQ melt when you leave the gas burners burning for an hour?
Greetings Anon # 257!
The Linda Tripp advisory to Monica Lewinsky to not dry clean her Bill Clinton-gizzum stained dress is very weird. Do you happen to know anything about Tripp’s politics, associations? (Zigh) Am sure Linda just did not innocently provoke (salivating) Monica to use “Tide.”
… Thanks.
Ah; looks a bit like the old three-shell game; keep your eye on Cheney so you don’t notice the crooks behind the curtain? rgds
Pelosi was/is hated more for her snide, kneejerk liberalism than for anything Faux News said or did. Because to sane and decent people, liberalism as it’s practiced by the left today (insipid hatred of and for Heritage America and everything virtuous) is worthy of hatred (by Heritage America and anyone with a shred of virtue/decency)
Cheney on the other hand, is perhaps now second on the list (behind only Hillary) of most execrable Americans alive today. (he would have been third but the first place spot held by McStain ended on the day the Stain joined his comrade Ted Kennedy in the ‘ninth circle’)
And why, you may ask, are these individuals so dubiously noteworthy?
Well, it’s because of their respective betrayals.
When Billy Kristol advocates for war and torture and atrocities writ large.. that will blacken the name and reputation of the ZUSA for generations, he’s doing so to advance the interests of his tribe as he sees them.
But when Cheney, (or Hillary or McStain or Kennedy) commit treason and war crimes and pass laws that will destroy the nations they’ve sworn a sacred oath to protect..
What they’re doing is beyond just evil. There’s a reason Dante reserved the center circle of his ninth level of Hell to those who betray, and worst of all, for those who betray their people.
It all has to do with levels of trust. When you trust a man to return your fishing pole, and he fails to do so, it is bad, but not too bad in the scheme of things. But if you trust a man to protect your children, and you pay him handsomely to do so, and give him your guns and keys to your home – because you’re trusting him with everything prescious to you, and he accepts your trust and your money and perks and blessings to protect your children, but then then sets about killing them or selling them into slavery..
what he has done is pretty much as bad as it gets.
And this is what Cheney has done. He was trusted with the protection of this nation. He was paid handsomely and given great perks and exalted with great powers…
specifically for the purpose of looking after our nation and its people and its Constitution.
But then he used that trust, and perks and position…
To betray this nation and the people and the Constitution (he swore an oath to protect) for his own personal gain- and he betrayed this nation to its worst and most deadly and most intractable enemy. (as this thread points out)
And, he does it all with haughty arrogance.
A more execrable human being.. it’s hard to imagine, unless you consider the cackling war hag.
Traitors like Jonathan Pollard, at least in their heart of hearts, felt that by betraying America, he was aiding his people.
But Cheney is White American through and through. America has been astoundingly good to that man, and had lavished upon him great power and wealth at public expense.
And how does he repay all of that to the American people?
By betraying not just their trust, and the lives of their young men and women in the military. But he also has betrayed the soul of America. More than any man I can think of, he has transformed the moral spirit of the America I grew up in ~ into a fiend on the world’s stage. Bombing and droning millions of innocents.. and even running an open torture camp, as he presided over the evisceration of our Constitutional rights and God-given freedoms.
I wish I were more articulate / eloquent. I wish I had the skills to flesh out just how bad (evil) that guy is.
I’d like to think that men like that, are not able to die quietly in their plush beds, after a long life as a minion of the Fiend.
I abhor torture and cruelty, but if any single person on this planet deserves to be given the ‘Gitmo treatment’, and asked for the details vis-a-vis 9/11..
It is Dick Cheney
IMHO
Having noted Ron’s good question “Is there anything about Cheney that’s so horrific that I’m missing?”, below are some good clues offered by Paul Craig Roberts.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/09/14/americas-false-history/
Pelosi’s credibility fell off the table when she repeated her campaign promise about no Bush impeachment as Democrats prepared to take control.
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/cq/2006/11/08/cq_1916.html?pagewanted=all
Two sides of the same coin. Those with the gold make the rules.
https://911timeline.s3.amazonaws.com/2001/abcnews091101.html
Well, it didn’t get wiped on his agenda, and Pres. George W. Bush subsequently claimed on at least two occasions that he didn’t learn of the first WTC attack until he got to his agenda at the schoolhouse when he “saw an airplane hit the tower” on a TV there:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html
Of course, by now even many of those casually curious onlookers along with most regular people know there was no live broadcast on national TV of the first WTC crash. John Cochran’s live ABC News report makes it clear Bush already knew about the first WTC attack even before he left his hotel on the morning of 9/11, and long before he ever even got to the elementary school.
Some is conditioning, sure. But political power is lightning rod for criticism. Plenty of partisans would have behaved exactly as Cheney or Pelosi, but Cheney and Pelosi were the ones in the positions of power and so they got a lot of (often well-deserved) criticism.
Was this done with the explicit objective of getting Bill by the balls, literally and figuratively?
Ctrl + F “Daniel Lewin”, no results.
Its a curious wrinkle that there was a IDF Sayeret Matkal Captain on board one of the planes. Sayeret Matkal is an elite Israeli Special Forces unit that often specializes in military operations involving planes. A truly astounding coincidence he’d randomly be aboard a hijacked plane. Pretty much nobody brings him up though, even people who think Israel did it.
He’s either a very unlucky victim and a massive red herring or a huge clue.
What makes both Cheney and Pelosi “horrific” are their ties to the Council of Foreign Relations. *
The CFR is monstrous primarily for their commitment to starting wars. Carroll Quigley explicitly details, in ‘Tragedy and Hope’ and ‘The Anglo-American Establishement’ **, how the Cliveden Set (a precursor to the CFR) provoked and intentionally started both the Boer War and World War 1.
Although Israel is a Chabad-run entity (ex. Netanyahu), the CFR is also staunchly Zionist in nature. *** Their collusion in the 911 disaster is quite obvious considering the global media’s coverup and the High Fivers/Dancing Israelis quick departure back to Israel. History has proven that both the CFR and the Chabad-Lubavitch global network have no problem initiating wars where millions die and billions are negatively affected.
*https://pelosi.house.gov/sites/pelosi.house.gov/files/pressarchives/releases/prrCouncilForeignRelations030703.htm
**http://www.carrollquigley.net/books.htm
***https://www.cfr.org/blog/pcusa-against-israel
Yes, an egregious error in Ron Unz’s article, sure to be repeated by innocent readers who will thereby further damaging the credibility of the 9/11 Truth movement, is the implication of the statement:
In fact, no competent critic of the official 9/11 story maintains that the buildings collapsed at free-fall velocity. What was shown by David Chandler and later confirmed by NIST is that the roof-line of Building 7 initially declined at free-fall speed, but only for approximately 2.4 seconds. Such dynamics are precisely what would be expected in accordance with your description of the process of controlled demolition.
It’s useless to argue with truthers for a variety of reasons, but I will point out some obvious lies:
This is completely false. Yes, some networks reported that WTC7 had collapsed before it actually had. That kind of miscommunication happens all the time. But it is completely false to say that networks didn’t report that the building might collapse. There are at least 5 different newscasts in this video where they note that 7 might collapse:
Bonus, the video also features a firefighter pointing out that the building is leaning and that there’s no way to stop its collapse.
A building is burning, creaking, bulging and leaning. It doens’t seem like a stretch to me to say it’s in danger of collapse.
It seems that L.K. (see comment below) has elevated us both to the status of honorary Jews, which is fine with me, but it indicates (as do other mad comments by those who think that any who question the Jews-Did-9/11 thesis must be Zionists, Israel-Firsters, or actually Jews) the harm that Unz’s crazy anti-Semitic articles do.
They incite the simple-minded and basically non-informed into a lather of anti-Jewish rage that only bolsters Jewish power in America by promoting Jewish solidarity (and resistance to assimilation) and justifying special protection of Jews from what Eli Wiesel called the age-old goyish disease of anti-Semitism, a disease without which Jewish power in America would surely soon wither and die.
Your sketch of the American Potemkin village, so far eclipses in breadth and depth my own feeble pessimism that I am now not only more pessimistic but actually depressed. Perhaps it is time to emigrate to Iceland, although given the gigantic size of that American landing strip at Reykjarvik, with which you must be familiar, the tentacles of American influence must be firmly coiled around even the tiny nation of Iceland.
You misunderstand the US constitutional republic. It is a one-party state. It is the Money Power state wherein the Money Power buys both Democrat and Republican representatives.
The reason Trump is seen as illegitimate is this: he was an accepted member of the Money Power, who funded politicians in return for their cooperation where his business interests intersected public business (here I’m just repeating what Trump himself has said in so many words), who has grabbed the visible trappings of power that are rightly seen as the privilege of the bought and paid for delegates.
By seeking to enjoy power, both actual and apparent, Trump has breached a basic condition of an unstated clause of the American Constitution.
After German newspapers lost half their circulation in the first year of Nazi rule (source Joseph Wulf, Presse und Funk im Dritten Reich,) how many of them were still profitable?
It pays to look long and hard at the details, All of them…
Part of knowing who you are dealing with is keeping all those details in context.
There is one damning detail encoded into this thread that i have learned how to interpret.
A sort of “One of these things is not like the others” issue popping up twice…
It’s sort of like the crap google does to some folks they don’t like but have to post any how.
You know what i am talking about don’t you Mr Unz.?
Some times it might work, But well some times it might backfire, You never really know do you?
Let’s just say i look and have noted a number of things. Thinkprints work, As do Deedprints.
Good luck.
There’s no way to tell if it was arranged to cause a scandal. Monica’s mother divorced Dr Lewinsky and married Lewis. It’s the kind of thing a man might do for his new wife’s kids.
Mrs Lewis sure lucked out, from prosperous Dr Lewinsky to mega rich Peter Lewis. The Lewises are probably still supporting Monica. I know all you old codgers are woman hating puritans of the highest sexual morality but I feel very sorry for her. A little fling with the president and her life was ruined.
wow
you’ve just gone from tiresome troll to actual – zero credibility – POS
He probably sacrificed himself for the good of the Tribe. If the Arabs hadn’t killed or disabled the pilots with their box cutters he’d have shot them and taken contsol of the plane
Is there any proof they had box cutters? INMHO any weapons were handed to the hijackers by an airport employee after they went through security.
All I know about Tripp is what I read in the papers. I’m under the impression Tripp was a republican I’m not sure.
I saw Monica around a few times when she came home to Los Angeles. She was absolutely beautiful like a fatter Liz Taylor.
LOL. Let’s say us old codgers are morally – err – diverse. That’s it. Diversity is our strength. OCD – Old Codgers for Diversity.
I agree.
I don’t believe the NYC building and safety codes allowed tanks of diesel fuel on the top of a building. Thanks for clearing it up.
In rural areas propane is used for the generators. Different counties different codes.
The damage was not significant in a STRUCTURAL way (“broken windows” = superficial damage). It was of course significant in the “can I go to work tomorrow” sort of way. There were a lot of broken windows, some from fire, and that outer damage on the South side. The fires were small, except in a few isolated areas, which were nowhere near where the collapse initiated, according to the NIST study (remember, NIST refused to test for explosives, and spent about 4 years trying to come up with a model of how the building could have collapsed without the use of explosives).
From the NIST report, on p. xxxvii:
Even if the external damage on the very Southwest edge would have triggered the collapse, the building may have collapsed on the floors above that. Absolutely impossible that would trigger a perfect, simultaneous, building-wide collapse in perfect unison into its own footprint.
This video looks at the report a bit more:
Hey repulsive, keep your porn and masturbation fantasies to your self.
I’ll take the word of the thousands of people who watched one or both planes crash into the towers over people who’ve never been to NYC and don’t realize the towers could be
seen from much of Brooklyn and Jersey to someone who thinks he can see through clouds of black smoke
And where are the people who were on the 2 passenger planes with windows? Do American military planes not have windows? I have no idea.
It is useless to argue with truth deniers, but I will at least attempt to correct your inaccuracies.
you wrote: “Yes, some networks reported that WTC7 had collapsed before it actually had. That kind of miscommunication happens all the time. ”
Well, in fact, no it doesn’t. That is the point! You simply stating that this happens all the time is tantamount to saying, “Move along. nothing to see here” I already spelled it out for you in simple terms once, but I will do it again.
Three separate TV networks made the same false statement claiming an event that had never happened before and has never happened since had already happened. Uncannily, that event did take place within 30 minutes. This was no trivial event, mind you.
That does not happen all the time LOL.
I will look at your film and comment later, but I don’t see many reports of creaking and bulging. you are just talking feces there.
you wrote: ” There are at least 5 different newscasts in this video where they note that 7 might collapse:” That is sleight of hand. That is not what I was referring to. I was clarifying that the noted broadcasts explicitly stated that the buildings had collapsed past tense. They were sure of it until their eyes told them differently. That was no mistake. Someone they had a lot of trust in told them that.
Just to be clear, I buy the story that two AA planes with passengers flew into WTC 1 and WTC 2. As with anything there is not 100% certainty but I have not found any claim to the contrary persuasive. This is a very different question of whether cellphone calls were made by actual passengers (which to me is part of the story for it’s massive propaganda/brain-washing effect) and whether those actual passengers ended up flying into buildings. I have no idea why you would conflate the two.
Who are you to sneer at a 125 IQ considered very bright just 5 points below gifted. Only 4.78 of the American population has IQs over 125.
So Bush is in the 95th percentile. Dummies don’t get accepted into Andover no matte how haute their families.
If you think Bush 2 is dumb you are an ultra liberal Democrat. That was one of the canards against Bush of the liberals Jews and Democrats
What’s your IQ? Way below 125 I bet.
Given humanity butchers about 300 million cows, 500 million sheep, 345 million goats, 1.3 billion pigs, etc. per year, I have a sneaking suspicion that your absurd sewer “clotting” claims are an utter fantasy. Well, even without the slaughterhouse facts, I would know so.
News flash, Anon, the clotting process does not permit blood to clot in flowing water, you should learn a bit about the clotting process before spouting nonsense. Have you ever put blood in a bunch of water and seen it clot, let alone block a pipe, under pressure?
I’m with FB, where is the “Retard” button?
You wrote: ” features a firefighter pointing out that the building is leaning and that there’s no way to stop its collapse”
Ok, that was a very brief reference. We will assume he is referring to building 7, though this is not certain.
A couple observations:
If the building truly was leaning, it would not have collapsed as it did.
He was just one guy among many giving his personal opinion and prediction. Yes, there were people all day talking about building 7. After the other two buildings collapsed, the attention focused on building 7. I am sure many people gave the opinion that the building would collapse.
That is not the point!
The point is: Three separate TV networks made the same false statement at the same time claiming an event that had never happened before and has never happened since had already happened. Uncannily, that event did take place within 30 minutes.
Again, THAT does not “happen all the time.” That was no mistake. Someone they had a lot of trust in told them that. Someone they trusted so much, on such a momentous event, that they went straight to the air with it without even verifying the facts.
Rurik to troll Canspeccy
Yep. Nothing new though.
The same is true of his Stalinist buddy and obfuscator FB.
Mr. Guyénot has written an excellent article though nothing really new for those who have read Bollyn before.
In his article, Guyénot talks about these types who have hijacked the 9-11 movement in order to deflect suspicions away from Israel and its network within the ZUS.
The hijacked conspiracy and the controlled opposition
https://www.unz.com/article/911-was-an-israeli-job/
When Flight 93 was shot down and WTC 7 was not struck, panic, I am sure, set in among the plotters. They probably had a backup plan for such a contingency but surely it still set despair.
So yes they started circulating rumors that WTC 7 would collapse. Precisely because it is effective for people like you, that somehow if the demolitionists say this building will collapse from fire, you won’t see the obvious fact that it was demolished. I don’t know the provenance of the “WTC will shortly collapse” meme – the “news reports” don’t give a source – but I will suspect our very own Mr. Silverstein, you know, the guy who took over the WTC a few months before 9/11, let Mossad install explosives, took out massive insurance policies, collected $10 billion in profits from the whole event, and admitted on PBS that he gave the order to “pull” the building.
The “brilliance” of 9/11 was the extent to which psy-ops can get people to ignore their own f*ing eyes and buy the BS. Astounding, really.
Of course, there was the hiccup where “news” agencies reported the actual collapse before it happened. Obviously the “conditioning” for the demolition of the building had some bugs in it. As did the whole operation. But where the operation on the ground had errors, the psy-ops took over, swimmingly.
So where was this alleged “bulge” and this alleged “leaning”? Any pictures? Would love to see it. All those photographers down there, before WTC 7 fell, surely someone caught a picture of this “leaning”? I haven’t seen that in any pics I’ve seen. Please, provide some evidence aside from one firefighters’ impression, when the visual evidence all the way up to the collapse contradicts his absurd statement.
Great post.
Please do not use the very derogatory term “goyish”. It is like “nigger” or “kike”, actually much worse, Ron had an article in his American Pravda series which explains its provenance and meaning. The short version is: it means sub-human, slave, cattle, soulless creature.
The proper word is non-Jew.
No, it hasn’t. See my post above.
Thanks for the kind words, Can…
Btw…glad you mentioned Quigley…he got fairly close to the inner circle so to speak, although he was surely a part of the ‘need to know’ class himself…but he did provide a good jumping off point for many other investigators…which he himself then tried to smear…funny how that works…
As for the mouthfoaming Jew haters, I agree with you that they are useless…perhaps they are even playing out their own assigned role [none the wiser of course] in a special corner of our Potemkin village…it’s hard to disagree with you that their ‘activity’ may in fact suit the greater purpose of the Elie Wiesel types…what an irony that would be for our ‘friends’ here…we need a good cartoonist to capture the essence of that little spiel…
As for Iceland…agree with you there too…freedom always has a fence somewhere in the background…but at the local level the good folk there still have the luxury of being nobody’s fools…
Aren’t you the idiot who thinks the people on the 4 planes never existed? Or are you the idiot who thinks they were all taken off to some witness protection gulag?
There is zero proof of box cutters. Plenty of phone calls mention knives, and at least one long knife was found in the wreckage of Flight 93, I believe.
The “box cutter” story comes solely from Barbara Olsen’s phone call, which is very likely just all lies by Ted Olsen.
The used big knives (and some type of pepper spray). No box cutters or guns.
not a central goal
but the only goal.
we seek it with a monomaniacal fervor.
for us ‘truthers’, the truth is our religion. It is our God and our salvation and our only hope.
If the truth were to turn our pre-c0ncieved reality upside down, and crumble the foundations of our world view…
then as a truther, all I can say is ‘bring it on!
for us, this was never a choice
we would pick the pill of truth, every time. Come what may..
In his excellent article, Mr. Guyénot explains that the fact that 9-11 was an Israeli false-flag op, does not mean that there were no treasonous elements of the ZUS deep state involved in it.
https://www.unz.com/article/911-was-an-israeli-job/
Guyénot then talks about who the decisive elements behind the operation were and their goals…
Maybe because Ron wants to get us all going again.
Actually, when I was adding that concluding section, I went back and forth several times between using “a central goal” and “the central goal.”
You’ve persuaded me—I’ve changed it back…
Definitively an image of Cheney who was in control and Bush who was being controlled has been created. On 9/11 it was Cheney who was in command center while Bush was on the run in exile looking for a safe harbor. When Bush and Cheney testified together in front of the 9/11 commission everybody understood that it was so because Bush needed a help during a testimony and not the other way around.
I don’t know what you guys are hoping for, but surely you realize that the truth of 9/11, at least in broad outline, is already evident to those with eyes to see, but that that truth will never be publicly acknowledged by the US government until all concerned are dead. Then the truth will be of interest only to historians, the only people to whom the names of Dubya, Rummy, and Cheney mean a thing.
Even papers on the Kennedy assassination are still under government lock and key, as ordered by DJT, although we now have statements by the Parkland Hospital doctors which confirms that Kennedy was killed by a head shot from the front, i.e., not by a shot fired by Lee Harvey Oswald, fromn the Texas School Book Depository building, which was directly behind the President’s car.
In another 25 years or so, when no one alive on November 22, 1963 is still around, the full story of the Kennedy assassination will be quietly released, and practically no one will pay it the slightest heed.
I know perfectly well what eutectic is. And by the way ‘a eutectic’ is either lazy or you’re not accustomed to using the term.
‘trace amounts’: yes because anything more than a trace would push it out of spec
What oxidation state is the sulfur in drywall? What oxidation state in the steel? What is the enthalpy of this reduction? What conditions would be needed to drive it? Is this plausible?
There is a well written academic paper proving ample evidence:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, 2: 7-31
Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen3
Fantastic history.
But I think excessive dilution can handle this problem? Just use enough fresh water to keep the blood dilute.
No…. because they gas them first. There’s no mess on the plane.
Or even better. Give them a one way ticket to Tel Aviv.
Thanks for the heads up…I just downloaded his paper and intend to read it carefully…the author does bring solid credentials, so I’m looking forward to seeing what he’s got…
So? Miscommunications happen. Maybe they had the same source who got it wrong. Maybe one network got it wrong and the others trusted their reporting. None of this is evidence of any conspiracy. If anything it shows how utterly weak your evidence is.
As for “an event that had never happened before” this is another incredibly stupid argument. Maybe Roger Bannister didn’t run a four-minute mile because it had “never happened before.” 9/11 was an extraordinary event. Fires burned for hours with next to zero attempts at putting them out due to low water pressure. How many times has that happened?
Yes, and you said that “They did not say the buildings might collapse at any time due to structural weakness from the fires. They did not say any of that.” Except they did. You were absolutely wrong and now you’re trying to hide that fact. It won’t work.
Quantity has a quality of it’s own.
You have no evidence for this at all. It’s a claim based on a child’s understanding of structural engineering.
lol..Unz has got himself a literal grammar Nazi.
I feel discussions like these bring more and more people online. And furthermore, they give us an improved understanding of the topic that we can use to convince people in real life.
Sometimes I think it’s wasted time. But then I think again and I realise it’s such a deep topic with so many lessons on so many levels. It should be a core piece of course material in a course titled Learning how to think for yourself
Yes, word got out that the building 7 would collapse hours before it actually did. It appears that this information, even for the collapse of the South Tower, came from the very suspicious Office of Emergency Management(OEM). It was EMT Richard Zarrillo who relayed the message to some of the fire captains that the South Tower would collapse. He says, “OEM says the buildings are going to collapse; we need to get out.” Fire Chief Pete Ganci’s response is, “who the f___ told you that?” Seconds later, they hear the noise of the South Tower as it collapses.
Richard Rotanz, the deputy director of New York’s Office of Emergency Management, assesses the state of World Trade Center Building 7 and sees significant damage inside the building. At around 12:30 p.m., according to the BBC, Rotanz and some other officials—whose identities are unstated—go into WTC 7 to see what condition the building is in. “At the time the building wasn’t safe, but we had to make an assessment just the same,” Rotanz will later tell the BBC. He will describe what he observes inside WTC 7, saying: “You could hear the building creak above us. You could hear things fall. You could hear the fire burning. You could see columns just hanging from the floors, gaping holes in the floors up above us.”
Also an engineer at the World Trade Center site correctly predicts that WTC Building 7 is going to collapse. Deputy Chief Peter Hayden of the New York Fire Department will later recall: “We had our special operations people set up surveying instruments to monitor and see if there was any movement of WTC 7. We were concerned of the possibility of collapse of the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?” The engineer apparently predicts correctly that WTC 7 will collapse and also the time it will take before it comes down. Hayden will recall, “He said yes and he gave an approximate time of five to six hours, which was pretty much right on the money because the building collapsed about 5 o’clock that afternoon.” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer.
The NIST report on WTC7 states that the fires started in WTC7 due to embers from the collapse of the North Tower at 10:28AM. However, the first photographic evidence of any fire is at 12:10pm on floor 22. NIST also reported that prior to 2:08PM the fires were only observed on floors 22,29 and 30. The fires on these floors had nothing to do with the collapse of the tower. The first visual evidence of a fire on floor 13 was at 2:30pm.
Note: So people knew ahead of time that WTC7 would collapse. In fact, it was reported before it collapsed and they established a perimeter around the building waiting for it to come down.
So how do you have certain knowledge before an event happens, but after it occurs you have zero idea as to why it occurred? If they knew the tower was going to collapse hours ahead of time they had to have some reason for this. But after the building did collapse they were clueless as to why. Lead NIST investigator, Shyam Sunder, stated in 2006 that they had trouble getting a handle on WTC7. It was still a mystery five years later.
The best way to predict the future is to create.
p.s. Jerome Hauer, former director of the OEM, gives an interview on the day of 9/11 and he knew why the buildings collapsed and who was behind it. Amazing….
Dan Rather: Based on what you know, and I recognize we’re dealing with so few facts, is it possible that just a plane crash could have collapsed these buildings, or would it have required the, sort of, prior positioning of other explosives in the, uh, in the buildings? I mean, what do you think?
Jerome Hauer: No, I, uh, my sense is just the velocity of the plane and the fact that you have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building, uh, that burned, uh, the velocity of that plane, uh, certainly, uh, uh, had an impact on the structure itself, and then the fact that it burned and you had that intense heat, uh, probably weakened the structure as well, uh, and I think it, uh, was, uh, simply the, uh, the planes hitting the buildings, and, and causing the collapse.
Dan Rather: What perspective can you give us? I mean, there have been these repeated reports that, well, yes, Osama Bin Laden, but some think he’s been over-emphasized as, as responsible for these kinds of events. I know many intelligence, uh, people at very high levels who say, listen, you can’t have these kinds of attacks without having some state, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, somebody involved. Put that into perspective for us.
Jerome Hauer: Yeah, well I’m not sure I agree that, umm, this is necessarily state-sponsored. Umm, it, as I mentioned earlier, certainly has, umm, the, uh, fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden.
So he already knew the official story of how the towers collapsed and who was behind it. Not bad.
From my perspective, it seems that a huge fraction of the 9/11 Truth community spends far too much of its time absorbed in the particular details of the attacks, debating the precise method by which the World Trade Center towers in New York were brought down or what actually struck the Pentagon. But these sorts of issues seem of little ultimate significance.
We need Conspiracy Realists than Theorists.
No nee to make up stuff. Just look closely at any strange event, and dots begin to connect with one another.
Your fantasies are not evidence.
What about The Little Mermaid? She had a lot to gain here. (Plus. I think she’s secretly Jewish, so, you know ;))
I know, those conspirators (including our tiny mermaid) were sure careless! Except for running a scheme involving hundreds if not thousands of people without a single one fucking up and talking in 17 years.
I’m sorry the people who evacuated the building in fear of their lives didn’t stick around and take photos so some dipshit would believe them decades later. I guess your stupid theory must be right. Hang the Jew mermaid, amirite?
What country are you from? That one.
Blood coagulates no matter how much it’s diluted. Put a teaspoon of blood in a pint of water, stir it around. Half an hour later the blood has globbed together. Remember, the 1795 pompiers didn’t have fire hydrants connected to a modern water supply. All the water they had was in the tanks on the wagons.
The blood did coagulate in the sewers and the sewers did back up.
Just because you can’t read the French language. Never had access to some of the greatest libraries in America.
Never got the chance to read books written in the early 1800s by witnesses who lived through it doesn’t mean I don’t have those advantages.
FYI there are other sources of information than public schools and Wikipedia. Don’t make assumptions about things of which you know nothing and can’t even read the language and have no access to the libraries.
“ I don’t know about it therefore it doesn’t exist” should be the motto of Ron Unz commenters.
If 3,000 people were gassed the killers would still have to deal with the bodies.
Excellent analysis.
That the government investigation did not test for explosives is really strong evidence that the investigation was a scam from the beginning.
One cannot look into this matter with any degree of objectivity without thinking that there is something very rotten in our Denmark.
The evil that we are dealing with is incomprehensible.
Duck blood soup: Vietnamese is coagulated and Polish is liquid. The difference is that the latter use vinegar as anticoagulant.
I don’t. She was more than likely a consensual honey trap if the accounts of her at the WH are to be believed. She is said to have actively sought Clinton’s attention from the get go (not like that would have been difficult) and much as I hate to defend the creep, she was every bit the instigator.
She’s grown up to be a very attractive woman and probably has a good future ahead of her. There’s not a lot of shame these days in freely giving out blow jobs, as Lenny Bruce said to the Judge at his obscenity trial for using the word cocksucker, “but Judge, a cocksucker is a good thing!”.
C’mon. I thought you were up to recognising satirical derision. And do you really require satirical derision on UR to fit some neat prescription that doesn’t advertise its absurdity?
There is an awful lot of video and photographic evidence taken at the WTC in the hour plus after the “planes” crashed into them and before they exploded and tumbled to the ground. I wonder if you would be kind enough to post some of them or links to some that clearly show any aircraft wreckage that has fallen to the ground? Or was every single piece of two passenger aircraft completely absorbed within the buildings WTC 1 & 2? Thanks.
QED
Oct 25, 2008 More proof a plane did not hit PENTAGON
More proof tons of evidence disproving the official story,this is just a little more.2 star major general who is was an analyst for the government says no way on top of top military and commercial pilots.
No conflation. It sounds uncomfortable. But the plotters would only need phoney cell and/or air phone calls if there were no hijacked planes being flown into buildings and the plotters needed to make people believe there were. So, logically connected.
The British expeditionary force shot French civilians simply because they were blond men. The French authorities themselves shot many hundreds of their own civilians, including attractive young women, before they surrendered. After Liberation they shot even more, often women guilty of sleeping with Germans. In a Normandy village square during an impromptu celebration of the arrival of allied forces someone in a my grandfather’s unit gave a tommy gun to the Frenchmen to look at and a little while they shot dead three of their own young women with it.
So your point of view is that:
Three separate TV networks made the same false statement at the same time claiming an event that had never happened before and has never happened since had already happened. Uncannily, that event did take place within 30 minutes
Is all due to a simple misunderstanding? Nothing to see here. Move along
Well your head is in the sand. I don’t see any point in continuing to try to enlighten you.
P. S. I don’t think you misunderstood me at all regarding the other comments on building 7. Your position is weak so you are twisting things.
Since Ron Unz, by his own admission, is new to the 911 Truth movement and he especially has some questions about Christopher Bollyn perhaps he should study the lectures Christopher Bollyn has given throughout in order to gain a better glimpse of his position:
Perhaps your word goes a long way when compared to mine on this forum.
He can also get acclimated to the likes of these (to start):
http://911conspiracy.tv/index.html
911 Nanothermite In WTC Dust Top Military Scientists and 9 Independent Scientists Concur:
9/11 Physics Debate 2014 – Dr. Griscom wins:
9/11 Physics Debate 2015 – Dr. David Griscom wins again:
9/11 Museum Virtual Walking Tour:
What happens to animal blood in slaughterhouses?
https://www.newdelhitimes.com/what-happens-to-animal-blood-in-slaughterhouses123/
Terrific article and thanks for taking so much time to write it. How can I now read 1250 comments?
The comments are often illuminating-fabulous .
I’m afraid you are the one with a child’s understanding. If the only thing that brought the building down was the force of gravity, then the gravitational force vectors on any leaning part would prevent that part from rising to become level again. Alternatively the rest of the building could collapse around the leaning part somewhat while the weakened leaning part stood strong, but that is illogical. More likely, the lean would become even more pronounced as the building fell because the falling leaning part would be forced to fall in an arc centered on any attached points below temporarily remaining fixed. This arc would force the leaning part even farther from the center.
I won’t respond to you further. It is a waste of time
The torture seems to have been the major barrier to trying KSM. But, unless one is willing to believe one can rely on almost nothing one hasn’t observed ffor oneself (and checked for illusions) it is not unreasonable to believe that KSM is/was a Pakistani Muslim jihadist who despised America and planned several acts of terrorism. If one then regards it as probable that the four planes were hijacked the world doesn’t seem quite such an unknowable place as you seem to find it.
I look forward to your considered technical explanation. From your vote the cuff reply I think you are saying that the steel members that needed to weaken in order to fall were so much more massive at the lower levels that the necessary weakening for collapse under the weight of the upper floors would have taken much longer than the necessary weakening of the relevant steel members on the building first struck higher up. But that seems to create an even bigger mystery as the building struck lower down did in fact fall after much less heating time. So please let’s have your fully worked out explanation.
In reading the comments, I am amazed how many people believe the story. The story given is preposterous. and absurd. However, it is the story given by the “authorities”. It must be a natural propensity, almost like a breathing air, for human beings to look to their authorities to inform them. The first authority was a person’s parents, and as children, who did not believe their own parents?
Termites are that.
But your commenters never, ever will stop going over “these technical issues” again and again and again, because they are all about being Columbo “Just one more thing”. As to the importance of how or why, whether the termites destroying one’s house have acted with intent, plan or collective mind hardly matters. The consequential thing is how to make them stop having that effect.
The effect of the Palestinian problem along with Israel and the other Middle Eastern countries’ traditional relationship with the US was to cause 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq among other disasters. Having established this we understand that these relationships must be resolved in such a way as to cease having a deleterious effect in the future.
For the first time on this thread, you are correct. But, of course, the statement has nothing to do with my statement to which you responded. I formulated a hypothesis (since you probably don’t know this, that is part of the scientific method, look it up, I kid you not), and explained the hypothesis. A hypothesis, by its very definition, is not evidence. Instead, evidence, including testing, is used to support or undermine the hypothesis. This, also, is part of the scientific method (look it up, I kid you not).
This is a classic propaganda technique. You slyly accuse the speaker of bias, insinuating both (a) that I am anti-Semitic, and (b) that I am motivated by an evil motive in postulating my hypothesis. Thus the statement is essentially an amalgamation of several logical fallacies, including an ad hominem attack, and conflating a hypothesis with a witness (I am not a witness so my credibility, or bias, is entirely irrelevant; I am merely formulating a hypothesis, which evidence either supports or does not).
Any complex operation, including a large military battle (which is how view 9/11), involves mistakes, no matter how well planned. That’s why it is critical when making such an attack that you also control the reporting / interpretation of the event. This is another indicator that this was an inside job – people on the inside would be the most likely to believe they could carry it out successfully and, even if they erred, would not be caught. This is also related to the doctrine of “plausible deniality”, which is a staple component of covert operations.
That’s the thing about bureaucracies. You don’t have to control everyone in it. You only have to control the top. That’s called “organization”, and it makes the modern state possible. Yes, you would need a fair number of Israeli military to pull it off. But I do not question their absolute loyalty to the Zionist project. On the US side, only a couple people – say, Cheney and Chertoff – would suffice.
So you have proven yourself to be a hasbara troll. Instead of debating the merits of my hypothesis, you choose the anti-scientific approach of accusing me of being evil and, by implication, anyone who considers my hypothesis as evil.
It is very primitive trolling, Mr. Hasbara. How many shekels have they paid you for your troubles? LOL. 🙂
It is worth the time but you’ll save a lot of time if you just skip the Anons and variants of anon, you’ll miss some good comments but mostly avoid tossers trolling.
Probably those with some mental problem. Do you think of your mother as a good person?
In a different universe torture of Richard Perle, Ehud Barak, Dick Cheney could lead us to entirely different narrative than the one that you are so ready to accept now.
Let us make a list of people who under the thread of torture could lead us to the final resolution of the 9/11 question? Who would be your candidate WoZ?
Or, FB could save himself some valuable time and effort just by knowing that the request is being made by an HIQI individual who has previously claimed that the explosions in the towers were caused by heated aluminium (of the planes) combining with water.
Re: No plane at the Pentagon
Significant adioactivity was reported in the vicinity of the Pentagon following 9/11, suggesting the use of a a DU penetrator. That is consistent with the assumption that the Pentagon was hit by a missile not by Flight 77. It would also be consistent with the neat round hole created in the inner, C-ring wall, and the FBI’s confiscation of all video records of the impact at the Pentagon. Maybe there should be a special prosecutor appointed to investigate what Mueller’s FBI were doing on 9/11, which will not happen under President Trump who was part of the cover up team, as noted above.
People believing the story is a result of expert propaganda (nobody does propaganda as well as US and the Tribe). The fact that the US so quickly and severely pronounced guilt is relevant to it being an inside job. See this comment above for more.
Well this is easy, because imagine you are the public relations officer of a company and your company committed a crime, for which, let’s assume, it does not with to pay. The first thing you would do is confidently and immediately blame someone – Bin Laden (and, because the controlled demolition theory does not work for him as the perp, the accompanying “collapse by fire” fantasy).
This is to preclude people searching for clues – crime solved, no need to investigate! We know everything! You never know what some inquisitive detective in a local district might learn, were he to launch an investigation. Or an actual journalist for that matter.
This is of course a known and accepted propaganda technique. It is especially effective in time of shock, since people become, scientifically proven, more much more “suggestible”. In shock (fight/flight response), the critical facilities of the mind are largely shut down and the memory function is greatly enhanced (this is why people remember traumatic events more clearly and for a longer time). This put the mind in a susceptible state for “persuasion”.
So, as the propagandist, what you want to do is keep showing shocking footage, which creates the stress/anger (fight/flight response), and embed the message, “bin Laden did it, in the cave, with fire!”, over and over and over and over and over again. It is only a small fraction of a population which can escape such a powerful technique. Even otherwise intelligent and critical people can be manipulated this way. It is extremely similar in effect to hypnosis, as far as the underlying science works. The shock puts the mind essentially into a hypnotic state, making it far more “suggestible” in the propaganda parlance.
What a fanciful way of writing, just because you don’t believe my baseless, ridiculous claims.
Do you not think women had periods in France? Where do you think all this blood went? Surely 1 million women in Paris, 200,000 bleeding a week (life after menopause was not so long), is more blood than a few bodies?
Have you ever taken a long bath with a scab? Say, a few hours? What happens to the scab? Would you say, that the “connection” of the scab, both to itself and to the sewer wall, could overcome all of that pressure? Do you know how large a scab would have to be, to block the sewer pipes used to cart off water during rainfall? Are you utterly fucking insane?
As to utu’s response, yes you can coagulate blood that is very thick, with very little water added (bear in mind the human body has only five liters of blood, and maybe two liters of that would drain in a beheading, but I think they can easily cut through this “coagulated blood” with a spoon. It’s not like caked grease, like lard, which can form a sufficiently large object, when combined with other materials (like paper, hair, bones, etc.) to clog a sewage pipe, even though even that is rare, despite the very large amount of fat drained into the sewage system.
Ron, where is the “Retard” button! 🙂
Here’s a start: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/aircraft.html
I would expect it to be difficult to find debris in the parts of the airplane crushed by 100,000s of tons of steel and concrete debris. But I believe they dug some debris out from the wreckage, and other places in the area, as well. See e.g. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-twintowers-landinggear/landing-gear-found-in-manhattan-was-from-9-11-plane-boeing-says-idUSBRE93S0QL20130429 .
You are lacking imagination. You must imagine you are creating this plot, like writing a Hollywood script, and you want to convince people that something that didn’t actually happen (a plane hijacked by fools stumped US government, engaged in military-ace-precision aircraft maneuvers most expert pilots could not muster, on a plane they had never flown before, and fire brought down three steel skyscrapers in one day, but never before or since).
So you make it a “story”. Yes, this part strictly speaking is not necessary for the ground operation, but it is very useful for the psy-op component. First, this presents “evidence”, otherwise not available, that it was hijackers (and not remote controlled planes), which flew the planes into the building. Second, it presents “evidence”, otherwise not available, that these hijackers were Arabs.
Again, I think it was a very, very low-risk part of the plan (i.e., assuming the voices were faked). They could only use the phones of those whose voices they could convincingly duplicate. If any response was required for which the answer was not known (based on surveillance of the phone, email, etc.), the caller could just “hang up”, or say, hushed, “I gotta go, I love you” or similar.
Really it’s not very hard at all. And completely consistent with actual people and actual planes flying into WTC 1 and WTC 2 and crashing (whatever the cause) from the PA plane.
“Guyénot talks about these types who have hijacked the 9-11 movement in order to deflect suspicions away from Israel and its network within the ZUS.”
Now THAT could be a legitimate conspiracy. It wouldn’t be hard for a small group of internet posters to sow disinformation among a crowd of kooks for dissemination. Not saying that happened (probably didn’t), but that strikes me as a much more reasonable assertion than claiming micronukes or controlled demolition brought down the WTC buildings; both latter conspiracies are needlessly complicated and are, therefore, unlikely. If the government wanted to stage something, why not just keep it simple? Seems like the less that could go wrong the better.
“She was more than likely a consensual honey trap if the accounts of her at the WH are to be believed. She is said to have actively sought Clinton’s attention from the get go.”
Lol, Bill or Hillary?
“There is zero proof of box cutters. Plenty of phone calls mention knives”
That’s not surprising. Since “box cutter” isn’t a term used by Americans on a regular basis, it does not surprise me that some people would substitute the more common “knife” for “box cutter.”
“The “box cutter” story comes solely from Barbara Olsen’s phone call, which is very likely just all lies by Ted Olsen.”
1. Why would Ted Olsen lie about this? What sense does that make? Did the pod people get him, too?
2. Barbara Olsen was an accomplished lawyer with a high vocabulary. Therefore, it does not surprise me that she would have used the term “box cutter.”
“But that seems to create an even bigger mystery as the building struck lower down did in fact fall after much less heating time.”
Let’s not pretend here that you are some kind of structural engineer or have any extensive knowledge of Building 7. You don’t know how it was struck, how it was constructed, or how it burned; therefore, you can’t claim this is some kind of mystery. The common sense explanation is that structural damage to the building and fire caused it to collapse, and that’s exactly what engineers on scene thought, too. The burden of proof is on those alleging a conspiracy in regards to the collapse. I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that overturns the official story. But I have seen video evidence of a similar building in Europe collapsing under fire, so this is not an unusual phenomenon.
“If the only thing that brought the building down was the force of gravity, then the gravitational force vectors on any leaning part would prevent that part from rising to become level again.”
This is a common phenomenon among internet kooks: they use large, complicated phrases resembling scientific jargon in an attempt to give their arguments credence among the uneducated. In reality, I doubt any of these people are engineers or have ever produced any kind of computer model validating their claims. There have been models using “force vectors” that validate the accepted theory, however.
“More likely, the lean would become even more pronounced as the building fell because the falling leaning part would be forced to fall in an arc centered on any attached points below temporarily remaining fixed. This arc would force the leaning part even farther from the center.”
1) …but the video on 9/11 didn’t show any kind of lean in WTC 1 & 2, so your entire claim is called into question.
2) That’s not necessarily correct. It depends on the degree of the lean, the height of the building, and the design and materials used to construct it.
“I wonder if you would be kind enough to post some of them or links to some that clearly show any aircraft wreckage that has fallen to the ground? Or was every single piece of two passenger aircraft completely absorbed within the buildings WTC 1 & 2? Thanks.”
This is why I don’t trust conspiracy theorists. Even when there is solid video evidence, they cannot process the fact that they are wrong. Case in point: there is indeed video evidence of one of the planes crashing into the WTC; that video evidence shows the aircraft being completely absorbed within the building, which isn’t surprising given the speed of the aircraft and the light materials used in its construction (even a small caliber weapon could shoot through a commercial airliner hull).
“That the government investigation did not test for explosives is really strong evidence that the investigation was a scam from the beginning.”
Not really. I mean, they had video evidence – broadcast on live television – that commercial airliners were involved. So, that is not surprising in the least. Further, we shouldn’t discount the possibility that they actually did test for explosives. Conspiracy theorists are notorious liars, so that should remain an open question until someone can provide a document or statement proving they didn’t test for explosives.
Did they test for nuclear material or radioactivity? Then I guess that’s evidence for micronukes or antimatter photon torpedoes being used, right? No? See what I’m saying?
“‘I don’t know about it therefore it doesn’t exist’ should be the motto of Ron Unz commenters.”
Totally agree.
“The “brilliance” of 9/11 was the extent to which psy-ops can get people to ignore their own f*ing eyes and buy the BS. Astounding, really.”
Oh, the irony. We have video – broadcast on live television – showing the towers hit and then collapsing, but yet kooks still think micronukes or some kind of elaborate demolition was employed when the obvious explanation, directly shown to you, is ignored in favor of the unlikely.
“Of course, there was the hiccup where “news” agencies reported the actual collapse before it happened. Obviously the “conditioning” for the demolition of the building had some bugs in it.”
The building was cordoned off by the NYPD and Fire; they had engineers on site who were talking to the media. It was widely expected that it would collapse, so it is not surprising that a network jumped the gun among all the chaos and misinformation, causing the rest of the networks to then do the same. Exactly that kind of thing happened in November of 2000 during the presidential election – one network called Florida, and then the rest followed suit. There is no conspiracy here.
“When Flight 93 was shot down.”
Then where is the missile debris since it was supposedly shot down over an open field? Does no one else find it unusual that these conspiracy theorists claim that a plane didn’t impact the WTC because, supposedly, no airliner debris fell to the ground but then turn around and claim that a missile hit another airliner even though there is no missile debris that fell to the ground?
Linda Tripp was the last person to speak with Hillary's late lawyer and lover Vincent Foster.
Since she is still alive, one must assume she has stashed some actionable evidence on Billy-Jeff and the Hildabeast as a safeguard against Arkancide.
Because he’s a Republican?
The one question I have seen no-one bring up: why control-demolish building 7?
If it happened (proximately) as planned, and “had to be hidden” by concealing the video recordings, doesn’t this stand opposed to what was done with the 2 other building, where a representation as dramatic as possible was arranged, to be displayed to the public and stir it?
The 1605 “Gunpowder Plot” blamed on dissident Catholics enabled the Anglican Establishment of England to create a climate of hysteria that made impossible any rapprochement planned by the new King with the waning superpower, Spain. See, for example
http://truthmegasite.com/gunpowder-plot-guy-fawkes-a-false-flag-patsy/
Later the same century the lies and fantasies of Titus Oates were encouraged and employed to cause havoc with the “Popish Plot” during the reign of Charles II.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titus_Oates
Whether 9/11 was truly an “insider job” or not, the immediate results were terribly convenient for the desired policies of some, at least, insiders. And were great stuff for the career prospects of the neocons.
Haw. Quite possibly, the greatest ‘bug’ in the system.
Q: What happens when those most believed-in parents teach their children fairy-stories like alleged ‘supernatural deities’ and risible ‘eternal life after death?’
A: Exactly the mess we are in.
Once you convince anyone to ‘believe’ in such massive, unsupported [and unsupportable] lies like those two, you can convince them of anything; proof by inspection. rgds
Thanks for the links but I find them unconvincing. Even the firefighters reported how everything was reduced to very small pieces yet here we see a picture of a large segment of a fragile passenger aircraft fuselage. No sale, sorry.
I explicitly requested pictures or videos taken during the time between the aircraft (missile) impacts and the explosions and collapses of the towers. It is inconceivable that nothing of wings and tailplanes etc did not shear off when coming into contact with substantial steel beams with both buildings being hit from different angles yet I’ve seen nothing of that sort. Colour me skeptical.
Not that many. Most of the believers in this thread have a history of defending the Tribe whenever possible. They don’t “believe” – they shill.
My general assessment of Cheney and Rumsfeld is that, in the 1970s, they had been hired by Richard Perle, and have since acted as mercenaries for the Zionist Neocons : under Ford, then Reagan, then Bush II, the Israel Power Network helped them into government positions, from which they opened the door to the Neocons, Perle and his protégé Wolfowitz in particular.
Detail from my book (translated by Kevin Barrett) : Richard Perle was from 1969 to 1980 parliamentary assistant to Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, who succeeded Johnson as the leader of the militarist and pro-Israel wing of the Democratic Party. Cheney and Rumsfeld were his associates. When Ford (a former member of the Warren Commission) replaced Nixon, Perle pushed his two sabbath goyim into the White House and the Republican camp. Ford appointed Rumsfeld as his chief of staff; Rumsfeld then chose Dick Cheney as his deputy. Having inspired Ford in the cabinet reshuffle that became known journalistically as the “Halloween Massacre,” Rumsfeld then seized the position of secretary of defense, while Cheney replaced him as chief of staff. Thus there appeared for the first time the explosive combination of Rumsfeld at Defense, Cheney in the White House. Then Rumsfeld and Cheney persuaded Ford to form Team B in order to revise upward the CIA estimates of the Soviet threat, and reactivate a war atmosphere in public opinion, Congress, and the administration. Team B was chaired by Richard Pipes and cochaired by Paul Wolfowitz, Perle’s protégé. Thus the Neocons have always entered the state apparatus hidden in the baggage of Rumsfeld and Cheney.
1) I mention Zim in my article published by Ron same day: “9/11 is an Israeli job”
2) Nice additionnal piece for the puzzle. Thanks
Yes, it was on the boob tube; therefore it must be real.
Furthermore, no agency of the USG has tested for fake video–while failing to explicitly acknowledge that glaring oversight–and you and others here among the willfully blind are entirely free to ignore your lying eyes.
Michael Hezarkhani, CNN
Clearly, this still image frame grab from CNN’s video portrays an impossible situation where UA175 has plunged partway into WTC 2 without any reaction visible from either building or airplane – easy to do with CGI, but impossible in the real world.
Thankfully, researchers like Simon Shack and Jim Fetzer have tested for fake video. Unfortunately, Gordon Duff deleted numerous articles by Fetzer at VT, causing dead links at articles like Makow’s
https://www.henrymakow.com/september_clues.html
Fortunately, Jim has resurrected his excellent and comprehensive article at his own blog
Planes, No Planes, and Video Fakery.
ps: Of course, USGS didn’t test for thermite in September and November 2001 because the issue of thermite had not yet arisen at that early date, and in any event testing for explosives was outside the scope of USGS’s stated mission.
Monica Lewinsky played a tremendous part in advancing the agenda of her tribal brethren in the financial industry.
Bill Clinton had rejected twice (in 1995 and in 1997) the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act separating commercial from investment banking.
In the aftermath of the Lewinsky scandal in 1999, he was finally forced to repeal this act that lead to Jewish-owned banks to be come “to big too fail”, and hence allowed them to acquire an immense power and to rip off the public and the taxpayer in total impunity.
https://laroucheirishbrigade.com/2014/04/20/new-documents-reveal-massive-pressure-on-bill-clinton-to-repeal-glass-steagall/
Briefly, building seven was not struck by an airplane. It is much easier to believe that buildings one and two, which were struck by airplanes, collapsed only for this reason. In fact, all three buildings were brought down by controlled demolition to some degree.
I see that a chap with a very unreliable memory has misreported – for some reason, or very likely none, in a comment replying to me rather than you – references I made to some speculations about the explosion of aluminium in some form in contact with water. (You will recall that aluminium is an ingredient of at least some thermitic material though an apparently well informed commenter has said that there is no way the appearance of thermite residues could come about accidentally from the plane’s aluminium. He volunteered no comment on the theory that NtD has now resurrected).
If you are interested you may care to look at and comment on
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110921074747.htm
https://www.metabunk.org/aluminum-water-explosions-theory-of-collapse-christian-simensen.t3161/
https://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/58596-twin-towers-brought-down-by-molten-aluminum-says-scientist
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040657/Explosions-caused-jet-fuel-water-sprinklers-brought-Twin-Towers-9-11-scientists-say.html
I seem to remember thinking that it might anyway be one of the explanations for the explosions some witnesses reported hearing.
BTW sorry for the typo where I hope you worked out that I was referring to your “off the cuff” post.
“Fair-minded comment”???? I hope that was ironic.
You’re right that I would likely just delete Geokat’s crap. Or, more likely, I would let the comment through once and just point out that the Ryan Mackey character has been thoroughly debunked. That situation is not recent. The following rebuttals are about ten years old and found easily with a Google search:
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/mackey/index.html
http://truememes.com/mackey.html
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/b/MackeyLetter.pdf
I think that the above articles destroy Ryan Mackey at about the 1000% level of overkill. And, as I said, all of this “debate” is over ten years old. So, this Geokat62 is bringing up something that has been thorougly debunked for a very long time.
There is a general problem of people using these vacuous “free speech” arguments to say that a forum should be completely helpless against all of their disinfo and disruption tactics.
All of us have limited time and we cannot allow ourselves to waste unlimited amounts of time with people who are obviously not acting in good faith.
I’ve never heard that unlikely theory of the Gunpowder Plot – or for that matter, that the Scottish Protestant King James had any known plans for getting close to Spain – but by coincidence have recently seen a good film about the plot and it’s unravelling. There were supposed to be 16 Catholic gentleman plotters, the survivors of whom attempted to get up a p previously planned rebellion in the Midlands or North after the plot failed. It received no support from other Catholics and failed quickly. The key to failure was said to be a letter to a Catholic peer loyal to King James warning him to stay away from Parliament. There was some speculation that he wrote the letter himself. Subsequently James himself led the search of Parliament and insisted on a second one which not only found Guy Fawkes in the basement, where he had previously not been identified, but found the explosives.
My interest in it relative to 9/11 was quite different from yours. I thought it made a plot which involved 19 Arabs hijacking planes entirely plausible.
Geokat,
You were under my various articles peddling the stuff you peddle. On various occasions, I posed a simple question:
Could you please summarize the strongest evidence available (in your opinion, of course) that the official version of 9/11 is broadly true, i.e. that the attacks were orchestrated from Afghanistan by this bearded religious fanatic named Osama Bin Laden?
I distinctly recall that you never got around to answering that question. So, it only seems reasonable to give you another opportunity to answer.
I really don’t think that’s correct. Unless I’m seriously mistaken, during most of the 1970s, Richard Perle was just a young nobody, while Rumsfeld and Cheney were among the top figures in the Ford Administration, being Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense, vastly more powerful and important than Perle.
I think it is a case where the (IMO overstated) arguments against the efficacy of torture are probably correct. There would be those willing to say anything to stop the torture but also those wishing to boast of their achievement and then probably embellishing it in a big way.
Anyway the answer to your question, as you put it, could only begin with getting the identity of the perpetrators right and even then you have to zero in on someone who knows the whole story and wasn’t just a member of a cell within the conspiracy. Assume it was Israel then torture the now retired head of Mossad and don’t let up until he’s given you verifiable information you weren’t aware of.
As I understand there is no GPS in that signal but differences on reception times at different satellites gives a rough idea of location.
But commands to the engines would give an idea of who was flying, their level of skill, or if a plane was shot down or dived into the ground.
911 – No planes hit the towers – JUST CRAPPY CGI COMPOSITES
Its been brought up elsewhere. Don’t expect everything to be served up to you on a plate. Do some research if you’re interested. You could start by taking a look at the tenants list, then think about what some of those tenants might have wanted destroyed.
STFU hasbara boy
There are a few possibilities.
1) They had intended to bring down WTC7 earlier in the day when its collapse would have been obscured by the huge plumes of dust and debris(from the collapse of WTC 1,2) covering lower Manhattan that morning. There is some evidence for this. CNN had reported that a third tower had collapsed. Allan Dodds Frank describes: “Just two or three minutes ago there was yet another collapse or explosion. I’m now out of sight, a Good Samaritan has taken me in on Duane Street. But at a quarter to 11, there was another collapse or explosion following the 10:30 collapse of the second tower. And a firefighter who rushed by us estimated that 50 stories went down. The street filled with smoke. It was like a forest fire roaring down a canyon.” World Trade Tower 7 was 47 stories.
2) Flight 93 could have been intended to WTC7 but for some reason it never made it to its destination and they had to bring it down anyway. There were reports, later that turned out to be false, that there was a third plane headed to NYC and possibly WTC7. This led to the evacuation of WTC7 and the OEM bunker on the 23rd floor. There is some speculation that something was wrong with the demolition system that morning and it took some time to repair it.
Remember that for the collapse of towers 1 and 2 they had a proximate cause, the impact of the airplanes. For WTC7 they did not have that so it would have looked strange for a building to collapse just like a demolition for no reason whatsoever. The media did do a good job of preventing people from knowing about it though.
I think you have too much imagination for me, though I may compete later 🙂
As an instrument-rated private pilot for almost 30 years, I can attest to the veracity of the testimony from the pilots in this video. Without even going into the facts about the size of the hole and the absence of any debris from the “crash”, or luggage, or body parts, etc. Most lay people don’t understand what “ground effect” means.
In simpler terms, this means that the closer you get to the ground (and the larger your aircraft’s wingspan), while maintaining constant throttle, the faster your aircraft flies and the harder it gets to go down any lower. As the video states, if you are flying a 757 at 500 mph, the lowest you could get would be around 60 feet – well above the ground floor of the Pentagon. In order to land, pilots cut the throttle and increase drag by lowering flaps, wheels, and using a “nose up” profile to induce body drag.
I have performed what is known as a “low approach” (or low pass) hundreds of times on a runway. This is effectively approaching the runway as if to do a landing but doing so at a fast speed as close above the runway as possible. I can tell you that with my low-wing Mooney airplane, flying at a mere 125 mph, the pressure on the yoke is so high that even applying a lot of strength, it is nigh impossible to put the nose down below about 15 feet above the surface of the runway with even a small plane, and when you release the pressure on the yoke, the airplane leaves the runway in a steep climb.
[not my plane – for obvious reasons]
For an aircraft with the wingspan of a 757 at 500 feet to penetrate the ground floor of the Pentagon, I call bullshit.
G’day, and me too. This from CalDre
I found this page, quote:
I recalled seeing a map somewhere along my net-inquiries; I searched my [memory/archive] and re-located this page, with this image:
Quote from the page:
Hmmm; perhaps FEMA can explain this apparent mystery? Also, CalDre might be so kind as to substantiate what s/he bases such a ‘belief’ upon. rgds
Good call. Don’t feed the trolls and shills.
BBC Journalist Jane Standley also announced the collapse of WTC7 (Solomon brothers Building) at 16:57 hrs, 23 minutes before it happened (17:20 hrs).
The BBC explanation for their journalist’s psychic powers is that she might have made a mistake . Also, the BBC has lost ( !!!!) these particular news tapes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
He did have a 3 part debate with engineer Tony Szamboti on the collapse of the towers on Ronald Wieck’s show, Hardfire, some time ago. The arguments for demolition have become stronger since then but you can watch and see what you think.
Couldn’t agree more. Speaking of good faith, the only reason I decided to post a comment under this thread was to simply point out to Ron Unz that since he was eager to present the works of those who best represent the arguments on both sides of the battle lines, there was, indeed, someone who went beyond the arguments laid out in the Popular Mechanics article.
How can you present a debate on whether 9/11 was an “Inside Job” without mentioning the work of NASA scientist, Ryan Mackey? It felt incomplete to me.
And I’m glad to see that at least one Unz Reader (FB) is open minded enough to give it a fair reading and draw his own conclusions. I was hoping that Ron Unz would do the same and perhaps share his findings.
The links you offered are to the following three individuals: Jim Hoffman, Charles Thurston, Kevin Ryan.
Along with Eric Douglas, Ryan Mackey provides a Critical Response to each of these individuals starting at page 165 of his white paper and a much more detailed response to the criticisms raised by Hoffman and Ryan in the Appendixes starting at page 192.
I thought you were about to write:
Is that so? Perhaps your powers of recollection have been impaired somewhat while you’ve been out in the cold? Here is the response I gave to your query:
Now, speaking of queries, do you recall the one I repeatedly put to you… to which I never received a very satisfactory response?:
Kevin Barrett interviews Laurent Guyenot:
Victor Thorn on Israeli role in 9/11:
Ugh! I meant to type 500 mph.
Well…at some point a ‘clever’ question becomes an stupid question…let’s look at your wording…
Correct…that is how any building is designed…it gets stronger at the bottom…
What exactly is the ‘mystery’ if the entire story is physically impossible…?
Please reference again my comments about Captain Nemo and how that relates to the real world…you seem to maybe miss the fact that I’m not interested in discussing Captain Nemo, nor the Easter Bunny, nor any question that does not make physical sense…
There is no ‘mystery’ whatsoever to the physical fact that an office fire cannot TRANSFER much heat energy into a massive amount of steel framing…through which heat flows without much resistance…therefore acting as a huge heat-absorbing sponge weighing over 80,000 tons…
So there are two very big problems with the idea that those steel beams [in either of the buildings] got anywhere near enough to a temperature hot enough for losing ANY strength at all…[which incidentally happens only at temps higher than 400 C…I had already posted a graph…up to nearly 400 C steel actually increases in strength]…
First is the fact that heat transfer from an open flame is incredibly INEFFICIENT…did those comments about basic heat transfer which I already made just go out the other ear…?
Think of sitting around a campfire…the flame temp is up to 1,000 C…you can roast a marshmallow on it or even cook a corn cob given enough TIME…but if you sit just two feet away you only feel fuzzy warm…and you certainly cannot now throw several tons of corncobs onto that fire and expect to cook them…
That tells you much about how heat is transferred from an open flame…most of the heat goes into heating the surrounding AIR…which carries a huge amount of mass itself if it is flowing on a large scale…as through a building with its windows blown out…or in an open sky campfire…that flame heats the entire night sky…radiating outward as a function of the inverse square law…where its energy decreases by the square of distance…sit four feet from the fire instead of one and the amount of heat energy reaching you is 1/16’th…
In a building made of steel frame…the steel frame is like that night sky full of air, through which heat travels and disperses…it is a big mass that simply carries away the heat…a giant sponge if you will that absorbs heat instead of water…
I already posted the NIST graphics of flame temp [their unverified model] but I am NOT disputing the flame temperature because it is irrelevant…
It is obvious to anyone versed in thermal science that this is absolute proof that the story is impossible…and not just impossible but completely ABSURD…they are trying to tell us that EVERY OBJECT in the vicinity of those few spots where the flame temp reached 1,000 C also reached that SAME temp…which means in practical terms that a standard 1,000 C campfire is impossible to survive since your body will also automatically reach a temperature of 1,000 C also…
NIST didn’t think about the HEAT TRANSFER issue at all…not surprising since this is a very specialized discipline [OOPS]…they simply put forth the notion that if the flame temp reached 1,000 C [in a very small portion of the space]…that this immediately means the steel beams reached that SAME temperature…
That only works in disneyland…and in the limited minds of those who are ignorant of the specific details of how HEAT TRANSFER actually works…
Think of the amount of AIR flowing through that building…it is carrying away huge amounts of heat energy…think also about the SMOKE we see billowing out in huge black clouds…do you suppose that smoke is nice and cool…?
Or perhaps the smoke is indeed very very hot, like the smoke in a chimney, and those huge clouds of smoke contain huge amounts of HEAT ENERGY…so how much energy is actually left over for heating steel, after the air and smoke has carried away its portion, to actually find its way into the steel…?
[And also we stop here and note that the huge amounts of BLACK smoke indicate a fire of LOW temperature…ie smoldering…this is consistent with the fact that office furniture needs to be fire resistant…it’s not campfire kindling…so in fact we do have grounds for questioning the unverified NIST flame temp model]
We also consider here the HUGE mass of the concrete floors and other concrete structures…do you suppose they are absorbing some heat also…or is it just the steel that is absorbing heat…?
Concrete has a higher specific heat than steel which means it takes more heat energy per unit mass to raise its temp than steel…ie it absorbs more heat…
So now we have huge amounts of air absorbing heat energy…we have huge amounts of smoke absorbing heat energy…and we have huge amounts of concrete absorbing heat energy…[concrete being non-structural in this building so if it is destroyed in the fire, it makes no difference to the structure’s ability to keep standing…]
Just how much energy is now left over to heat that steel…?
Did NIST actually ask this question…if so then please point me in that direction…[or any of the ‘debunkers’]
Sorry to tell you but this question has NEVER BEEN ASKED…the entire heat question got as far as FLAME TEMPERATURE ONLY…
It’s as if the entire process of actual heat transfer and dissipation does not come into the calculation at all…we are just told [incredibly] that since the flame temp reached 1,000 C then all the steel members in the building miraculously reached that temp too…
Please keep this in mind on your next camping trip…because thanks to NIST we now know definitively that…
1….Everything around that campfire will also automatically reach a temperature of 1,000 C…
2…Be sure to bring a trainload of corn cobs, because you can be sure that the campfire temperature of 1,000 C is certainly enough to cook a trainload of corncobs without any problems…
So we see here a truly groundbreaking advance in thermal science by the NIST…heat ENERGY and how it traverses through our physical world is of NO CONCERN WHATSOEVER…the only thing that counts is TEMPERATURE…
Based on this world-changing discovery you can now reap huge benefits in your life…you no longer need to lay up several tons of firewood at your winter cabin…since a scented candle is perfectly adequate to heat your entire cabin the whole winter…after all the fireplace and the candle burn at the same TEMPERATURE…
Are we approaching a light bulb moment here…?
Incidentally, I had already posted the NIST comments [referenced by page number in the report] about the max temperature they found in steel samples they tested…only a few were even above 250 C…at that point steel is 30 percent STRONGER than at room temp…did you miss that too…?
The story is absolutely fantastic to anyone with a solid background in thermal science…I mentioned previously on another thread that my own doubts about the event started some years after the event…I had up to then not looked into it at all and simply accepted the official account as legit…and dismissed the opposition as conspiracy nuts…
But then a friend and colleague who had spent his entire career at Lawrence Livermore decided to do a quick heat balance calculation to PROVE the official story…thus started my actual scientific examination of the issue of heat in those towers…
Long story short…my friend assumed falsely that those long-haul planes were carrying full fuel, when in fact they would have been carrying about one-third fuel capacity…the calculations fell on their face…at that point we had not even considered the fact that what fuel the planes did carry would have been mostly consumed in the huge fireball OUTSIDE the building…[and yes that can be calculated also]…
That left us with an office fire on five or six floors…now even a very simple energy balance shows that there is not nearly enough heat energy in that office furniture to even produce enough heat energy to bring even a very small mass of steel to the temp required for serious weakening…
And that is assuming that ALL of that heat energy just miraculously went from the fires into the steel…just as it would from the campfire into all the campers sitting around it…and none of that heat ENERGY would ever go into heating of the air, smoke and concrete…which would have accounted for MOST of the heat energy released in fact…
So that is how a very basic examination of the heat question showed that the NIST claim is more absurd than anything I have encountered in my professional life…
And then there is the question of just how much total heat energy was produced there anyway…?
We had fires on only five or six floors of a 100 story building…and in fact just looking at those fires you could see almost no flame…it was mostly smoke…which happens when fire is ‘diffuse’..ie burning at a low temperature…let’s have a look at that huge ‘fire’…
Now take a look at that Madrid building fire…
Now think about the AMOUNT of heat energy in those two fires…which one do you think released the greater AMOUNT of energy…especially if we consider the size fo the fire relative to the size of the two respective buildings…?
Also considering that Madrid fire burned for 18 hours…clearly the AMOUNT of energy released in those tower fires in the space of one or two hours was PUNY in comparison…and I am telling you that for 88,000 tons of steel to get hot enough even in a few localized spots would require a truly massive amount of energy release that would make the Madrid fire look like a toy sparkler…
Also note how pieces of the Madrid building facade are falling off the building as the entire building is ENGULFED IN A FIREBALL…where are the pieces falling off the towers…?
And what happened to the Madrid building after 18 hours of being engulfed in a massive fireball…did it also collapse on its footprint…?
Apparently the physics of heat energy and how it moves from one object to another depends entirely on the geographic location…in Madrid heat transfer appears to happen by way of known laws of thermodynamics…while in NYC we have the NIST laws of thermodynamics…
Now let’s also add in the building structure aspects to this discussion of heat and heat transfer from an open flame to its surroundings…
Looking at the NIST flame temperature graphics above…we see that most of the fire is actually quite cool…clearly less than a quarter of the floor space is at 700 degrees…and maybe half of that at 1,000…
And look also at the temperature distribution…it was mostly on the perimeter…how could those 47 massive core columns that carried most of the building weight even get anywhere near hot…?
In the space of an hour…?…remember the corn cobs on the campfire…how long does that take…I suppose using the heat transfer physics of NIST those corncobs should be cooked in nanoseconds…but maybe corncobs are much harder to heat than structural steel…yet another NIST ‘discovery’…
Let us also recall that this building design was incredibly structurally redundant…the structural analysis performed by Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson is considered one of the most thorough such calculations ever made for any building structure…
The outer perimeter frame consisting of 240 columns [Vierendeel Truss]…was designed to handle mostly the dynamic loads of wind up to 140 mph…and earthquake up to a high magnitude…even at the same time…an entire side of that perimeter structure could be REMOVED [along with the two adjacent corners]..and the structure would remain standing…
The inner core of 47 columns was designed therefore to mostly to carry the gravity load…and due to the MUCH HIGHER dynamic loads the building ended up with a safety factor of nearly 10…that means it could carry 10 TIMES ITS ACTUAL WEIGHT…
But the Madrid building which also had a steel frame perimeter…we see that after 18 hours of that massive inferno, that steel [unprotected] did begin to lose strength and the outside facade started buckling…and eventually only parts of that outside perimeter collapsed in a heap of twisted metal hanging off the rest of the still intact building…
Yes…steel will get weaker and start to distort and buckle if there is enough heat energy applied to it…as we saw in the Madrid building…everything there makes perfect sense…
But we are told by NIST that the steel in the towers somehow reached 1,000 C…
Go back to the steel strength vs temperature chart above…how hot does the steel have to get to retain only 10 percent of its strength…why it’s 1,000 C…NIST even confirms this on their website…
So there you have it…the AIR temperature reached in a very small part of a just a few of those building floors means the STEEL TEMPERATURE THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING also reached 1,000 C…
The campfire scenario is confirmed [instant death for all campers]…and we can all heat our homes with scented candles…QED
Incidentally, I hope you recognize this sincere effort on my part to actually provide some scientific explanations for the layman…and I trust you will formulate your questions in a suitable manner going forward…
LOL!
Thanks for a humorously penned post! A good laugh on this Saturday morning!
Where are all the papers on Fire Induced Progressive Collapse that Shyam Sundar of NIST claimed they had discovered as a result of 9/11.
Wisely, Iris wrote: “Monica Lewinsky played a tremendous part in advancing the agenda of her tribal brethren in the financial industry.”
Greetings Iris!
… Above, agreed, Iris! Not mean-spirited (“sexist”), but I cannot think of a woman who effected American politics/history more than Monica Lewinsky. Uh, Eleanor Roosevelt? Maybe Betsy Ross, more well known than Monica?
… Very interesting how the president who didn’t indulge “in & out,” sex but continued as a tremendous positional-asset for the Zionist promoters of the globalist New World Order, & who obediently signed NAFTA, which became the kick off for America-killing deindustrialization?
… Rush Limbaugh (yuck) enjoyed calling Clinton “Slick Willie” while blooming Jewish Neoconservatives organized pep rallies for NATO’s eastward expansion! (Note: Post-9/11, Pat Buchanan was asking the critical question, “Who lost Russia?” and, zZigh, today’s anti-Trump Neoconservative Democrats pine for war against Russia)
… Now, Iris, a return to the past including Shakespearian union of the horny President and affectionate intern, Monica Lewinsky!
… Fyi. the Netanyahu campaign despised Clinton’s support for Peres in Israel’s 1996 Prime Minister election. Uh…, ZUSA “interference” in an election anyone?
… Championing the “go-nowhere fast” Oslo peace accord, PreZident Clinton sensibly hesitated to host P.M. Netanyahu at the White House. That was a no-no for the Likud Party leader who already had plans in-place for ZUS wars against contiguous neighbor A-rab nations.
… Rhodes scholar & ebullient William Jefferson Clinton thought more with his “little head” and while getting blow jobs out-of-sight & inside White House, the Big Israeli Heads had the Oval Office telephone wiretapped * and Bubba soon learned what the meaning of “is” is, in regard to lyin’ under oath & “is” impeachment.
… As you please, fyr, Iris, below is linked an old article on Clinton’s lovers-feud with Bibi Netanyahu, leader of the “only democracy in the Middle East.”
https://www.jns.org/bill-clinton-admits-quiet-campaign-against-netanyahu-during-1996-election/
… Selah, The “Moral” of this comment: Trump’s 2017 victory over popular-vote winner Hillary Clinton was very good for Netanyahu ‘s Israel!
Great comments, Iris, and thanks for your service!
* The shady Starr Report alluded to a foreign government’s wiretapping of Clinton White House telephone conversations. As typical, to date, I do not believe the foreign government “perp” is identified! (zzZigh)
Yes, it is funny. Very. But also an excellent exposition of relevant physical facts. Anyone denying that the Towers were brought down by a prepared-in-advance controlled demolition has to refute the facts presented. If anyone tries, the response will surely be a spectacle worth watching.
It’s very disorienting and disheartening. Worldwide, I think that more people are Truthers, but in the US the anit-Truthers are dominant.
This may be the result of the dumbing down of American education system. But still, engineers and scientists ought to know better.
Someone once told me that there were physicists who were certain that rockets couldn’t work in outer space because there was nothing for them to push against. They maintained these certitudes even after rockets and satellites were fairly common. Neither theory or empirical evidence could convince them.
Another thing scientists used to believe is that rocks can’t possibly fall from the sky.
I trust you are right on this point, Ron, as you are more familiar with US politics than me.
The question of Cheney and Rumsfeld’s connection to the neocons, and the way they served them (knowlingly, half-knowingly, or unknowingly) is anyway secondary (let’s settle for somewhere in the middle, perhaps). On the whole, I am terribly happy about the way you figured out things, more than I could express with my poor English. Gratefully.
9/11 was, above all else, a satanic ritual.
Rumsfeld became defense secretary for the second time when he was 68, the oldest ever. Cheney’s second heart attack was in 1984. He had a third one in 1988, and then a fourth in 2000. Like a boxer whose punch is the last thing to go, superannuated CEOs can be highly effective bureaucratic infighters, but their critical thinking is shot. Cheney listened to Bernard Lewis.
It is clearly evident, reading this thread, that math and physics is not taught or is not in favor in schools anymore. I wonder if this is an American problem.
The US is digging itself into a hole by not having disclosed NIST’s models and by not disclosing the 28 pages.
And what about the missing trillions of dollars in the Pentagon?
https://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-deep-state-violence-and-the-hope-of-internet-politics/9289
Rich of info on the Cheney-Rumsfeld duo, they are always named as a pair.
More important, it assesses the last 70 years of USA history and the series of deep events running through it in a, hum, deep way.
There is a very informed Italian writer, Gioele Magaldi, who has given an account of the same historical period in terms very close to the linked content material: whereas Prof Dale Scott talks of Team Traderly and Team Warriorly, Magaldi talks of reactionary and progressive Ur-Lodges: the similarities beyond the formal differences are clear. Magaldi’s book was given a translation into English.
Hi Sean,
Palestinians listened to Dick Cheney & Ariel Sharon’s press conference, fyi, below.
… I trust Cheney and Sharon simply knew more about the real politics planned for Palestinians.
Though I can agree with Ron Unz’s thesis that the Israeli Mossad were the primary perpetrators of 9-11, his explanations for why this could not be an “inside job” by various levels of the US government are of as much supposition on his part as he claims those who blame the US government for this atrocity.
If we take Ron’s suppositions at face value on this point then this would immediately make all such reporting of evidence of collusion by the Bush Administration on that day as completely false, which from the many documents I have read on the matter, I cannot possibly see. On one specific point, it has been very credibly reported that Cheney had the military stand down prior to these so called attacks on the WTC. Why would he do such a thing if he was not part of such an operation when other foreign intelligence services had warned US intelligence about such an attack on US soil… unless he was quite mad?
On another note, the Mossad didn’t simply walk into the WTC towers, plant bombs, and blow them up in isolation as Ron has suggested. They needed inside assistance for them to accomplish such an enormous task. For example, who authorized the fireproofing work on the floors that were to be struck by airliners on that day? Yes, it could have been civilian, business personnel but at the same time Ron asks us to believe that, no one in US intelligence was watching anything anywhere for any suspicious activity after being warned of such an attack on US soil? I am sorry but Ron is then refuting the intelligence analysts who did come forward to explain that their own hierarchies were acting very suspiciously on this matter to the point of criminality.
Ron’s suppositions that there could have been no high level involvement by the Bush Administration is contradicted by his own statements later in this essay when he asks as to who could have benefited from such an attacks.
The idea that Cheney’s own company, Halliburton did not benefit from the many soon to be unleashed wars in the Mid East is preposterous at best.
Ron’s contradictions regarding the nature of US leadership unravels his thesis in terms of placing the entire blame on Israeli Mossad and the Israeli government. They may have been the direct perpetrators but let’s face it, leadership in the United States has never been a sterling continuum of honor and integrity.
In fact, several years ago it has been publicly declared by historians who study such trends that every US president since and including FDR were no more than common thugs (with one exception), with each one of them with serious blood on their hands. Should I list the ways of war for you?
FDR used his insidious foreign policy dictates against Japan to spur them into an attack on US soil so he could enter the war against Germany.
Truman dropped two atomic bombs on Japan when not only the majority of development scientists were appalled at such a possibility but practically his entire military staff was dead set against such an action. In the end Truman dropped these bombs on the advice of only a handful of people in his “inner circle”.
Eisenhower was no sweetheart either and was responsible for millions of German civilian and POW deaths as well as the displacement of at least 10 million Germans after the WWII.
John F. Kennedy, in my view is the only exception to this historical account, and he was assassinated for going against the ingrained, cultural aspirations of the US governmental institutions. Had he survived, many historians have come to believe that our world would have been a better place as a result.
Johnson led us into the Vietnam war on bogus intelligence, which he knew to be bogus, and has been recently linked to the JFK assassination. He also allowed the Israeli Air Force to attack and rip apart the US Liberty saying in the end that he would never go against the wishes of a US ally.
Nixon continued the assaults on Vietnam until he was forced to begin withdrawal, which continued under Ford’s leadership. But in the interim Nixon blew up Cambodia leading the door open for Pol Pot and the vicious Khmer Rouge.
Carter, though not like his predecessors, caused the American abductions by Iranian simply for being foolish enough to not return the Shah to Iran to stand trial for his many crimes against the people of that nation.
Reagan had his Iran Contras…
Bush attacked Iraq for no good reason.
Clinton committed war crimes by attacking Belgrade in Serbia and allowed 500,000 children to die of exposure, malnutrition, and radiation poisoning in Iraq. Albright remarked that the price was worth it. Did anyone ever ask her what she was buying for that price?
Bush, Obama, and now Trump have unleashed utter hell across the Mid East.
In the mix of all this, members of the US General Staff were proposing the downing of a Cuban airliner in 1968 that would be carrying US citizens on board for a pretext to begin a war with Cuba.
And Ron Unz wants us to believe that somehow these people along with Jewish Neoconservatives influencing US policies across the spectrum, American Christian and Israeli Zionists who can’t seem to wait to liquidate an entire people do not have the capacity to attack the US on its own soil?
What has Ron Unz been smoking???
Once you convince anyone to ‘believe’ in such massive, unsupported [and unsupportable] lies like .. secular humanism.
We should believe the Big Bang and evolution. LOL. These are as big a lies as Creation. But you probably buy those, having been indoctrinated by authority.
The problem with parent indoctrination was never that it was not effective, indeed, before the introduction of the world’s greatest brainwashing machine, the public education system, it was extremely rare for children to reject their parent’s Weltanschauung.
But the schools were constructed to advance the Bolshevik agenda. So they destroyed God and replaced them with .. Big Bang (absolutely ridiculous theory) and pond scum evolution (nearly as ridiculous).
This also led to the “generation gap”. The generation gap exists because each generation the indoctrination centers known as “schools” change their ideology to closer and closer approach the desired goal of Global Bolshevik Dictatorship. Now, the schools are also authority. And, they have far better brainwashing techniques than parents do (testing, reward and punishment system, multiple people expressing the same dogma/lies as truth, peer pressure, etc.). So there was a clash of authorities and in most cases the scientifically run indoctrination centers win out.
But this is human nature. Virtually every society has some fantasy vision for why we exist, be it God, the Spirits, the gods, or Big Bang/Evolution/randomness. Philosophically, it is impossible to know the answer, which is why all of these explanations is a religion.
P.S. I actually think public schooling, as it is now, is a clear violation of the Constitution – it is the establishment of an official religion. Every US pupil is indoctrinated with almost identical propaganda, which changes over the years as the social engineers/priests want it to. It is not even remotely science or truth, but a faith based system of belief; religion does not require a “god” entity to be a religion. Secular humanism is clearly a religion, and its preaching in schools violates the First Amendment. But no indoctrinated judge would rule that way, not these days anyway.
You’re confused; I’m not trying to “sell” you anything, and I couldn’t care less what you think, or claim to think.
As to your other non-sequiturs, the bulk of the planes remained inside the WTCs. Perhaps you can fault the people stuck in the towers for not taking the time to snap selfies of themselves in front of airplane wreckage and send it to you to satisfy your skepticism. Selfish bastards.
By the way, there is no inner core of the Earth. If there is, please show me a picture of it. If you cannot do that, it means it does not exist. And since I don’t have a picture of you, you must not exist either.
That image perplexed me once too, but it only took watching the whole video to sort it out. That frame is blurry and suffers from the many problems of fast-moving objects caught in a low-quality camera. The nose in that picture had not yet reached the towers, even though with the shadows, motion (remember it was traveling 500 mph, have you seen a photo of a car moving at only 80mph? not the clearest, right?).
In fact if it had been CGI, there would be absolutely no reason to have the nose impact the building and not have any indication of it. With CGI, the moment of impact is calculated to mathematical precision.
Well, he may have woken up about 9/11, but his opening about immigrant crime is off. Apparently, he, like most, has a difficult time separating immigration from immigrants, and crime from different types of crime. Every single illegal alien is a criminal. Therefore, these “undocumented immigrants” are all criminals, whether they go on to commit murder or not. Rape is a violent crime that is not murder, as is battery.
Mr. Unz’s analysis contradicts the experience of towns and small cities across North America that have legal and illegal immigrants and/or temporary foreign workers in meat packing plants, where crime, violent and non violent has risen.
The tribe is famous for its imagination and story-writing capabilities.
And people in covert ops have a long history in them, with shared knowledge. Let’s say they have a PhD in covert ops.
Covert ops are all, always, about false flags or other false perceptions. The reason it is a covert op is that the persons conducting them do not want to be seen as the perpetrators.
Every covert op is a conspiracy. Hence any identification of a covert op relies on “conspiracy theory”. Those who decry conspiracy theorists, are essentially denying the existence of covert ops. Since covert ops OBVIOUSLY exist (many have been revealed in declassified documents), it is obvious that the people denouncing “conspiracy theorists” are irrational, though effective.
Back to the main point. A successful covert op has a number of properties, the most important being, “plausible deniability” (and with a very huge, attention-getting covert up like 9/11, you would want to really shape the public discussion).
So, assuming this was an inside/covert op, you have to put yourself in the position of those planning it. What would they do to make their fake, false story as appealing as possible, and prevent themselves from getting caught? That is their number one priority, even ahead of accomplishing the op (e.g., if they were willing to get caught, an overt op would work; obviously, for 9/11, an overt op would not have worked, assuming Mossad was behind it, in fact, would have had an opposite from the desired effect).
So imagine very skilled, intelligent, educated people are trying to frame 19 Arabs as having hijacked these planes. I think the phone calls are a brilliant way to “persuade” people that the faulty explanation was the actual one for the event.
They did many other things too, like planting the seeds of planes flying into buildings in the “intelligence circles” (most likely no terrorist group ever considered this, but the seeds were planted, which is trivial for these deep state operatives to do). Or, one of their “assets” who had penetrated an actual terrorist group started spreading this idea, in a way to be picked up by Western intelligence, to plant the seed that way.
A lot of planning went into this event. And the way you do it is you write a storyline. The storyline starts long before the actual event. It includes recruiting the patsies, training them, providing a “cover story”, making it believable, moving all of the chess pieces into place.
By imagination, I mean, you have to imagine you are committing this crime, and you absolutely do not want to be caught. What might you do to get people to believe the false story, that you want them to believe? How do you convince people it was 19 Arabs/Muslims? Well, of course, witnesses telling you, a bunch of them, that would be very helpful in selling the story! And how do you get witnesses on an airplane? They call somebody!
Really if you think about all the time and effort that went into this plan (whoever carried it out), this is not a difficult part of it. But a critical part. The most important part. SELL THE FAKE STORY!
My belief that airplanes crashed into WTC1 and WTC2 is not in even the slightest manner dependent on FEMA’s claim they found parts of Flight 11 on top of the Bankers Trust building. In fact I wasn’t even aware of that debris claim at the time I dismissed all of the no-plane at WTC theories (though I do agree it is likely that no Boring 7×7 struck the Pentagon).
I also agree the claim doesn’t make a lot of sense. I suggest asking FEMA why they made it; I never have.
I gave you a plausible reason: that they had the same source. That makes a hell of a lot more sense than the theory that WTC7 was a controlled demolition with SILENT explosives.
Seriously, do you even realize how dumb you sound when you say “It had to be a plot by Jews because three news stations got the story wrong.” That’s your evidence? All I can say is get used to being ignored by rational people whenever you bring this up.
Steve Naidamast inquired: “What has Ron Unz been smoking???”
Greetings Steve!
… Fyi, California’s Orange County sells popular orange vape!
… A theory:
… Ron Unz is a California-Republican, & so maybe he held nose, took hits off Orange County vape, and voted for (New Yawkah) Trump whom the Zionist Hillary-campaign poked fun, & branded Donald, er, a non-Syracuse U. Grad, “The Orangeman.”
… Thanks, Steve. I really like how you think… and exhale!
‘In 2017 the Guardian was Soros property.
So why should I read what Guardian writes ?’
It’s a pretty funny newspaper?
In a thread loaded with dumb comments, this just might be the dumbest.
The steel beams were INSIDE the fire, surrounded by it.
Now stand in the middle of your campfire and report back to us on the temperature.
Bush43 is to The Hidden Hand what his grandfather Prescott Bush was to the same as fronted by Averill Harriman. Prescott was President of Brown Brothers Harriman with a 2% shareholding and he fronted and took the rap for “Trading Wuth The Enemy” (Nazi Germany) in 1942. Brown Brothers Harriman came out of Brown Shipley, a Rothschild vehicle. During the Blitz in London, Averill was screwing Winston Churchill’s daughter in law Pamela and went to Moscow to hold Stalin’s hand after germany invaded Russia in June 1941. So these International Bankers were supporting three sides in WW2, a three peat. and likely USA too. After all they were, no doubt hand on heart, Patriotic Americans.
First, I should reemphasize that many, many of the commenters on this thread have probably spent 10x or even 100x as much time investigating 9/11 as myself, and their knowledge is vastly greater. Therefore, any of my contrasting claims should be treated cautiously.
I agree 100%. But the lease on the WTC was held by Silverstein, who apparently was a zealously pro-Israel figure. He very well may have been an active collaborator in the wiring of the buildings, and even if not, he or his subordinates could probably have been relied upon to knowingly or unknowingly provide openings and assistance for the teams. Furthermore, wasn’t WTC security overseen by Kroll, another company with very strong pro-Israel ties? I think access only required having the active support of a few key people on the inside.
My impression is that this claim of a stand-down order is the only clear piece of evidence pointing toward Cheney’s involvement in 9/11, and I think it’s much more ambiguous than alleged. Perhaps the recollection of the statement was garbled or Cheney was persuaded by some of his subordinates who were involved in the plot to issue that command. Also, there were supposedly a very large number of related drills that day, and perhaps these were used to confuse and manipulate Cheney. I just would need to see far, far stronger evidence of Cheney’s guilt than that one somewhat-ambiguous recollection.
In a similar vein, it’s not at all clear to me whether people like Wolfowitz, Perle, Libby, or Feith were knowing, active collaborators in the 9/11 attacks or merely Mossad “assets” who could be relied upon to say or do certain things at certain crucial points. Perhaps they were merely used to provide information or to place a few actual agents at key points to assist the plot, without realizing what was being planned.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/09/some-thoughts-on-robert-fisks-syrian-adventure-ttg.html
Perhaps…. Mr. Fisk’s excellent adventure was actually a story line for his agency handout.
The security of (((her))) people.
” All I can say is get used to being ignored by rational people whenever you bring this up.”
My point exactly. You are not ignoring me thus implying/admitting that you are not rational.
“They had the same source” – possible but not certain, So what does that prove? It proves that it was a trusted source since all of them went with it. Any child can tell the difference between a building that has collapsed and one that has not collapsed. Yet uncannily it collapsed less than thirty minutes later.
It does not make any sense that a trusted, reliable source would make such a stupid, glaring error unless they were so confident they were correct that they did not even need to look. Their timing was just off. There might have been many reasons for that.
At a minimum your head is deep in the sand.
“SILENT explosives.” – red herring. The building did not collapse silently.
I said nothing ever about Jews. Now you are completely making things up. This makes me think you are a paid troll.
What I described is a far cry from a simple “three news stations got the story wrong” You know that as well as I do. Again, you are making wild exaggerations. I suspect you are a paid troll.
I guess RETARDS nowadays come without a pair of working eyes…?
Where is the fire retardo boy…?
Oh yeah…it’s somewhere inside that thick black smoke…but we can’t actually SEE ANY FUCKING FLAMES…
But we know it’s in there because retardo boy put on his NIST-approved X-ray goggles and tells us there is a fire with a steel beam RIGHT IN THE FUCKING MIDDLE OF IT…
Here is what retardo boy sees that we mere humans of normal intelligence cannot…
Oh wait…that’s the Madrid fire…Oops…
And btw try this experiment at home retardo boy…make a fire in your fireplace or in your backyard and then stick a steel beam [just a small one, you know like the kind they beat you OVER THE FUCKING HEAD WITH] right inside it…then take it out after an hour, or two and see how hot the steel is…
[Not sure if mentally challenged individuals are legally allowed to posses matches or any flammable materials…but do ask your FUCKING CAREGIVER to build the fire for you…]
For the normal people here…it is physically impossible for a surface exposed to a heat source to reach the same temperature as the heat source…second law of thermodynamics…
…which means the object being heated can never reach the temperature of the heat source…since heat energy flow would then be impossible between objects of the SAME temperature…
In reality this means there is always a temperature gradient…even the OUTER surface of the object cannot physically reach the heat source temperature…since heat is being conducted constantly away from that surface and deeper into the material…here is how that heat gradient looks…
We see that T1 on the left is the ‘freestream’ temperature of the fluid [in the case of an open fire the fluid is the hot gas of combustion flowing over the surface that is in its midst]…
We see that even at the outer surface of the material [steel in this case] the temperature is already lower than the freestream [fire temp]…and as the heat propagates through the material thickness, the temperature decreases…
Finally at the other side we have the cold fluid, which in this case is the air streaming over the outside of the building…
–Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, Bergman page 113…
Anyone who has a fireplace will have noticed that if you leave the poker in the fire, even for hours…it will never actually get hot enough that you can even bend it by banging it with a hammer…ie it never gets red hot where the metal temperature is high enough to be malleable…
That is why the blacksmith bellows where invented…the extra air blowing over the hot coals does two things…it increases the coal temperature with the extra flow of air… and, even more important, it increases the heat transfer due to convection…
…which is the bulk movement of hot fluid molecules over the surface…which GREATLY increases heat transfer…ie you need a flowing fluid, either gas or liquid to transfer heat more effectively…when you take a frozen chicken breast out of the freezer and run it under water…even the cold tap…it will thaw much more quickly…as the flowing fluid carries a lot more mass [molecules] with it…as opposed to simply putting it in a bowl of water, where the number of molecules are obviously limited by the bowls size…
Now I don’t know if the NIST had ‘reported’ a giant bellows inside that ‘burning’ building and a giant pair of hands working those bellows to get those steel beams red hot…maybe retardo boy can put on his X-ray goggles again and check for us in the footage…
Also one more tip…when cooking that ear of corn in the middle of that fire your caregiver has built for you…when it is cooked and you take it out…make sure not to stick it in any of your FUCKING BODILY ORIFICES YOU FUCKING RETARDED MORON…
No, that’s absurd. The nose, forward fuselage section, and leading edges of the main wings are all entirely visible in all the frames up until the points where they begin to penetrate the building.
Not really. This is all just unconvincing special pleading. Hezarkhani worked for CNN so it is doubtful he had a low-quality camera, and much more likely he had top-notch gear and a state-of-the-art video camera–which was good enough for Hollywood by 1998–but I haven’t found an exact description of just what gear he used that day.
Nevertheless, the images are not so “blurry” to prevent us from seeing that reputed mostly aluminum UA 767 penetrate entirely into that reputed steel-caged WTC 2 like the proverbial knife through butter without any reaction from either building or airplane until a few puffs of white smoke finally flit across the still intact facade only as the magic airplane’s tail ducks out of sight into the building.
But where the heck is the fireball?
And the gash?
The special effects hacks just couldn’t keep up with the action that day, and we have it all in (something like)
Glorious Technicolor
Breathtaking Cinemascope and
+ S t e r e o p h o n i c -+- S o u n d +
That story points clearly to Mossad as we perhaps correctly imagine it. Ruthless, imaginative, effective and in service of a far fetched if imaginable objective, namely to get the US militarily involved in the Israel hating ME. But it also points to long term planning with lots of testing. One would expect some knowledge of the development and testing and of other major uses of the technology to have emerged by now. And fiction writers would have used it (see my imagination in the positive sense in which you raised it is switched on). How often has a spouse murderer used the technology?
Point to Kaiser Söze and friends by all means (he was after all a recruiting agent for Mossad before freelancing) but I still prefer to think that he was facilitator for KSM and 19 ObL acolytes and that the calls were mostly from air phones with Barbara Olson for example having made a failed attempt at a cell phone call.
How long would it have taken to prepare a data base of plausible voice simulations? Too long I guess for a plot which had to coincide with 19 Arabs being manipulated and used as patsies**. Timing has to be considered by reference to a lot of checks. If Larry Silverstein was integral to the plot, even if guaranteed to be kept untainted by any verifiable connection, we need to know when and how his interest in the WTC came about ^^.
Doesn’t your imagination extend to a serendipitous conjunction of Silverstein’s seeing the chance of a great coup with Mossad having kept an eye on KSM and the Arabs? And here’s a bit more imagination. Mossad was tipped off about the Arabs from within the CIA after which there can be more than one version of why the CIA dropped the bundle.
Ever trying for simplicity I don’t have a problem about Flight 93 crashing or being shot down (I think though we would have heard if it had been shot down) or with WTC 7’s collapse being no part of the plot.
**I don’t think you have said they weren’t on US airlines that day and indeed getting a lot of young Arabs to take flights (“don’t wait on martyrdom: join our competition and get your first five virgins for eid”) would be a he’ll of a lot easier than fixing the phone conversations.
^^ You know about the real estate lawyer with a cousin working for the Port Authority who said to Larry, “you’ve heard of St Elmo’s Fire? Think big. Think St. Elijah’s Fire my friend. And think asbestos”. The trouble is there are so many missing diary pages that we don’t know when it was said.
Time to cash in. Now’s the time for spoof videos of Rumsfeld using the voice cloning technology to make Cheney appear to be putting the wind up George W.
Meh.
1) The standard story, that Muslim terrorists did it, is entirely believable. I mean, they are sort of known for that sort of thing. Yes, the damage caused was extreme, but you’d expect these sorts of attacks to have “fat tail” statistical properties.
2) I am fairly cynical. But even I have a hard time believing the government would intentionally murder a few thousand Americans. And there is zero direct evidence for this. Some stuff supposedly doesn’t make sense, ergo Bush and Cheney did it. That is Ancient Aliens logic.
Additionally, if the government just wanted an excuse for wars, they could have just sunk a ship or something. Gulf of Tonkin, Lusitania, Remember the Maine, etc. No reason at all to do anything so big or so cruel as 9-11.
3) “The Jews did it” is also unconvincing. There is no way in hell the Israelis sent a missile into the Pentagon or did controlled demolitions of the WTC without the US government knowing about it or figuring out what happened. So I see this as a variation on the Inside Job theory. And again: I see no reason for the Israelis to do something so dramatic as 9-11 to manipulate us when their standard methods work so well.
I watched the Loose Change “documentary” on YouTube quite few years ago and I thought it was really ridiculous. It’s a little hazy but I recall it was saying all the hijackings were fake and the alleged terrorists were still alive, etc.
Most likely they did. My guess is someone who was in on it. Probably Silverstein Properties – either him or his general manager or chief of security – was saying “it’s about to collapse due to the muh muh fires” (this is to condition the mind – when it does in fact collapse, you just say, “I told you so, it was the muh muh fires”). This way people don’t ask the obvious question, “who put those explosives there?”
It wasn’t silent before. There’s interviews with countless witnesses, including firefighters, who heard lots and lots of explosions. Just because the controlled media has censored any evidence of demolition (that it could), doesn’t mean there weren’t explosions. I linked some references to the vast, overwhelming explosions evidence in a prior post on this thread, check it out!
As I noted before, the psyops aspect of this covert op are as important, if not more so, than the overt aspect. So every time you see a gross anomaly, it is an indication that the official story is not true, and a covert op is underway. The “prior knowledge” of the building’s collapse indicates (not enough by itself, but, it IS evidence, in particular, evidence of prior knowledge, which is admissible in court, indeed!) that the collapse was pre-planned. It is not definitive proof, but it, along with other purely circumstantial evidence, can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the buildings were all demolished following plans made prior to 9/11.
No, he will get ignored by ignorant, irrational people, who are busy living their lives and blindly believe the government and mass media. They do not understand spycraft and secretive plots; they think they are all “conspiracy theorists” and only a madman would contemplate it. Yet, they do believe in other conspiracy theories, like that Putin, the GRU and two Russians conspired to fly to Salisbury, from Moscow, and like idiots kill two Russians, and leave a deadly poison in your own room.” That, to them, is actually credible. Indeed, so credible, that no other alternative (like those two were framed) would even dare to cross their mind. Frame-ups never happen; and particularly not in extremely politically charged events. Because they are ignorant and distracted (football results at 6!) and, like some corporal said, people easily swallow the Big Lie; it is little lies (like cheating on your spouse, something they might do) that they might disbelieve..
This is a very immature debating style. You have lost the debate so you resort to childish pranks to try to discredit the winning position.
Only irrational people (people who don’t even have a first layer of critical thinking which, granted, covers a large swath) are influenced by such shenanigans. Those people aren’t on this board, so you can relax and spend your hard-earned shekels on some coffee in a nice, Palestinian-cleansed park.
Congratulations Ron. I have just re-read your article (and comments). I think you have eliminated the doubts that it could have been a Mossad operation based on the PNAC Pearl Harbor insight and the aim of having all ME Muslim countries as enemies of the US. But….
Given that ObL would have been equally motivated, in his case to hurt the US (and, I suggest that to believe any denial of responsibility is naive, especially while he was still the guest of the Taliban) and would not have had the means to have explosives planted in the buildings it becomes absolutely critical to prove that there were explosives used to bring down the towers or, perhaps less easy, that heat plus gravity couldn’t have done it. Nonetheless, that shows again the value of following the detail right down every hole. The point here is that ObL could have been expected to make a big thong of Israel’s possible complicity. Surely he would have been (and some reports say he was) surprised by the collapse of the towers as he can’t have had anything [OMG could he!?] to do with or foreknowledge of controlled demolitions. So…. at least as soon as truthers started to talk of controlled demolitions, why wasn’t ObL blaming Israel, or the CIA or Larry Silverstein?.
Trivial nitpicking copy editor style
1. “never in world history”….. Think Nero and, also, blaming the Christians;
2. 3000 Americans…. no, lots of foreigners amongst them – but that’s what copy editors are for
🙂
Look, I never claimed I knew for sure those phone calls were faked. I think there is good evidence for it. When you counter-argued that there was no rational reason to do it, I proffered up a rational explanation – a hypothesis – for why someone running this covert op might do that.
I do not believe there is enough evidence in the public record to come to a certain conclusion. I do, however, believe that there is enough evidence available to come to a pretty darn good conclusion. This part of the story does not affect my overall hypothesis – i.e. whether or not those people could actually call their loved ones is not important. Because those 19 Arab hijackers believing they were on a simulated hijacking is enough to explain all of it. Or even if they thought they were on an actual hijacking – and their superiors were just going to make darn sure those buildings came down.
Now, if you could prove those cellphones did not actually use the cell towers below them, or at least not from the necessary range, you have essentially destroyed the entire 9/11 official story. Because there is no way the “official story” could incorporate the passengers faking calls home into their storyline. It makes no sense whatsoever in that story line.
Overall I think it’s just a distraction issue, nobody will change their mind regardless of logic whether or not they were fake. Hence I won’t pursue it any further.
Yes. But aren’t you the slightest bit curious as to what this source might have been?
You see there was also foreknowledge of the South Tower collapse as well. Apparently, this bit of information came from the highly suspicious Office of Emergency Management(OEM). It was EMT Richard Zarrillo who relayed the message to some of the fire captains that the South Tower would collapse. He says, “OEM says the buildings are going to collapse; we need to get out.” Fire Chief Pete Ganci’s response is, “who the f___ told you that?” Seconds later, they hear the noise of the South Tower as it collapses.
Foreknowledge of the collapse of WTC7 occurred hours before the actual collapse. An engineer had relayed information to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden of the New York Fire Department that the building would collapse within 5 hours or so. Hayden will recall, “He said yes and he gave an approximate time of five to six hours, which was pretty much right on the money because the building collapsed about 5 o’clock that afternoon.” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer.
It was the deputy director of New York’s Office of Emergency Management(OEM), Richard Rotanz, who reports what terrible shape the building is in when they survey it a around 12:00-12:30pm. Curiously, this is about time the first visual evidence of fires start showing up in the building.
The emergency bunker for the OEM was on the 23rd floor of WTC7. But for some reason it was empty that morning and there has never been a good explanation as to why. John Farmer, who headed the 9/11 Commission unit that assessed the city response to the attacks, will find it “strange that Richard Sheirer[director of the OEM], four OEM deputies, and a field responder went straight to the North Tower… rather than to the nearby emergency command center.” John Farmer goes on, “We tried to get a sense of what Sheirer was really doing. We tried to figure it out from the videos. We couldn’t tell. Everybody from OEM was with him, virtually the whole chain of command. Some of them should have been at the command center.”
So the foreknowledge all points back to one group.
And interestingly enough the former director of the OEM, Jerome Hauer, has an interview with Dan Rather on 9/11 and Hauer seems to already know how the towers collapsed and who was behind it, officially.
The best way to predict the future is to create it.
“Keep your eye on that building, it’ll be coming down….”
Somewhere in there I got lost. You can’t heat a steel beam to the same temperature as the higher temperature heat source. Check. But if what is required is just to progressively weaken the steel after it gets to a particular critical temperature while heat continues to be supplied by the heat source which is at a higher temperature, what is your point?
It’s very blurry, not because the camera was of low quality, but because the camera was far away. It was already very zoomed (the photographer was quite far away, he zooms out a few times, we don’t know if that’s max zoom out) but yet the wingspan of the right wing at the time of impact is about 6.9% of the total width of the video. Given that the wing on a 767-200 is about 65′ (wingspan is 156′, which includes the fuselage), this means that the entire width of the video, at the point of impact, covers approximately 745 feet. This can be verified by noting that the 250-ft wide WTC takes up about one-third of the screen at that moment. The Resolution of the video is allegedly 1280, but that’s a higher resolution then is shown. It is a lower quality video that has been converted to a higher quality video – which does not add any detail at all. But let’s assume not – even 1280, this is about 1 pixel every 1.7 feet, shot on “full zoom”. This means, for example, that a human face would be a single pixel – at full zoom (actually less, many faces are not 1.8 feet wide, mines easily under 1 foot).
A normal (2000 sq ft single level) house would be around 50 feet wide. That would be about 30 pixels. Do you really think seeing a normal house in 30 pixels and a human face in 1/2 pixel is good clarity? No, of course not, so, my point stands, the film is quite blurry. And the plane is moving fast. And there are big contrasts. So yes picture quality is not precise.
I see it differently. The Boeing 767’s fuel tanks are along the wings (both in the wings and in the fuselage between the wings). So the tanks were probably not ruptured until the wings entered the building.
I have downloaded this video and played it frame by frame. I see the flame forming/explosion starting in the 4th frame showing impact (i.e., the first frame showing impact is the one where the nose has broken through the wall, where there is a small brightness (explosion), then 3 frames after that one, you can clearly see circular brightness where the engines are). This is logical since the fuel is by the wings and the tank would not be ruptured until the 2nd and 3rd frame (i.e., the 2nd frame is the first frame that shows part of the left wing and its engine having breached the outer wall of the tower, 3rd frame for right engine). On the 9th frame the building on the right side, over halfway to the other side of the building, starts to blow out with the big explosion we’ve all seen (the 10th frame is clearer but then if you back up one frame you will see it started there).
Now what is the frame rate of the video? 30. So 4 frames is about 135 milliseconds (about 33 milliseconds per frame).
Now honestly that’s a pretty fast fire start. What makes you think the fireball should appear as a large ball the instant of contact by the nose? Have you seen many things blow up that way? The wings (with the fuel) only enter the building in the 3rd frame, and one frame later, or 33 milliseconds later, you can already see a fireball starting. Within another 5 frames (165 milliseconds), the explosion is coming out the far side of the building.
Now, how much is the distance to the far side? About 150 feet, as the entire WTC is 250 feet per side. Traveling 150 feet in 165 milliseconds corresponds to 620 miles an hour. That is about the speed the plane was moving, but the flame we first see is coming out the side of the building, which is not the direction the plane was moving. So this explosion was exploding out from the wings. Gas explosions are not instantaneous; indeed, after that 9th frame, it takes another 70 frames (or 2.3 seconds) before the explosion reaches its maximum size, extending about 200 feet outside the building (the building is 250 feet wide). This means, after the initial explosion appearing to come out the building, the fireball blast only moves at 200 feet in 2.3 seconds or 60 mph.
The reason we don’t see flames out the opening in the tower is because the tank/fuel are moving forward at 500 mph, until they are largely stopped by the floors, supports and center columns (at least the tanks, some of the fuel keeps going all the way through). Then the flame shoots out the back (as well as the front and the side).
Now we have some latitude here because we really need a slow motion film, 3000 frames per second would be nice, to get better measurements, but we don’t have that.
So frankly I see nothing inconsistent with conventional physics or common experience. Indeed I see this happening exactly as I would expect.
LOL
It’s actually worse than that. Because the official story relies on the failure of the ceiling trusses, this means that not only must there have been a fire, but a raging inferno that had solid flames all the way up at the ceiling.
Given that all of the kerosene was gone within a few minutes (as its boiling point is very low, whatever did not immediately explode was spread all over the building and quickly boiled away in this 10 million degree heat that was caused – yet the building obviously stood for an hour or longer after). So what was burning? Regular office stuff – file cabinets, computers, rugs, wood paneling. Most of the fuel would be in the file cabinets. Due to the need for people to have to look into them, file cabinets in office buildings (at least any I have ever seen, and I’ve often been in office buildings, including WTC) tend to be about 4 feet high. The trusses, on the other hand, were connected to the floor above, so at least 6 feet over the paper.
So your campfire example is pretty correct. Imagine you have a campfire, and put your hand 6 feet over the top of the wood – your eye height. Does anyone think it is as hot there, as where the wood is burning? Or maybe Mr. Fire Inferno could roast a hotdog at this 1,000 degree temperature point 6 feet above the flame, with all that heat it should take only a few minutes. Now for the test to be very accurate, make sure the fire is oxygen starved, and spewing out lots of black smoke.
And all this, assuming the plane somehow blew all of the insulation off the trusses (no evidence of that). And all this, causes a perfect collapse into a footprint.
That’s a bit too much imagination for me. I jump off the train at the small office fire softening the structural steel. Choo-choo!
The case is circumstantial. Is there a hard evidence for anything? Actually what is the evidence that the official story is not true? And how from that evidence do you get to point a finger at Mossad?
The only hard evidence from which everything else can be deduced that exists is the postulate of the controlled demolition. W/o the controlled demolition there is no case except for the case based on the cui bono principle only. But the cui bon principle can always be postulated, so it is not really a strong argument.
Is there any hard evidence that it was Mossad? All you got is dancing Israelis and the evidence of foreknowledge in warnings for some Israel based companies. Everything else one can find in the Bollyn’s book is circumstantial based on the ‘six-degrees-of-separation’ argument.
I can understand that military men like Sabrosky do not like the idea that the whole system is compromises including the military and that they are penetrated by Mossad agent who were actively involved in carrying out the 9/11 operation. So Sabrosky and apparently you would prefer to believe that Mossad teams of supernatural abilities carried out the operation in the backyard of the greatest military and greatest police apparatus in the world w/o their cooperation or even knowledge. I think that there is psychological need to believe such a thing. The idea that there are some patriots who are not corrupted by Zionist goals in the power structure of the US may give us hope and solace. But everything suggests that if such patriots do exist they are powerless.
The bottom line is that we do not have any direct evidence to do attribution of different levels of responsibility and guilt between people like Perle and Cheney.
Well, I don’t know too much about any “Bolshevik agenda,” but my own primary/secondary education was clearly defective, with special attention here to these two failures:
1. That representative democracy is constructed to implement the will of the majority while protecting any minorities’ interests. That, at least for most of ‘the West’ as we prove by inspection, was/is an outright lie.
2. Entirely missing was any instruction on practical ways of interfacing with our fellow humans, most specifically partners and ‘bringing up baby.’ That last should = IMHO *must* include ‘tell them no lies,’ and again specifically, never tell them ‘supernatural-type’ lies. Actually doing the latter, before a child’s ‘age of reason’ = criminal child abuse.
The fact that you deny the Big Bang tells us something, namely that a) you will believe anything as per my theory, b) here specifically your “belief that airplanes crashed into WTC1 and WTC2,” concluding with c) facts are not needed for your belief, exactly as the case with supernatural deities, looping and QED
PS Searching my oeuvre will show that based on the ‘conservation laws,’ I assert that the Big Bang was ‘merely’ a phase-change from an incredibly super-dense&concentrated-energy state to an expanding, cooling state, just as we see. Sure, the Big Bang is a theory, but well-founded on scientific examination of matter/energy plus the observed expansion. Here is a false-colour image of the earliest visible manifestation of our universe, approximately 379,000 years after the Big Bang:
rgds
Some more explanation of my claim that the odds of “mammals” evolving is lower than one divided by the total number of atoms in the universe.
It is estimate that there are between 120 to 300 sextillion (that’s 1.2 x 10^23 to 3.0 x 10^23) stars exist within our observable universe. Given the number of atoms per stay system, it is estimated that there are between 10^78 to 10^82 atoms in the known, observable universe. https://www.universetoday.com/36302/atoms-in-the-universe/
Now, DNA is essentially a binary data system (either an A binds with a T or a C with a G, which is known as “base pairing”). Now, what are the odds of randomly creating a structure that requires a mere 256 “bits” to express? This is easily calculated: 2^256 = 10^78. That means that if it takes only 256 base pairs to express (1) all of the tubes needed, their structure, hollowness, etc. to create mamallian glands, (2) the exterior hole with a nipple to prevent leakage, (3) the production of liquids, only into the aforesaid tube, with a substance necessary for offspring to survive, and (4) the ability of the offspring to access said nutrient, which entails both, as “instinct”, to find a nipple, and to be able to suck from it, itself an extremely complex motor task.
One can safely assume that 128 base pairs do not suffice to express such an extremely complex structure. Let’s assume it’s only 256 base pairs, shall we?
But what is 2^512? Wow wow wow … that’s already 10^155! Wow! That’s like having a number of “observable universes” equal to the number of atoms in our observable universe – where that universe consists of sextillion stars – all of the stars which science has ever observed.
But, really, can only 512 base pairs express mamallian glands? How much is 512 bytes? Well, a single ASCII character is composed of one byte. So 512 bytes is a short paragraph of text.
And the mammary gland and sucking instinct hardly requires only 512 base pairs to be expressed. I don’t know the exact number, but it’s vastly more than 512.
This is something the “evolutionists” don’t tell you. They say, oh, the universe is big, even if it’s unlikely, there are so many universes, it’ll happen in one of them. No, it won’t, because of the odds that something would randomly become that complex is pretty much 0.
Ron, I fully concur with you. The Bush Family (Deep State) fully owns both Cheney and Rumsfeld. All these guys are fine patriots.
All the above guys are Israel firsters and traitors. They are minions for Israel. Appropriate suggestions were made to them by Deep State at regular interval, see how good it is for Israel and they ran with it.
Probably, a suggestion was made that it is not only good for Israel, but we guarantee that you will double your investment.
Tou·ché
As our own Dr. Philip Giraldi has predicted, “Bad Moon Rising”
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-manafort-and-senior-israeli-official-meddled-in-ukraine-elections-obama-foreign-policy-1.6471261
“I cannot think of a woman who effected American politics/history more than Monica Lewinsky”
Very likely. The 1933 Glass Steagall act was a major piece of legislation protecting the public, and very hard to come by. It took the terrible 1929 economic crash to impose it onto the cabalistic banking system.
Destroying the economy and people’s livelihoods is as big a crime as war; it is just more si.
Thanks for the enlightening information about how the Lobby managed to control Bill Clinton. Depravity, corruption and blackmail… Same old, same old.. It is amazing, though, to learn that Israelis were able to bug the Oval Office !! Is it really that bad? In Europe, we have a similar story of US intelligence agencies eavesdropping on the phones of France, UK, Germany head of states, but that at least can be understood considering the USA’s importance and hegemonic position.
The “Who lost Russia?” question is a fundamental one. If the “smart” neocons hadn’t hounded Russia, the rise of President Putin and his radical patriotic agenda wouldn’t have happened.
President Trump’s election was better than a victory of Mrs Clinton, a token female President, after a token Black President and a token Catholic President. For all his flaws, for all the harm he is causing to Palestinians, he still seems to be a sensible politician trying to slow down the run to WW3. With regards.
How do you know they weren’t also false flags or – probably just as 9/11 was – false-flag hoaxes.
The evidence clearly shows that the 3,000 dead, 6,000 injured claim is a lie. With controlled demolition so obvious there is no way that the perps would have killed the people in the buildings and the planes and there was simply no need to. Just as they propagandised us that 3 high rise steel frame buildings came down by fire when they so very obviously came down by controlled demolition and also propagandised into believing in 4 plane crashes when they were completely faked they also propagandised into believing the 3,000 people died and 6,000 were injured on 9/11 when that didn’t happen.
http://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/3000-dead-and-6000-injured-a-lie.html
The evidence for the official story not being true is, properly understood, in deep structure, exactly the same as the evidence that Ron Unz was not walking on the waters of San Francisco Bay yesterday.
It is not physically possible!
Therefore, it did not happen.
I know this is a very advanced concept that takes people a long time to get their heads around. So, feel free to take your time to think about it. Maybe you’ll need another seventeen years to grasp that.
Well, if this was your response to the question of what the strongest evidence for the official story is, then are you admitting that, as far as you know, there is no actual evidence?
That would be a reasonable, and honest answer, I guess, something like: “As far as I know, there is no real evidence, to speak of, for the official story. (Bin Laden etc.)”
So, is that your answer finally?
Why not? Because the whole notion is patently absurd! You want to investigate 9/11 but you don’t want to investigate any buildings getting blown up with explosives.
This is like having a new JFK investigation except you exclude any investigation of anybody getting shot with a gun.
No, obviously, you don’t want a real investigation. (Or whatever faction you’re here trolling on behalf of does not want one.)
Iris discussed: “… enlightening information about how the Lobby managed to control Bill Clinton. Depravity, corruption and blackmail… Same old, same old..”
… Greetings from Scranton, Pa, Iris!
… Not only are Americans deceived about present US military’s unnecessary & immoral intervention in Syria, they are trained to completely forget history.
… Will offer an example taken from President Clinton’s Netanyahu-besieged second term. (Zigh)
… On August 20, 1998, the cynical & ass- saving WJC ordered a bombing mission on a “suspected” Al-Qaeda operated chemical plant in Sudan which turned out to be what was described as a benign “aspirin production facility.
… Pathetically, Iris, this bombing mission occurred on the exact same date that the affectionate Monica Lewinsky was scheduled to appear before a Grand Jury & spill-the-beans about her flings with horny President “Slick Willie.” Please refer to The Nation article way below which reported on the U.S. war crime committed in the name of fighting terror before it strikes the…, uh, “Homeland” in embryo.
… Great job, Iris, and thank you.
… Post scriptum: In Summer 1986, having an American-nominated Fulbright award to Bulgaria, I traveled to Washington D.C. Smithsonian in order to attend an orientation for all Fulbright scholarship destined for eastern European countries, under the Warsaw Pact. Fyi, as a “single” man, the following session gripped my attention:
… A speaker warned scholars to be very careful of dalliances with the native ladies who possibly might be incentivised by Bulgarian intelligence operatives who were known to plant cameras upon Fulbright scholars matriculating beneath Belgrade hotel bed sheets! Intelligent, if one happened to return home to U.S. and wrote something negative about the Belgrade government, they’d have evidence of less than pure angelic behavior! (Ugh, “same old same old.”)
https://www.thenation.com/article/august-20-1998-the-us-bombs-a-suspected-qaeda-run-chemical-plant-in-sudan/
Oh dear. You think that’s a debating style. How very solemn of you. I would have credited you with the self knowledge to know that what you h a d in common with nearly everyone on UR (Ron himself excepted) is a willingness to waste one’s time. Allow me, when not fooling myself that puncturing bad arguments or correcting bizarre errors of fact will even change one person’s mind, to indulge a little frivolity. Try it. It could do you some good.
Thank you for your discussion of the thermodynamics involved. Your illustration of the heat transfer issues juxtaposed with the NIST estimates of the temperatures achieved in certain areas and on the steel itself is the most convincing scientific argument I have seen that the fires alone could not have brought down the towers. I would say that not only is your argument convincing, it is definitive
Guesses aren’t evidence.
No doubt there were explosions at some point: lots of things were burning. There are ZERO explosions when WTC7 fell. That’s not how controlled demolition works.
As for firefighter witnesses, I believe that they heard explosions, but you don’t believe that they saw structural problems with WTC7. You’re just cherry-picking the evidence that you want to hear.
lol.
Frame-ups happen, but you need evidence, not just your thirst for shirtless Putin.
You have prompted another variant line of thought. If there was remote control of the planes to cause them to crash then the 19 Arabs could have been duped into engaging in an actual hijacking which they thought was designed only to set up a deal with the US of some kind – plus their own freedom to leave the US. Or, maybe some of them could have believed that. Logically possible but of course I am not suggesting it is true.
I am not sure we are on the same wave length about the phone calls. By the time the FBI gave evidence there was very little to explain technically because the FBI version was that nearly a I’ll the calls were clearly from air phones. And as I pointed out to a commenter who raised the point about Barbara Olson having made one failed cell phone call that is compatible with the FBI version. If her cell phone didn’t work and she had access to an air phone one would have expected her to use it.
To geokat, J.R. wrote: “You want to investigate 9/11 but you don’t want to investigate any buildings getting blown up with explosives.”
Greetings from Scranton, Pa!
… The largest danger for 9/11 justice-seekers, uh, those who desire a real investigation, is who the ZUSA government would assign to do the job.
… Uh, would not surprise were ex-Senator & Al Gore running mate, Joseph Lieberman, to direct a 9/11 “reinvestigation” which would actually become the first one.
Remember your comment about good faith? Well, then why did you decide to leave out the final sentence of this paragraph:
Here’s the concluding sentence you cut out:
There are some weird affects on the audio channel in that last video, because initially, it seems, there is little or no audio in the left channel, but not long after some guy starts saying “Oh my god” (around 1:03 or 1:04) the left channel switches on.
I have not downloaded the video and extracted the audio channel but it looks like tampering happened.
Also, the following video claims that the man saying “Oh my god” was not in the originally aired version of that video:
There are ZERO explosions when WTC7 fell. That’s not how controlled demolition works.
You must be a Hasbara shill. You just lost all of your credibility.
To know you are lying all anyone needs to do is watch this video and listen.
What evidence? J. Revusky’s ‘evidence’ that Betsy Ong did not exist?
The evidence points to the Office of Emergency Management(OEM).
Now you are guessing, The collapse of WTC7 matches the collapse of a building being imploded. And you are ignoring eyewitnesses and physical evidence.
So what is not physically possible? That buildings could not collapse as they did w/o the help of additional explosives? I agree with it but there is a problem that this is a belief of mine and not a firm knowledge. And you do not posses the knowledge either. Your belief is so strong that you no longer see the difference between the belief and knowledge perhaps because you have a gene for zealotry.
If you were given all videography of 9/11 of building collapsing and say several hours of time to convince 12 civil engineers that the building were destroyed by means of controlled demolition you would not be able to convince all of them. You would end up hand waving a lot and shouting “free fall” over and over again. They could find a plausible counterargument for anything you would try.
A serious finite analysis modeling must be done to produce a definitive proof which still would be statistical in nature. Nobody has done it yet. Prof. Leroy Hulsey is working on it (WTC7) but keeps delaying his results. And then equally competent groups of specialist of finite elements method would have to go over his work to verify it because neither you or I are qualified to do it. David Chandler also is not qualified. He is just a high school physics teacher.
Anyway, Revusky, it is not all as simple as you think. Certainly this is not a case of walking on water. You are old enough to know that bad analogies do not constitute good arguments.
for starters..
We all know that even after it was obvious that this nation was under attack, the PTB allowed the Commander and Chief of our military.. the very man who is elected and charged with giving orders to protect America from harm in exactly such a situation… was allowed to sit in that classroom while the children chanted ‘kite, plane, must, hit, steel’.. for 20 something minutes, while the men who were really in charge carried out the false flag attack.
If they’re going to keep the Commander and Chief sitting in that classroom, then it’s because someone else is the actual, acting Commander and Chief, and that man was Dick Cheney.
Indeed, the fact that the chimp was allowed to sit in that classroom, while our nation was under attack, is just more glaring evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, and that the Secret Service were given orders to stand down. Otherwise they would have burst into that classroom with a single-minded purpose and whisked the chimp out as soon as it was obvious that America was under attack. He would have been secured out of harms way, and his generals would be all standing at the ready to hear their orders.
But nothing. He sat there, looking for all practical purposes like a complete dunderheaded fool. While Cheney took charge.
Cheney’s ties to the military and Pentagon were very deep and established. He is no dummy. He was the perfect Shabbos goy to bark out the orders on that day. No one in the Defense Dept. or Pentagon, NORAD, SACs, etc.. would have challenged Dick Cheney’s orders.
Well, I have to admit that I did not read your comment that carefully and I may have misrepresented what you were saying, which is more nuanced. Let’s see…
You want to call for a new investigation without mentioning any buildings getting blown up, but then when the investigation gets going, it can investigate the buildings getting blown up. But, for tactical reasons, I guess, in lobbying for the new investigation, one should avoid mentioning any buildings getting blown up.
I mean, it still doesn’t make much sense, because, though there are plenty of things to investigate, the biggest A-1-A reason to open a new investigation is that OBVIOUSLY, the buildings were blown up!!! But, for some reason, we should refrain from mentioning that when calling for a new investigation.
It’s like there’s an elephant in the room, the obvious explosive demolition of the buildings in this case, but we should not mention the elephant, because that somehow is not the right strategy. Why? Because you say so, I guess.
Anyway, are you now accepting that there is no evidence for the official 9/11 story? Yes or no?
Opposed to that is the conviction that:
They would never have done that!
Therefore, whatever the apparent physical impossibility, it did happen just as Donald Trump, standing at ground zero two days after 9/11 explained to a German TV audience.
Interviewer: Why did the buildings come down?
DT: It was the tremendous power, the tremendous heat… the tremendous amounts of fuel that was dumped on the building. Sixteen hundred degrees temperature. I guess that’s probably more than anything could take, no matter what.
Interviewer: What could have prevented such a disaster?
DT: People were willing to die and willing to become Kami Kazis. There’s very little you can do about it.
Interviewer: How must the US respond?
DT: They have to find out who did it and they have to go after those people.
So there you have it. The full official narrative.
(1) Kami Kazis, you can’t stop ’em.
(2) Jet fuel fires, bound to bring the buildings down, even though they were designed to withstand precisely that, an airliner strike and jet fuel fire.
(3) We gotta go to war with whoever they say did it.
I don’t “deny” the Big Bang. The word “deny” (and this is why I despise the world Holocaust Denial) implies that what you are denying is true, or some default value. The neutral way to phrase it is that I disagree with the Big Bang hypothesis (it is not even a scientific theory, in the true meaning of that word, and most certainly not a physical law).
What makes you think I believe in the Yahweh, God or Allah? In your constricted view of reality, are these the only possibilities? If so, I suggest you get back to basics, and free your mind.
As I noted in another post, my belief – in fact, this is not a belief, this is pretty much the one and only thing I believe is a law – is that it is impossible to know the nature of reality. Because if you start constructing models (explanations, like the Big Bang or Creationism), you can never be sure that there is not another layer of understanding/deception (intentional or empirical) that prevents you from seeing the full picture. It is impossible to prove these things true. Literally. Impossible. And it is just as impossible to prove Big Bang as it is to prove Creation. Because you don’t even know if you actually exist as a material being. You don’t know that you are not living, as Musk would say, in a video game. But if you start actually educating yourself into the philosophy of the topic, there are so many layers that you cannot actually know, it requires a leap of faith – religion – to arrive at any certitude. So, yes, Big Bang is assumed religion.
As to your image – I don’t believe any of that. You may as well show me a painting of Adam and Eve and say “this is the image of Creation”, lol.
One of your numerous absurd ideas, Utu, is that life can be guided by absolute knowledge. Trouble is, there ain’t no such thing outside your own realm of pure logic. That is why, at some point, rational people settle for less than absolute knowledge as a basis for deciding practical questions, e.g., should George Dubya Bush be tried for treason.
To most well-informed persons who have dispassionately examined the evidence, the WTC towers that fell on 9/11 were brought down with explosives. Moreover, a mass of circumstantial evidence indicates that the Bush Administration either instigated, or permitted, the 9/11 attacks, an inference consistent with the failure of the administration to order either a forensic or a judicial investigation of what happened.
Troll? Is this your response? I gave you an honest good faith argument. I must have hit the bulls eye that our master of hyperbolic rhetoric threw the towel.
Maybe you being here is to waste your time, but the same does not apply to everyone else. Debate and discussion is the cornerstone of understanding reality and being a good citizen. Wasting time is … watching a football game or crime drama, or any “hobby”.
Disingenuous, bad faith arguments are not “frivolity”. They are, in fact, what does waste time. And given, that you have admitted, that you are here to waste time, I guess now I know, to add you to my “Ignored” list.
Well, to be a high school physics teacher would typically mean that one has a bachelor’s degree in physics. Let’s assume that this is what David Chandler has, for the sake of argument.
I am pretty certain that this is way more than enough to break down the absurdities of the official 9/11 story. If it isn’t enough, then what do you think he would learn in a post-graduate program that would allow him to do so?
Well, I ask that but don’t expect an answer, of course. I mean, obviously, if it turned out that he has a B.Sc., you would say that he should have at least a master’s degree or doctorate, and if it turned out he had a ph.D. you would then argue, I dunno…. that it wasn’t from a sufficiently prestigious university. Or whatever. No qualifications would ever be sufficient. You would just keep shifting the goalposts.
In any case, I don’t think it takes even a bachelor’s degree in physics to figure out the absurdity of the 9/11 narrative. A half-decent high school education should be enough.
In the first article I wrote on this site, I outlined the kind of tactics you are using now. Right here:
https://www.unz.com/article/battling-the-matrix-and-freeing-oneself-from-the-roger-rabbit-mental-world/#p_1_94
I wrote this:
Actually, I am quite certain that it is as simple as I think it is. It may be impossibly complex for you, but that is because you are an idiot.
No comment.
I wold like to see him tried but then let suppose than we do not have a witnesses or co-conspirators who would admit that the explosives were planted in the buildings and all what we have is the 9/11 videography of building collapsing and the expert witness David Chandler who by waving hands convinced you that it was a controlled demolition. What if David Chandler had an accident before the trial that made his hands immobile? How could he persuade the jury?
Your firm conviction comes from watching videos produced by David Chandler and few other truthers. How could you decide that he was right? You are not qualified. He is just a high school physics teacher. His ability to analyze a complex structure does not go beyond the equation of motion F=mg and the conservation of energy. Brief intervals where some segments of the structure were allegedly identified to be in a free fall are not sufficient because periods of free fall are possible for some segments of the complex structure undergoing a collapse w/o explosives.
Having a taste of your own medicine, Utu?
You are the first to tag as “Troll” perfectly honest, genuine commenters. Don’t play the shy virgin, it does not suit you.
No, it is a perfectly common way of referring to a eutectic. I’ve bought eutectics for work. I know what I’m talking about. You clearly don’t.
Trace amounts are all you are talking about. Anyway, it isn’t in trace amounts in drywall. Was there no drywall in the WTC towers?
So, what is the answer to your essentially irrelevant question?
I agree that thermite gets hotter. That’s why people use it. There is still no evidence of it being used in the WTC.
I read it once. It was garbage. It’s in a Bentham open access journal – peer review consists of “did your check clear”. Stephen Jones is otherwise most famous for publicly announcing he had discovered cold fusion, and then having to retract it when it proved false. He apparently never got over it, and had to search elsewhere for glory, leading him to stumble into the “truther” ghetto.
It has just occurred to me that if this was entirely a Media/Jewish/Israeli – inspired event then, if there were no real planes involved as seems likely, there is no need to speculate about the USAF “stand down” on that day. No need, the media will suffice.
Look, my point is a quite straightforward one: your best chance for getting an investigation opened is to base it on the following FACTS:
1. those presented by international lawyer, Gerald Shea, in his meticulously detailed memorandum that shows beyond a shadow of a doubt Israeli involvement in the events leading up to, during, and immediately after the attacks on 9/11
2. Carl Cameron’s 4-part series on Fox News, detailing Israeli spying on American soil prior to 9/11 and their tie-ins to 9/11
3. Eyewitness testimony of New Jersey housewife who spotted three men celebrating (who turned out to be Israeli Mossad agents) after the FIRST plane struck WTC 1, which everyone thought was an accident BEFORE the second plane struck WTC2
My point is it’s better to call for the opening of an investigation on the basis of these solid/concrete FACTS and once it begins, the investigators can go wherever those facts lead them. Otherwise, getting an investigation to be opened by claiming no planes were involved, it was controlled demolition using nano thermite, or mini-nuclear bombs, or missiles were used may prove problematic. That’s all.
But if you Truthers feel strongly about downplaying the 3 FACTS I cited, and instead choose to lead with the controlled demolition hypothesis, by all means do so. All I would say is, good luck with that.
Look, both sides of this debate can point to some form of evidence that supports their respective cases. The crucial question is: which side does THE PREPONDERANCE of the evidence support. That’s what an independent investigation would establish.
If, at this investigation, experts could be brought forward who could refute the arguments put forward by Ryan Mackey in his whitepaper and demonstrate that the buildings were indeed brought down by controlled demolition, so be it.
Thanks, Einstein. So glad you’re here to educate me, I’d be lost without you!
Well if Popular Mechanics says so, it must be true! I can’t hand-feed you everything, particularly since no doubt you will be too smug and lazy to actually read or look at anything, but here’s a shot:
https://www.infowars.com/new-911-footage-reveals-wtc-7-explosions/
(shows a large number of explosions in WTC 7, blowing out windows, nowhere near any fires, though the time relative to the collapse is not indicated)
Also, it is obvious that those who planned the event could not have fooled the public if the buildings collapsed with obvious large explosions. That’s the whole reason they used nano-thermite instead of C4. Nano-thermite will cut the steel support columns (the whole point of explosives used in a demolition) without making loud sounds.
Your entire premise that cutting support columns requires loud explosions is contradicted by the official story itself. I.e., no matter what the cause, the building collapsed into its own footprint without any explosions, according to your argument. But in your argument, it is not nano-thermite, but a quite small office fire, very far away from the collapse point (according to NIST), that severed the support columns.
By the way, what possible reason could there be to classify any of the collapse video? Why hasn’t it all been released, in full? What national security interest is at stake, other than the official story?
You’ve completely ignored the steel-framed building in Iran that recently collapsed due to fire. You guys always do that: somebody brings up a point – ignore it, move on to the next.
Thousands of gallons of jet fuel. Shredded aluminum. Insulation stripped off the structural members. Massive damage to the buildings structure from the collision.
Who is David Chandler and why should I give a f**k? How did he measure it? From grainy youtube videos.
I don’t believe you guys have the slightest inkling as to what constitutes truth or how to go about finding it. You are nobodies with obsessions that are irrelevant – unimportant to anybody but yourselves. You occupy a ghetto of like-minded cranks. You are cultists.
You quote part of a NIST report, presumably because we are supposed to take it as authoritative.
Well, then why don’t you quote the part of the report that concludes that the building ultimately collapsed due to the fires, and not to imaginary thermite plots?
” The word “deny” (and this is why I despise the world Holocaust Denial) implies that what you are denying is true, or some default value. The neutral way to phrase it is that I disagree with the Big Bang hypothesis (it is not even a scientific theory, in the true meaning of that word, and most certainly not a physical law). ”
Correct.
The words ‘Big Bang’ are from Hoyle, to ridicule Gamow.
Didn’t review in time to edit … point I am making is that it is obvious the building collapsed into its own footprint, either with or without explosive sound (depending on what eyewitness or video you believe or don’t believe), but I think we all agree that the building collapsed rather suddenly and uniformly into its own footprint.
The real question is: was that sudden, symmetrical, free fall collapse into its own footprint caused by a random fire, or some demolition technology? I.e. was it a random event (that has never occurred prior or since), or a controlled event (that, aside from the issue of explosive sounds, matches every other expert controlled demolition in every detail)?
You claim, any demolition would require loud explosions, because that is the “normal” way to demolish buildings. But as I have noted previously in this thread, if fire is enough to cause such a perfect collapse, you should start a company and use that as a demolition technology! Get rich! Or, perhaps some other technology – such as nano-thermite – was used. Have you seen videos of buildings demolished by nano-thermite? Do you know what it would sound like?
Well here’s a clue: nano-thermite would work by slicing through the steel using extreme heat, rather than expanding gas which produces a pressure wave / percussion wave.
Even if David Chandler was Richard Feynman the problem could not be resolved without a serious finite elements modeling of the building structure that nobody can do in his head and only those who specialize in doing such a modeling may have developed shortcuts and intuitions that are not available for others whether they are Chandler or Feynman. Neither Feynman nor Chandler are qualified to determine the solution by looking at videos.
Chandler argument stems from the equation of motion F=mg and conservation of energy that are basic things one learns in high school physics. Then he claims he identified a period of time when a part of structure was in free fall condition, i.e., its acceleration was equal to g. The problem with this finding, if true, is that it is not sufficient to prove the thesis that explosives must have been used. It is possible that some fragment of the structure may be in a free fall for a period of time even w/o explosives. One needs the finite elements model to determine which fragments and for how long could experience the free fall. Only then you can determine whether the building indeed must have collapsed because of explosives. Prof. Leroy Hulsey was supposed to be working on it for WTC7. He was promising results for October 2017 and then for Spring 2018 and again he is postponing. Find his website and so on (UA Fairbanks). He is supported and possibly funded by the real truthers. The real truthers recognize the importance of his work because they unlike you and CanSpeccy and most yahoos here do not realize that David Chandler hand waving is insufficient.
Calm down and tone down you rhetoric like about the pigs flying and Run Unz walking on water. Did you mother encourage this kind of thing? Or was your father also a borderline hysteric?
The video of flashes in WTC7 that you have posted is fake. Not only government is data faking.
Is that what you have? Only a “half-decent” high school education?
So now the authorities you are citing include not just a theology professor, but a high-school physics teacher who – maybe – has a bachelors degree in physics. Maybe it’s only a BA. Maybe he doesn’t have a bachelors in physics (lots of high school physics teachers don’t).
Anyway, plenty of people with PhDs in physics believe that there was no demolition, and that the airplanes brought down the towers. Why are they wrong, in your view, but a high-school physics teacher is right?
You’ve been wallowing in your own bullshit for so long, do you even know what reality looks like?
Why don’t you stick to sticking up for muslim rapists, in keeping with your anti-white agenda.
Two more links on explosions being heard:
https://www.unz.com/book/david_ray_griffin__911-contradictions/#chapter-24-were-there-explosions-in-wtc-7
AND
Well, I certainly agree with the first part, but I don’t see how it really implies the second part…
Suppose that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and all the other top Bush officials believed that “W” was just as ignorant and useless as most other Americans did, including myself. During a sudden national crisis, isn’t it perfectly possible that they would consider his personal involvement of no value or perhaps even counter-productive? So they just sort of forgot about him or even casually decided his best role was probably to continue reading his pet goat book to those schoolchildren while they tried to figure out what to do.
If it had been an “inside job” by the top Bush officials, wouldn’t they have planned to make him look a little more “presidential” and less totally ridiculous? I mean assuming they still wanted to keep him around as their front-man for the remaining years of his administration. Didn’t his ridiculous behavior on 9/11 potentially endanger his reelection in 2004, and if he’d been defeated, all of them would have been out of their jobs?
Why do you keep repeating such utter nonsense? I have already in this thread linked to the Jones et al. peer-reviewed scientific publication demonstrating that nano-thermite was indeed found in the dust. A peer-reviewed paper published by so many scientists is at least as convincing as an FBI report. Also I have shown that the limited dust analysis done by the USGS fully confirms the Jones paper.
To then come out and say there is “no evidence” – well WTF is evidence to you that there was nano-thermite in the dust? Nobody else has tested for it, so nobody has even claimed that “a test revealed no nano-thermite”! You just take very high quality evidence and groundlessly dismiss it.
What’s actually more true: there is no evidence that you are acting in good faith; indeed there is overwhelming that you are a troll.
No, it is not relevant.
(1) It was not a true skyscraper – 17 stories. Also it was merely a steel-framed building, there is no evidence that it had internal steel cores, like all the WTC structures had, nor is there evidence that it had the kind of redundancy that the WTC buildings had (e.g., WTC 1 and 2 were designed to survive multiple aircraft, with fuel tanks, flying into the buildings, as well as to withstand earthquakes and hurricane force winds because, yes, sometimes hurricanes hit New York City, many with wind gusts in excess of 120 mph, which puts quite some stress on such a large “sail” as the towers).
(2) You can see in the collapse video that there were 3 large explosions right before the collapse started. See also https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2018/01/30/demolition-deniers-obsessed-with-plasco-demolition-tehran/ (many more videos linked in that one) and http://www.ae911truth.org/images/PDFs/Plasco_Building_Report_2.20.17.pdf
(3) It did not collapse remotely in the way WTC 7 collapsed. It collapsed more like you would expect a building to collapse if it were to fall solely due to a fire (but see the part about explosions above).
In general see the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth report linked above.
“Your firm conviction comes from watching videos produced by David Chandler and few other truthers. How could you decide that he was right? You are not qualified. He is just a high school physics teacher. His ability to analyze a complex structure does not go beyond the equation of motion F=mg and the conservation of energy. Brief intervals where some segments of the structure were allegedly identified to be in a free fall are not sufficient because periods of free fall are possible for some segments of the complex structure undergoing a collapse w/o explosives.”
I am afraid you are wrong. Chandler’s two arguments can be made quite strong and they do not have anything to do with his job or academic degree.
The first argument is that a building cannot fall in free-fall acceleration unless supporting structures have been removed. This is perfectly correct.
You find a careful analysis of the energy needed to break supporting structures in WTC1 from
F. R. Greening:„The Pulverization of Concrete in WTC 1 During the Collapse Events of 9-11” available at
http://www.911myths.com/WTCONC1.pdf
Greening calculates the energy needed, Breaking one floor takes a bit over 1/4th of kinetic energy that the upper floors gain when falling one floor. It follows that the acceleration is about 7 m/s2. Chandler measured the acceleration of WTC1 to 6.31 m/s2 from a video, which is a fully acceptable method in science. This result agrees with gravitational fall that is breaking structures. But when we go to WTC1, he measured 9.8 m/s2. That is free-fall and it lasted 2.25-2.5 s. A building in Sao Paolo (not steel-frame) that collapsed 2018 because of fire fell with acceleration 6 m/s2. You refer to suggestions that some segments of a building could collapse in free-fall, but the video shows the whole building collapsing at the same time (the whole roof goes down) therefore this argument is invalid. WTC7 should also have collapsed with acceleration around 6 to 7 m/s2 if it collapsed due to fires.
The second argument by Chandler requires some clarification. It is that if the upper part breaks down the lower part, then the lower part also breaks down the upper part and finally the upper part is destroyed and some of the building is still standing. This argument is obviously false if we talk about the whole building, but valid if we talk about the external walls and assume that floors pancake. It is false of the whole building because each time the upper part falls one floor it gains kinetic energy, so the falling mass has more energy the lower it falls and if it can break the highest floor, it can break all floors below it. The upper floors break, but the mass does not escape anywhere, it still falls down. However, if the floors fall first by pancaking, that is, floors break loose from walls and fall down faster than the walls get destroyed, then the only thing that can break the walls of the lower part are the walls of the upper part. As the walls of the upper part break walls of the lower part, they get broken. The lowest floor of the upper part falls down and the mass of the upper part is all the time decreased. The walls of the upper part do not stay fixed when they are broken, they fall on sides. This way the walls of the upper part are indeed destroyed and about half of the walls of the lower part should be standing after the collapse. This argument requires that floors pancake, as the official theory says, but the official theory has to claim that floors pancake. It is because there are puffs of air far under the destruction level. They can only be either explosions from explosives or pancaking floors that push air out. As the official theory discards explosives, floors must fall before the walls. Thus, Chander’s argument is valid.
Both Chandler’s arguments are valid, but they are by no means the only arguments. Additionally there are the signs of very high temperatures, predictions that the planes come, predictions that WTC7 falls, lucky insurance policy, leaning of one twin tower and straightening, arguments against the Pentagon plane,… So many arguments that the case is certain.
As for weak arguments, the 911Truthers unfortunately often suggest weak arguments. Concrete can pulverize in a gravitational fall, the twin towers did not fall with free-fall acceleration, air puffs can be from collapsing floors, floors can pancake, fire can theoretically collapse a steel-frame building, and a temperature argument that the steel could not be heated enough is very difficult to make into a sound proof. I have seen an attempt in this site, but it is faulty: if the fire is large enough steel can be heated even though it conducts heat well. It only requires that a wide area is in fire.
There are many people with quite good qualifications who agree with the arguments by Chandler and others, only most of them who express their opinions on this issue are retired for obvious reasons.
I wonder if you’ve ever heard “Oh lighten up Dad, you’re being a bore”. And you are not even a careful one (still paying you a small compliment buried in that). I did not say or imply – or “admit” – that I was here to waste time I referred to the fact – expressed the opinion if you prefer – that virtually none of the commenters will have any appreciable effect on the real world. Oh yes, I agree that it is not a waste of time for you to become better informed and clearer in your thinking. A small modification that I accept.
I quote the NIST report because it constitutes the “official story”. No surprise that you are too stupid to make a tiny little connection like that.
I’ve also explained the NIST conclusion: their mandate was, “assume the building collapsed by fire, how did it happen?”. They did not investigate use of explosives. They simply said it didn’t happen, and it took them 6 years – 6 YEARS – to come up with a model which was a fire collapse, and then even this classified model shows a collapse that looks much more like the Iran building, than the WTC 7 collapse – indeed looks nothing at all like the actual WTC 7 collapse. So of course I don’t believe that. But they did have some test results published, from which we can draw our own conclusions.
Thanks doc…for me personally the heat transfer issue is the smoking gun…because I know this specialized subject very well…
The problems with the collapse and its near free-fall speed and all of that is compelling, but I am not an expert on structures…I leave that to many more highly qualified individuals who are are indeed investigating this at the highest level of expertise…Prof Hulsey et al at U of A, Fairbanks for instance…
But being well versed in thermal science at the professional level, it became clear very quickly that the story is utter fantasy…the INTERNAL temp of ANY steel structure in that building would have been very hard pressed to reach even 400 C [where it would still be near room temperature strength], even if we take the NIST flame temp model at its word…
And that is assuming with NO fire INSULATION…[I’m giving NIST a mulligan on this one also]…that the fire insulation did indeed fall off due to the airplane impact, despite the fact that this is completely unsupported…why would spray-on insulation that adheres tenaciously to the surface and is designed specifically not to lose its grip at high temperatures [after all, if it fell off in a fire that would be defeating its very purpose, so why even use it]…what would be the physical mechanism for this adhesive bond to fail…?
Regardless…I am giving the NIST every benefit of the doubt in everything they claim as to those data points…the maximum flame temp and its distribution…the lack of insulation on the steel…etc…
And even so the claim that the beams got hot enough [internal steel temperature] is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE…and in such a big way that it is not even close…
Heat transfer is a very specialized engineering discipline that even many engineers in other fields know nothing about…some don’t even realize it exists as a specialized discipline…its most challenging uses are somewhat esoteric, such as nuclear power and rocket engine and jet engine design…where components must be able to survive exposure to temperatures up to 3,500 C…a temperature approaching the surface of the sun…and nearly double the melting temperature of any metal known to man…
I suspect this is why this smoking gun was left lying around by the NIST…it is a science that is too esoteric for them to consider that someone would poke around in it…
It all boils down to this simple statement…even if the maximum AIR [or gas if you will] temperature reached 1,000 C in only a small portion of the space as NIST claims…how high did the temperature INSIDE the steel members actually get…?
To those who understand precisely how heat moves from one molecule to another and from one object to another…this is no mystery…and the idea that an office fire is going to heat a steel beam to even 500 C is absolutely preposterous…
Let me try to fill in a little additional detail to the science…let’s reference that figure I showed from the heat transfer textbook, here it is again…
Beneath the figure we see the so-called ‘thermal circuit’…analogous to an electrical circuit…
We see the first step is from the gas freestream temperature, T∞,1 to the object surface temperature Ts,1…in the thermal circuit we see the math for this drop in temperature…namely…
Now before we get intimidated by what looks like a bunch of greek…this is actually incredibly simple…
That mathematical relation tells us simply that the heat flux q, which is the AMOUNT of heat ENERGY moving from one point to the next is equal to the difference between the gas or fire temperature and the steel surface temperature, divided by a simple term that includes the KEY PIECE…namely the HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT, h…
What this tells us is that the temperature drop we see in the graphic…where the fire [or gas] temp drops to a certain value at the surface of the steel is solely a function of that heat transfer coefficient…
This is what heat transfer boils down to the heat transfer coefficient…if we have a high heat transfer coefficient, the flow of heat energy q [called the heat flux, in units of watts] will be greater…ie the transfer of heat from that fire will move very efficiently into nearby objects…
If, on the other hand that heat transfer coefficient is low…then no amount of temperature in the fire [it could be the maximum known combustion temperature like we see in rocket engines burning solid oxygen instead of air] will help with the transfer of heat energy into any object over which that very hot fluid is flowing…
It’s as simple as that…
Now one may ask what kind of heat transfer coefficient would we see in an open flame…and a steel object right in the middle of that open flame…like the fireplace poker sitting right in the fire…
The answer is VERY SIMPLE…such a scenario of an open fire heating an object even smack in the middle of the fire, will have a VERY VERY LOW heat transfer coefficient…
This can be explained quite understandably even to the layman…heat transfer occurs at the molecular level, where one molecule that has heat energy collides with another one that does not…and in that collision TRANSFERS its energy to the other molecule…
Now when you have a situation of an open fire and an object inside…let’s say a flat piece of steel…it is obvious that only the gas molecules from the fire that are right at the surface of the steel plate, are going to have an opportunity to collide with steel molecules and transfer their energy…
Those molecules even an inch away do not have any chance to collide with the steel surface…molecules simply do not travel on a scale of inches…their distance scales are much much smaller…
So we see the simple fact that the process of heat transfer…if left completely to chance is not very efficient…it is like leaving to chance that an asteroid will collide with earth…it does happen [at least small meteorites anyway] but it is simply not very efficient, if your goal was in fact to bombard the earth with meteorites [for whatever reason]…we would need to devise some more efficient way of making that happen, than simply leaving it to the very rare occurrence in nature…
That’s what heat transfer engineering is about…if we want to bring hot molecules in contact with cold molecules on a much more efficient scale..we then need to come up with a way to do that…so, let’s say we have a gas temperature of 1,000 C, exactly the same as the gas temp in an open fire…if we now want to heat a lot of steel we would arrange that steel into a lot of tiny little tubes and force the gas to go through those tiny little tubes…
Now the distance that each gas molecule needs to get to, in order to collide with a steel molecule and transfer its heat energy, is tiny [the smaller the tubes the smaller the distance each molecule needs to travel to get to the steel in the tube wall]…therefore nearly all hot gas molecules flowing through those tiny tubes will have an opportunity to transfer their energy…they are now physically in close enough proximity to do so…
As a result, our heat transfer coefficient is MUCH higher…and we are transferring heat from the gas to the steel in a very effective way…
Now here is a crucial point…even in such a carefully designed and constructed apparatus for transferring heat with the UTMOST effectiveness from a hot gas to steel…the surface temperature of that steel will still NEVER reach the gas temperature itself…
We have already established that with the heat gradient curve and the math that explains it…the heat transfer coefficient h may be very high, but it can never reach infinity…so there will always be a lower steel temperature even at the very surface, according to the math equation presented above…and as the heat propagates through the internal mass of those steel tubes that temperature will continue to go down…because at the other end we have air of room temperature or outside environment temperature…
That is the physical reality…I do not think that is so difficult to grasp…
Now let’s look at some ‘typical’ heat transfer coefficients as provided in the literature…
I have highlighted the applicable which is ‘natural convection’…which is what we have in a fire where the hot gas flows only due to natural lift of the hot gas through the air…as opposed to ‘forced’ convection where we have an apparatus that forces greater mass flow of the hot gas, thereby increasing the opportunity for more hot gas molecules to make contact with the surface…
–Principles of Heat Transfer, Kreith…page 496…
So we see that the value of ‘h’ is about 5 to 15 W/m^2*K…now that is quite low…I can tell you that state of the art heat exchangers are designed to achieve gas heat transfer coefficients of above 1,000…nearly three orders of magnitude higher…[and you can actually see some very high coefficient numbers there for liquids etc…]
But using even the higher figure of 15 given in this reference for natural convection, we can now plug this into our math to find the surface temperature of that steel beam in a fire of 1,000 C…and we find that it cannot even reach 400 C under these assumptions put forth by the NIST…
It is simply impossible…it absolutely fails the science test…the numbers simply CANNOT ADD UP…
The story is completely bogus…the fact that NIST has never provided one scrap of math about the actual HEAT TRANSFER…only the maximum fire temperature [which is meaningless as we have seen]…tells us that there is a MAJOR HOLE in their narrative…
But this does not stop the NIST FALSELY STATING A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY… namely that because the fire temperature reached 1,000 C…the INTERNAL steel temperature also reached 1,000 C…
I leave it to anyone here who has understood the basic physics I have explained about heat transfer gradient and coefficient…to test the veracity of that NIST claim…or the physical possibility that ANY material being able to reach the SAME temperature as the hot gas…
NIST has NEVER supported this claim with any math or physics…it is simply an EMPTY CLAIM THAT GOES AGAINST BASIC LAWS OF PHYSICS…
Note to commenters…this is an attempt to bring some BASIC understanding of heat science to the layman…it is a huge subject and very involved, so it must be realized that bringing someone reading this up to a full working facility in this science is not realistic…please keep this in mind when asking questions…I am glad to explain further and go deeper into the subject, but such a question must take into account an understanding of what I have already explained…
Questions that are obviously retarded do not help anyone here and are only a waste of bandwidth…
Well, this is a slippery misrepresentation. Nobody said anything about “downplaying” the facts that you cited. The fact remains that they are still secondary. The PRIMARY issue is that building 7 (which everybody agrees was NOT hit by any plane) is obviously a controlled demolition. Your whole idea that people advocating an investigation should decline to mention the single biggest smoking gun is something that just makes no sense at all!
In any case, above, you say “you Truthers” implying strongly that you are not a “Truther”. A “Truther”, definitionally, is someone who does not believe the official story, right?
So, one would infer that this means that you believe the official story. If so, what is the best evidence for the official story?
You did not answer my question. Here it is again: “Are you now accepting that there is no real evidence for the official story?”
The question above admits a simple yes or no for an answer. Why do you refuse to answer that?
A summary accusation of “fakery” is unsatisfying. What evidence have you that it is fake?
As an aside, Unz has uploaded one of David Griffin’s papers (Contradictions) discussing WTC 7 explosions here.
Have “lie” and it’s cognates become internet terms of art? Why do you Crimson 2’s expressions of opinion and argument are lying?
More important, since that interesting video has no voice over or commentary I am at a loss to know what you are seeking to make of it. I could hear noises which no doubt included the sound explosions which were part of the demolition. And I noticed the rapid descent of many of the buildings. But I don’t know what you want us to infer from it. Help please.
You were too stupid to notice that their disclaimer had nothing to do with the mechanism they said was responsible for the collapse.
You’re deep into the bullshit here, Utu.
Chandler undertook a well reported analysis of the kinematics of the fall of Building 7 which demonstrated that, for the first 2.4 seconds, the building’s roof line fell with an acceleration equal to g.
That his analysis was undoubtedly correct is confirmed by the fact that NIST revised its own report on the collapse of Building 7 to include acknowledgement that it fell at free-fall speed for 2.4 seconds.
But what can we expect from someone who calls Isaac Newton a fraud, Einstein a plagiarist and Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection mere rubbish. Take care, Utu, and watch out for pink elephants.
So you apparently have never heard of a blacksmith.
How would one ever soften metal enough to deform it with fire?
I guess that whole “iron age” we’ve heard about is just disinformation.
The fact that you have a heat transfer textbook doesn’t make you smart. You are just an idiot with a heat transfer textbook.
That’s interesting. Which ones? Can you name any?
Have any of these physics ph.D.’s (that you decline to name) who believe the official story been willing to debate with the high school teacher? (Or anybody else…) After all, it should be easy for them to tear him apart, a mere high school teacher, eh? It should be so easy and they would be doing a great public service, wouldn’t they?
Yet they don’t do it. Why not?
Well, this a vile lie. I don’t stick up for Muslim rapists (or any other rapists). Obviously not. I stick up for people who are falsely accused of being rapists. If Buddhists or Presbyterians or anybody else were being falsely accused of being rapists, I would stick up for them.
In fact, as nasty a piece of work as you are, I would probably even stick up for you if you were being accused and I knew the accusation to be false. (That would be my moral/ethical stance, though I have to admit I would think twice about bothering.)
Supposedly, some of the durable parts(engines, landing gear) from the jets allegedly used were picked up from the debris. There is some footage and photos of some of these parts.
The following contains some of these photos: https://rense.com/general64/wth.htm
To my mind, the relevant question is asked by Bollyn:
Based on this, he draws the logical conclusion:
He then speculates:
You guys wave peer review as if it is a magical wand. You question the very idea of that what “authorities” believe matters, but you obviously want to have authorities on your side, hence your desperate attempt to label anyone – even theologians and high school physics teachers – “authorities”.
In any event, Bentham Open journals aren’t really peer reviewed. They are open-access pay-to-publish journals. They’ll accept and publish almost anything. They are low quality journals and widely recognized as such. Jones et. al. published their paper there because that’s the only place they could publish it. And also, I read the paper in question. It purports to show that nano-thermite was found. It doesn’t actually show that. It’s a sloppy, crappy piece of “science”.
I read the damned paper, you nitwit. It doesn’t show what it purports to show. It is wrong.
Suddenly, I imagine somebody like you in the Hans Christian Andersen tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes”.
“Obviously, that little boy is not qualified to say whether the king is naked or not!”
“Where did that little boy do his ph.D?”
“The little boy needs to do a serious finite elements modeling” (whatever the hell that is, as opposed to an unserious finite elements modeling, I suppose….)
BLAH BLAH BLAH
#because at the other end we have air of room temperature or outside environment temperature…#
Your error is here. What if the other end is not in a lower temperature but the fire covers the whole building. Put a piece of metal into fire so that it is fully in fire and wait for a certain time. It will finally be in equilibrium temperature, there is no transfer of heat because of temperature gradient. The simple reason why all construction engineers know that theoretically a steel frame building can collapse from fire is that if the fire is large enough, there is no cold end where the heat can escape. Forget this argument, it cannot be made sound.
More bovine excrement, Utu. You don’t need any modeling to show that the roofline of Building 7 fell at the acceleration of gravity for 2.4 seconds, which is what David Chandler’s kinematic analysis showed, and what NIST acknowledged to be true.
That is conclusive evidence of the simultaneous failure of all of the building’s significant support structures, an occurrence that would have required the intervention of either of the Virgin Mary or simultaneous explosive detonation of numerous building support columns.
If you’re going to play silly bugger here, at least try being plausible
Maybe try a guide DOG instead…
Thank you Nosey.
I will work my way through the comments as suggested. It seems that there must be a number of “plants” in the Comments section -people who are paid or simply respond to protect the interests of certain groups-say Israel, AIPAC, others.
I definitely like the articles in Unz Review.
For many years I have felt that American culture was invented by this mainstream media. So much of it is artificial, cheap- just trash, but it obvious that millions across the USA are amused by it and watch all these slimy TV shows.
If it was not for the Internet and certain magazines I would never know what the truth is. It gets pretty obvious as I get near 70 years of age that what has gone on in America has been created for a reason, and I date the big turning point to be in the 1960s when this mainstream media decided to turn American culture, traditional values, and traditional families upside down and then start making dishonesty and chaos into acceptable behavior.
I learn a lot from a lot of those who comment. Some are just immature but the majority are interesting.
If it were not for Ron Unz, Pat Buchanan, Paul Craig Roberts , and hundreds of other brilliant discerning writers and many more common citizens who are really bright, we would be stuck with the garbage spit out by the mainstream media.
I am looking through the book Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky (1988) and already I can tell what a biased man he is as in the book he never mention Israel as a trouble maker among many other things. I remember Chomsky as an anti Vietnam War activist. What a phony. He hid behind his MIT protector.
I was in USMC 68-71 and remember these huge antiwar protests as “happenings” similar to rock concerts. I mentioned in comment that most of the “protestors” didn’t give a damn about the Vietnamese people and that all these activists never said anything about the North Vietnamese reeducation camps from 1975 to around 2000 or later, and I get some hysterical guy who immediately attacks me making his broad statement about how Vietnam was a creation by Republicans and the money people.
I don’t feel we should have gone full steam into a war but we did in 1965. The unrelenting assaults against North Vietnamese citizens caused millions of them to move to South Vietnam. But the MM and those who love it have only one thing to say about the Vietnam War and any other topic. There are never two or more sides to any story for these types (called leftists and other names).
Chomsky in my little opinion personifies the phoniness of those who get big play in the American MM. He is typical of those promoted by the MM even though he writes a book against the MM (1988).
The 9-11 story is huge and important. It needs to continue to be investigated.
Hey, I’m looking forward to the response to this, even if the admission does reveal a streak of sadism. But, just in case you want to save yourself a probable thrashing, you might look above where you will find the answer to your own question. You could then, with suitable humility, admit to its redundancy.
That’s not a “logical conclusion”. A logical conclusion requires two premises. The so-called conclusion has one premise – the FBI did not release some detailed information.
Here are some other “possible explanations” for why the FBI did not release it:
(1) the data was not available (was not legible, that part of the parts was destroyed somehow); and
(2) the FBI found no reason to release these minutiae details.
In fact, if the FBI were fabricating this whole thing, as you claim, they could have just released fake reports of the numbers to satisfy you.
#And also, I read the paper in question. It purports to show that nano-thermite was found. It doesn’t actually show that. It’s a sloppy, crappy piece of “science”.#
I also read the paper. Quite normal level scientific article. It demonstrates in the dust the presence of the substances of nanothermite by spectroscopy. The journal is peer-reviewed and in this controversial topic the review must have been strict. Many journals are controlled by some group and apply a blockade towards certain topics. It is exactly those that are not fully scientific.
So apparently you are TERMINALLY FUCKING RETARDED…
…since in my previous comment I stated this…
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2520169
FB- a lot of us appreciate this education on heat transfer.
I personally know several. Is it your contention that there are none who do? Not a single one?
How many distinguished physicists are in the habit of debating high school physics teachers about anything? Why would they?
Because it isn’t worth the time, as I am quickly learning.
No, it is an accurate statement of your position, as anybody who is familiar with your writings here knows. You are an apologist for muslim rapists. You are hostile to whites and their interests. Fortunately, it doesn’t matter much as you are a demented clown and an uninfluential nobody.
Hmm…you got me there…that’s really an interesting question…
…if you live in a FUCKING ALTERNATE UNIVERSE YOU FUCKING MORON…
Question…what exactly is on the outside of the building…?
Could it possibly be the air of the atmosphere…?
You’re a fucking hasbara troll. There’s no way to conclude “it’s wrong” from the paper itself, and you haven’t raised even the slightest issue with it aside from a general denial.
As to your prior idiotic comment (the only kind of which, obviously, you are capable), you haven’t the slightest idea what the word “evidence” means. “Evidence” does not mean conclusive proof. Evidence is something which is considered reliable.
Citing a peer-reviewed scientific paper is not reference to authority. It is reference to a process which is generally recognized to make claims more reliable. Indeed it is the basis of scientific research. It’s like referring to the “scientific method” as a reference to authority. Hence, peer-reviewed scientific papers are admissible as evidence in a court of law. Regardless whether you consider it evidence or not, an opinion about which nobody in their right mind cares the least.
When you find the need to define basic English terms to a commenter, you know you are dealing with a nasty troll.
Now, here’s another clue, you fucking idiot. The way the scientific method works, if someone publishes a paper that makes a claim, you publish a paper to refute it. Despite Jones having submitted the paper to NIST, NIST refused to test any samples for nano-thermite. They also did not provide any critique of the paper which would show it to be flawed (in fact, nobody has, not even you in your “general denial” that “I read it” but “it is wrong”, lol. The last resort of a hasbara troll.
What a total BS reply.
Hey, Troll, you are LYING about the Plasco building in Iran.
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/PDFs/Plasco_Building_Report_2.20.17.pdf
What are you gonna do next? Start talking about that derelict building in São Paulo?
Disgusting shills.
What on earth? Are you saying that the towers were burning from top to bottom? Are you blind?
Ron Unz:
Yes, and that is key. Bollyn:
Thank you sir…trying to do my part for sincere individuals here…
Halton Arp, 86, Dies; Astronomer Challenged Big Bang Theory
Doc…you will at some point get to know individuals here who epitomize the saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing…
Agree.
Unfortunately, when it comes to 9-11, Geokat is totally useless… even to the point of becoming a troll.
Since geokat is clearly not a hasbara rat, I wonder what it is with people like him…
Is it (misguided)tactical concerns?
Inability to handle such awful facts? Like, I have this US friend who is excellent with technical stuff, and, largely because of that, figured out the absurdity of the whole gas chamber atrocity propaganda.
But when I tried to talk to him about 9-11, he became sullen… this despite the fact he does not buy into the war on terror at all.
Anyway, I think the moment geokat saw this article by Unz he became nervous and I suspect he might have a meltdown if ever Giraldi came forward with similar thoughts… 🙂
Cheers
Christopher Bollyn “The Dual-Deception of 9/11 and the Fraudulent War on Terror”
The diversity of subjects covered in this thread is startling to me — a newcomer to this site, but not to 9/11 truth-seeking. Discussions about the official US Government positions as finally described in the NIST reports are interesting, but only for trying to convince people who are still believing in that fairy tale. The more serious issues are who did it, why, and how. 19 Arabs, real or fictitious, are only significant in the context of the cover story which itself is hard to take seriously.
My personal preference for solving the who-why-how question is to take it in the reverse order. The “how” is often a major clue to the “who” and the “why” becomes trivial once the other two are resolved.
Major explanations with some measurable following for the “how” are:
1) Conventional explosives like TNT, RDX, C4, etc.
2) Thermite and variations thereof like nanothermate
3) Directed Energy Weapons, like lasers, Tesla guns, etc
4) Mini-nukes, sometimes with a “micro-nuke” alternative (whatever micro-nuke means)
5) Full-size nukes
6) Nuclear power plant explosion (yes, really, there’s a book on this subject, by Tahil)
Conventional explosives are nominally a credible contender simply because that is how most controlled demolitions of big structures were and are accomplished, before 2001 and to the present time. What eliminates them as credible, however, is the extreme strength of the twin towers and WTC7. It would take a lot of explosives carefully placed around the buildings and would leave many large pieces in the debris pile. They would also produce collapses of the towers that would bear no resemblance to what was on television on the morning of 9/11. WTC7’s collapse at least looked by a controlled demolition.
Thermite, which is the darling of A&E For 9/11 Truth, is itself not much of an explosive; it burns too slowly. Nano-thermate which at least theoretically overcomes some of this deficiency has, like thermite itself, an unmistakable signature: It burns with an extremely bright light. If thermite or a variant were used on the WTC buildings it would best be used to punch holes in the building façade (outline hole of plane crash, e.g.) not to do the heavy lifting of taking the whole building down. In this latter role, the thermite/ate would produce a light display which would be the mother of all fireworks. Thermite/ate has another problem which is pointed out in the next paragraph. It is also not used as the takedown mechanism for serious buildings. Yes, it was used to take down the Reichstag roof and part of a Chicago world fair ride. That’s not a track record I would depend upon if I wanted to take down a twin tower.
Directed Energy Weapons, as espoused by Dr. Judy Woods, has a lot of appeal in that it explains something that thermite/ate does not. DEWs would be capable of dustifying much of the towers and much of its contents. This is something thermite/ate can’t do. Dustification (a good term created by Judy) is a physical property and requires a physical, not chemical, action to accomplish it. Moreover, DEWs fit the observer’s misconception of the towers being destroyed from the top down. The problem with DEWs is that they involve enormous power and if they are satellite-based the only source of that much power would have to be a nuclear device in orbit.
Mini-nukes have some promise as an explanation because they can accomplish dustification, but they fail for two reasons. As soon as more than one nuclear device is involved, the ugly problem of fratricide arises. Putting a mini-nuke on every 10th floor for example wouldn’t work. The very first mini-nuke to explode would take out some of the remaining mini-nukes, i.e., all those within its fratricide radius — which is yield-dependent. As if that weren’t bad enough, a mini-nuke in any part of the building would yield all the well-known characteristics of atmospheric nukes like fireballs, heat pulse, mushroom cloud, etc. (think Hiroshima on a smaller scale) and would then be obvious as a nuke. In the basement garage a mini-nuke wouldn’t be so noticeable, but then dustification would be a limited phenomenon and wouldn’t occur in the high floors. A single mini-nuke couldn’t take out a tower, not enough power.
Before covering full-size nukes let me dispose of the Tahil nonsense. He posits that there were underground nuclear power plants under each tower and that they exploded in an atomic sense (not in a hydrogen gas sense, e.g.). A very tiny amount of research into nuclear power plants will show you that they CANNOT explode atomically. Fissile material has to be sufficiently pure/enriched to sustain an explosion. That’s elementary nuclear physics. Too many impurities mean too many wasted neutrons. Power plants never employ fissile material that pure unless you’re referring to the small amounts of plutonium produced by the plant and that plutonium is not allowed to just collect and grow toward critical mass.
Turning now to full-sized nukes, it’s obvious that the only way a building can be selectively demolished with a regular nuke is to explode the nuke underground — very deeply buried under the building. [Above ground, a regular nuke could take out all of Manhattan.] The problem with this approach is how do you bury a nuke deep under a tower. Silverstein is not going to let someone slant-drill a 70 to 100 meter deep hole under his buildings. The answer of course is that perhaps when the towers were built such holes were already in place.
If you read either the book by Khalezov or his much shorter article in the German Nexus magazine. (See URLs at the end of this paragraph) you’ll find that this is exactly what is claimed by him. He is a former Soviet military intelligence officer who served in the branch that monitored nuclear explosions, adherence to nuke-related treaties, etc. In this job, he and his colleagues learned that this is exactly the demolition plan proposed to the NYC Building Dept. to get permission to build the towers. The Soviets thought the plan hare-brained because of the density of the population around the buildings; they couldn’t imagine Moscow’s government buying such a plan for a Moscow skyscraper. Book: http://www.mediafire.com/file/i5qvsnpdvl3ivur/9-11thology-third_truth_v4_full.zip; Magazine Article (English): http://www.911thology.com/nexus1.html. Also available in other languages.
The attractive thing about the full-sized nuke as an explanation for the 9/11 collapses is that it meets all the objective evidence available about the collapses, with the upward blast wave dustifying most of the tower above and the undustified top crashing through the dust clouds below it and the dustified exterior opening/flying out like a banana being peeled. See Storax SEDAN you-tubes to see what a deep underground nuclear explosion looks like. Recognize that the first upthrust of ground seen in the you-tubes would not be seen at WTC. SEDAN was a series of tests in Nevada desert sands, not underneath a big steel building. That upthrust in the WTC would be the dustification and pebbleization (crushing) of the towers and would not show until the tower top started to fall under gravity. If SEDAN had included the destruction of an above ground building of any significant size, the resemblance between it and the tower collapses would have been even more obvious.
Another marker of a nuclear event would be the presence of radio-nuclides at WTC. Unfortunately, nobody tested directly for this, but indirectly there were thousands of unwitting test volunteers on 9/11 and on the succeeding days. The incidence of cancers which are known to be radiation-induced among first responders is well-documented. The faster acting of these is acute myelogenous leukemia; the slower acting is thyroid cancer (radio-iodine). Although not well-advertised, after a few days following 9/11 Dr. Alison Geyh of Johns Hopkins spent weeks at ground zero taking daily dosimeter readings, presumably to monitor accumulated radiological exposure. Those vapors coming from “the pile” (ironic name) were well-endowed with particles emitting alpha and beta radiation. This radiation is generally considered harmless to humans, but only if emitters of it are not breathed or swallowed.
Another marker of a nuclear event is the presence of fission products. Although Tahil’s book is a joke as to what the nuclear events were, Tahil does an excellent job of analyzing the significance of the elements found in the ground zero environment by the government’s own scientists. The scientists were looking only to identify the elements chemically. They apparently did not check for isotope concentrations or radiological activity. Tahil notes that some elements found should have a zero probability of being found where they were and other elements, found in generous quantity, seemed to occur in relative proportions indicative of their being fission end-products.
Yet another indicator manifested in 2008 when Silverstein published some photos of a huge “pothole” uncovered when construction of one of the new WTC buildings was in progress. This pothole contains a massive “volcanic” boulder left there presumably by the last ice age some 20,000 years ago and coincidentally was under the site of one of the towers. In reality, this “volcanic rock” was the end product of the nuclear event that melted rock in 2001. For pictures of this quickly-buried “geological wonder” see p. 390 et seq of Khalezov’s book, especially the pictures on p. 395.
“But why would the collapses appear to be top down and not bottom up if an underground nuke were used?” is a reasonable objection to the underground nuke explanation. The reality of the situation is that the tower destruction was a bottom-up phenomenon, the tower collapse was due to the effect of gravity and thus was top-down. Except for the very top floors in the towers, everything that rained down was already dust and small pieces (what I’ve called “pebbles” above) and thus offered negligible resistance to the nearly free fall of the top floors and the larger pieces of structure not destroyed by the upward moving nuclear blast wave.
A final objection that might be raised is the absence of any seismic signal consistent with a large underground nuke. But was there no seismic signal? Lamont observatory noted only a magnitude 2 to 2.5 event near the time of the collapses. Should we trust these data or should we trust the small amount of anecdotal data from human observers at ground zero who felt the ground shake prior to the collapses. Ground shaking sensed by a human is more consistent with a magnitude 4 or higher event than 2.5. Seismic data can be easily faked (especially by omission). If you don’t believe this, look at the earthquake-only damage on Honshu and Hokkaido before the 3/11/2011 tsunami rolled in. That was supposed to be a 9.0 quake — decide for youself. But be careful, earthquake damage on that day is usually conflated with the tsunami damage. Pictures and videos taken after the quake but before the tsunami are available, but they take some digging to find.
But why was WTC7 taken down and why did its demolition look different from that of the towers? Khalezov believes (NOT knows) and I agree that WTC7 was taken down by the same means as the towers, but looks different because of its height. Essentially all of WTC7 was dustified so it just slumped to the ground, gravity driven — the dustified state is not stable and can’t remain very long. The why of WTC7 is easy to answer: To cover up the means used to take down the towers. He believes that the delivery system’s control for the nukes was in WTC7 (a mini-rail system or equivalent maybe 100 meters underground). Such a system would explain why the towers came down in the wrong order; the “track” to WTC2 went right by WTC1 so WTC2 had to be brought down first even though it was “struck” second and was burning for a shorter time.
There’s a detail in the WTC7 rubble pile that also suggests that an underground nuke was used on it. This detail is the slumped over portions of the “curtain wall” that defined part of the apparent footprint of WTC7. This wall was attached at the top (about floor 6 or7) to a cantilevered set of beams and at the bottom by a shallow foundation — not the caissons which supported the rest of the building. The nuclear blast wave coupled to the caissons/basement of WTC7 taking out the building above, including the cantilevered beams. It, of course, bypassed the curtain wall and couldn’t do a 180 and take out the curtain wall. Without the cantilevered beams as support, the curtain wall simply toppled over.
With this description of the activity in New York let me pass briefly to Washington. What happened at the Pentagon? Khalezov and I both agree that a Granit cruise missile with its usual half-megaton nuclear payload sailed into the Pentagon. Khalezov, however, makes no mention of the airplane that also crashed at the Pentagon. Barbara Honegger does a good job in her analysis of the Pentagon events, but she seems unaware that there were two flying objects at the Pentagon — the missile and the plane that crashed at the site of INTERNAL explosions in the Pentagon. [Honegger’s timeline is therefore somewhat confused.] The missile made the inexplicably small hole that was later obscured by the collapse of structure above it. Why didn’t the Granit explode and take out half of Washington? It wasn’t intended to: It was intended to land relatively intact (live, but not armed and triggered) within the Pentagon. The audience for the Washington events was DoD; the audience for the NYC events was the general public and it was the MAIN EVENT.
As an aside, one poster said it couldn’t have been a sea-launched cruise missile because the missile struck a west wall of the Pentagon not an east wall and the Atlantic is east of the Pentagon. Actually, this is a strong indication that it was a cruise missile. It’s a standard tactic for a cruise missile to circle around its target in terminal phase . It’s much harder to shoot down in the circling mode. Granits, by the way, can be launched from freighters as well as submarines. How the Granit(s) was acquired by the 9/11 perps is covered in Khalezov’s book (stolen from the Kursk submarine in August 2000) but only in a general way. The Russians went to great pains to cover up what happened to the Kursk; it was major embarrassment to their newly installed president, Putin.
Before I go to the “Who did it” question, let me address the why question. This site has seen a lot of wrangling about “Cui bono”. This is appropriate, but I think the focus has been misdirected. A broader, objective look at what happened AFTER 9/11 is that the beneficiaries of 9/11 are, in what I believe is their order of importance: the surveillance state (read Orwell’s “1984”), the military-industrial complex and the wars entered into by the USA, and the state of Israel.
The general public, not just in the USA, was so terrified by the spectacle of the twin towers that it allowed surveillance and other infringements on liberty to grow exponentially. Snowden made clear just a few years ago how pervasive this surveillance is. As an aside, I believe that Plan A for the NYC phase of 9/11 was just what happened, although it’s possible more was planned. The “more” would explain Mossad agents driving around NYC with explosives or explosive residues in their trucks. NYPD may have been the extinguisher of the “more”. Plan C or D was for massive fire damage to the towers without their collapse.
The wars, in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. are obviously a consequence. Afghanistan had the additional benefit that it restored ownership of the poppy crops to the folks who had owned it before some extremist Arabs took it away from them. How Israel benefitted is obvious from the USA’s adversaries in these wars, except that they have limited interest in Afghanistan unless Mossad shares in the poppy profits along with their American counterparts.
To get to the “Who did it?” question, I think it’s also necessary to take a broad view first. The reason, simply, is that the “red button(s)” which have to be pushed to detonate the nuclear devices which were undeneath the towers are not accessible to just anybody in NYC or Washington. It was the opinion of European leaders early on that 9/11 required state support. The idea that OBL or a small group of Arab fanatics planned and executed 9/11 is far beyond credible. As a matter of fact, OBL expressly and completely disclaimed any involvement in 9/11 — which he did not do for the so-called “truck bombing” in the basement garage of the WTC in 1993. If someone like OBL played any role in 9/11 it was to organize and execute the 9/11 hijackings by patsies, and even then this would be closely monitored by the real perps. After all, a good cover story for the tower fires was necessary.
Khalezov’s book names and even includes a picture of the mastermind planner behind 9/11. Khalezov even knew and was befriended by the mastermind. In an interview, Khalezov stated his opinion that the mastermind expressly sought out Khalezov because he wanted to know how much was known by Russia about the nuclear demolition devices in NYC. The mastermind’s bosses wanted the objectives described a few paragraphs above, not an all-out nuclear war between Russia and the USA. The avoidance of war is why Condoleezza Rice and Putin spoke to each other on 9/11. It was a little awkward for Putin to have one of his Granits with a thermonuclear warhead sitting inside the Pentagon. It therefore took some careful explaining by him.
The whole purpose of the “live” Granit was to put the USA on a nuclear war footing on 9/11 so the red-button(s) would get pushed. That the USA was in a nuclear-ready state on 9/11 is hard to deny. That white plane circling Washington was the NEACP, e.g. Much more info in Khalezov. NEACP flies only when nuclear war appears imminent or for test purposes. [Testing the NEACP on 9/11 would have been world-class stupidity.] Khalezov even names who pushed the red button(s) in a fairly credible scenario as to how this was brought about. He and I part ways on this point because I believe American involvement was greater than he states. The mastermind’s bosses couldn’t steal the Granits from the Kursk without American involvement and I can’t believe there’s a secondary market in slightly-used Granits. From Khalezov’s book it’s easy to figure out what Plan B was (a different button-pusher) from the actions of the obvious candidates on 9/11.
Khalezov also names the 9/11 mastermind’s bosses. Whether he’s exactly right or not is not important. The people behind the surveillance state and the M/I complex do not publish organization charts but we all know who they are and what their ultimate objective is. I believe that as of August 2001 there were two main obstacles to achieving that objective: Inadequate surveillance and a massively armed USA populace. 9/11 took out the first of these obstacles.
Tehran Plasco Building Collapse “Close Up”: Explosives Must Be Investigated
Since you mentioned Sabrosky and a high level CIA agent that have come forward stating Israel and its network perpetrated the 9-11 attacks, Bollyn spoke to 2 high level people in German intel about it:
Full book can be read online for free @ http://bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book
This is great information. We are fortunate to have you comment here at UR.
You mean the Plasco building collapse in Iran where the firefighters could see, hear and feel explosions? This is your best piece of evidence for a building being destroyed by “fire”?
“But where I was high up there, I would hear small explosions and to my amazement, behind every one of the windows there was a gas canister…. I can’t remember clearly, but after the white smoke started coming out, there was a massive explosion to the point that it shook me. And there, after a couple of minutes, the fire returned…. After that they ordered us to evacuate the building…. All of this that I’m recounting took place in two or three minutes at most, and suddenly the whole building started to shake and then I saw that the building collapsed….”
Firefighter Saeid Kamani,
And interestingly enough they also found molten metal in the rubble pile,
“As the ruins removal process reaches final steps, excavators and mechanical equipment pull out a layer of molten iron from the rubble. The volume of molten metal underneath the debris goes beyond imagination and hopes of finding bodies of martyred firefighters and ordinary citizens are dimming on a moment to moment basis.”
– http://en.mehrnews.com/news/123013/8th-firefighter-s-body-recovered-number-rises-to-10
I want controlled scientific experiments that can verify the precursors to collapse and the collapse themselves. In short, people who believe the government’s story simply need to demonstrate what they say is possible.
I was referring to the collapse of WTC7, not the twin towers. WTC7 was not hit by a plane and there wasn’t any jet fuel that started the fires.
David Chandler is the one who measured the collapse of WTC7 across the north face at free-fall for the first 2.5 seconds.. NIST in their Final Draft report on WTC7 stated that it did not enter free-fall. David Chandler was able to ask them about this during their press conference. NIST had to go back to the drawing board and in their final report they admitted that the building did collapse at free-fall for 2.25 seconds. So he got NIST to correct their errors. If you think this is wrong why don’t you perform the calculations yourself.
We are cultists in the same way Galileo and others were in their time.
Appreciate your kind words and glad to see my contribution here is of some use…
My idea is that it makes more sense to call for an inquiry on the basis of facts and not speculation, period.
No, a “Truther,” definitionally, is someone who believes controlled demolition is OBVIOUS.
Look, there are many who believe CD is obvious. I, for the reasons previously put forward to you and others (i.e., planners having the willingness to cover two of their tracks, but not the third), happen to be not one of them.
Until someone can definitively refute the arguments put forward by NASA scientist, Ryan Mackey, arguments that seriously challenge the soundness of the CD hypothesis, I will remain incredulous on CD.
If someone can refute his arguments, I will gladly accept the CD hypothesis.
To that end, curious why Ron Unz continues to refuse to acknowledge the importance of Ryan Mackey’s whitepaper in thwarting the CD hypothesis.
In other words, if Truthers are serious about establishing the soundness of the CD hypothesis, they have to go through Ryan Mackey, IMHO.
Another great post, tanabear. Ultimately, the final NIST report provided at least two smoking guns:
1) Free-fall can’t happen unless the supporting structure was taken out in a controlled demolition.
2) Even if we boost the NIST’s heat “projections” by 1000% (lol), the top of WTC7 would have tilted and collapsed to the side. There’s literally no other option.
Here’s a test:
– Hold a plastic straw upright.
– Approach it with a flame.
– The flame will melt the nearby plastic and the top of the straw will tilt and collapse to the side. Always.
Thank you for taking the time to put this comment together: this is one of the most interesting single pieces I have ever read on 9/11. Truly remarkable, very well understood and summarised.
Where did the author you quote (Khalezov) get his information from? What is his background, what are his sources, motivations? With regards.
Tanabear, no firefighter at Plasco has claimed to have heard or seen demolition charges. Explosions (deflagrations) are common in large fires. The Iranian government report blames the collapse on fire.
You are free to spin this into any conspiracy theory you like. Video of the collapse here: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPGr4D1-zDI) I hear a sound like a tree about to fall and a puff of smoke indicating a floor collapse at 35 sec. What do you see?
One begins to see a pattern here. The official 9/11 story is dead. It is defunct, it is bereft of all believability, it has ceased to be as an idea worthy of consideration, it has expired, it is deceased, it should now be left to rest in peace.
So how are the Anti-Truthers dealing with the bereavement? They have a new idea altogether. Israeli hands were all over 9/11, so blame the Jews. That’s a win-win proposition. Those who reject it are obliged perforce to accept the official story, even if it is now pushing up the daisies. And those who accept the blame-Israel alternative are automatically discredited as anti-Semites.
Brilliant, and absolutely consistent with the techno-totalitarian direction of American society, where the elite mess with the minds of the masses to ensure that they vote as the leaders of the plutocratic global empire require.
In reality, Israel’s role in 9/11 was subordinate to a plan spawned by the US Project for a New American Century which required “a catalyzing event, a new Pearl Harbor,” that would justify a military build up and wars of aggression for control of the Middle-East’s energy resources.
What I definitely don’t see is a free-fall collapse or near free fall collapse of any sort. Nor is the collapse uniform and synchronized. Nor does the building fall into its own footprint.
Moreover, this building does not have the central support structures that we see in the WTC buildings that collapsed. Nor do we have any idea of the quality, particularly the over-redundance, of the steel support for the building, as we do for the WTC buildings that collapsed. We don’t even have tests that show the steel used in that building met building standards, which we do have for the WTC buildings.
Despite all of those differences, it would still be premature to conclude that the Plasco building collapsed without use of explosives. At a minimum, it would be required to test the steel and dust for explosive materials or their residues.
Really, all “Truthers” are asking for with regards to 9/11 is a simple, inexpensive test on some decent quantity of dust and steel samples. But you CD Deniers are so adamantly against these simple, inexpensive tests, spending years throwing out absolutely ridiculous claims, smears and lies to try to prevent it, instead of just saying “yeah, why not, let’s do some tests just to check”, that one can only conclude that, in fact, you agree it was a controlled demolition, but you are doing everything possible to prevent that truth from coming out.
Israel’s role was subordinate to PNAC, really? Nice try. PNAC’s whole raison d’etre was to serve the interests of Israel.
PNAC was confounded by the most prominent Israel-firsters, Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan.
The signatories to their Statement of Principles is stacked with other Israel-firsters and a few Shabbos Goys, thrown in for a little window dressing:
Elliott Abrams
Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett
John Ellis “Jeb” Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama
Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Norman Podhoretz
J. Danforth Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz
No, PNAC’s primary goal was to remake the Middle East to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle by regime changing those countries deemed hostile to said villa.
Well, if the Iranian government says something that settles it for me. Just like if the American government says something, I never question it. Because questioning your government is only something crazy conspiracy theorists do and who wants to be crazy??
I do like your little semantic attempt at deflection when you write “demolition charges” instead of “explosives”. The effect of a demolition charge is an explosion and that is how it was described.
I see and hear a series of explosions go off and then the building collapses. You can see the jets of dust and debris being ejected horizontally from the building.
Also how do you explain the molten metal in the rubble pile with a fire only theory?
The document was written by Jews. The more you lie, the more you’re making the Tribe’s position hopeless. But don’t let me stop you…
Fixed it for ya.
Wow, I really hit a nerve. Three rebuttals in half an hour. LOL.
‘WASHINGTON – A mysterious Israeli connection appeared on Friday within the pages of the plea deal…’
This tends to be the problem with the ‘evil Russians’ line. Seemingly inevitably, the Israelis turn up in the mix — and then of course American media has to back off.
Trump’s actually made good move allowing Israel to buy him. Now, at some point, his enemies are always going to find themselves pulled off the case.
And yet you have nothing to say but “LOL”. How appropriate.
No, it is not possible.
“If it makes no sense, it’s nonsense” Judge Judy
Yes. As I’ve said before 9/11 is a resolved scientific matter. It is no more of a scientific dispute than flat Earth vs. round Earth; heliocentrism vs geocentrism. Of course that doesn’t mean that we know everything yet, just like in Galileo’s time there was still much to be discovered about the Solar system. But it was a starting point in which future discoveries could be made. Adhering to the Ptolemaic system would have led nowhere. It is the same as today, those who believe, or pretend to believe in the “fire theory” are just pissing in the wind. They aren’t going anywhere with that.
9/11 remains controversial because it is a political dispute and certain people have a vested interest in promoting the lie, living by the lie and making money off the lie. The feedback mechanism is similar to what it was in The Emperor’s New Clothes fairy tale. You can tell the truth but you will ostracized from polite society. Those who promote the lie will maintain their status and positions in society.
We each might only do a small part in shining the light of Truth on 9/11, but it is a small part of something enormous.
The events of 9/11 make you aware that there is another power, another entity out there that is more powerful than the Presidency, the Congress, corporate America, international bodies like the UN etc… The most powerful organization on the planet is largely invisible.
Very ingenious. I think you should be recognized by Yad Vashem and have a tree planted there as Righteous Among Gentiles who tried to save Jews even before the next Holocaust happened.
But if you are so concerned with destroying the official story of 9/11 and believe that blaming Jews impede this process what about if we blamed 9/11 on child molesters. Hating child molesters is not a taboo.
Why would a US administration headed by a Bush, a family long connected with the Saudis, Dubya himself having been at one time financed by the bin Laden family, go to war with Israel’s enemies if it knew that it had just been attacked by Israel?
What possible rationale would explain that?
Or are you saying that the US, despite its astronomical expenditure on defense and intelligence agencies, hadn’t a clue what happened on 9/11 and just believed whatever bollocks the media immediately spewed about the event, and so inadvertently launched multiple wars for Israel?
And how, incidentally, does Israel benefit from the ongoing 9/11-justified Afghanistan war?
Your idea seems crazy.
Ron Unz’s reflected, wrote:If it had been an “inside job” by the top Bush officials, wouldn’t they have planned to make him look a little more “presidential” and less totally ridiculous?… Didn’t his ridiculous behavior on 9/11 potentially endanger his reelection in 2004… ?
Hi Ron,
At White House press conferences, President George W. Bush looked “ridiculous” and somehow the R.N.C
and “Talking Heads” managed to theatrically transform W.’s aloofness on issues into an illogical strength.
… Such fiction appealed to the common & “low information” Americans who identified with George W.’s apparent statesman-disqualifications.
… So after providing a glimpse of “Dubya” reading a pet goat story to kids, an assignment which reinforced his ordinariness, his next act came at “Ground Zero” where he spoke through a bullhorn as if he were trying to rally his Texas Rangers team during the bottom of the 9th…, Rumsfeld on 2nd base, and General Powell on deck!
… Unless by planning and behind curtain-intent, bipartisan Neoconservatives are never out-of-jobs. Uh, but, but dismal poll ratings for a particular president, reelection dim? No worries!
… Thank you, Ron.
Sorry to say it but it has been a process underway for much longer than just since the sixties. May I humbly suggest taking a squint at The Forth Turning by Strauss and Howe for an introduction to the nature of the cycle underway and Double Cross by Chuck Giancana to get an idea of just how deep and wide the swamp actually is? Regards.
Yes, I am familiar with Ace Bakers’s work. In any event, please note that YouTube video I posted in my #1339 is a complete p.o.s. that has been worked over or incorrectly encoded to the point that, when it is paused, a double image of the airplane is visible. Throw it out.
Below I link to a much better version of the Hezarkhani video with a frame counter. Using the keyboard commands, we can watch frame by frame as the image of the 767 glides into the image of WTC 2. I explain how to do that below with the embedded video.
My working assumption is that some video editing software similar to PVI’s L-VIS was used to generate the images of the 767, at the very least, and possibly much of the subsequent televised imagery including the airplane-shaped cartoonish punch-outs in the facades of the towers was generated and/or edited by a video insertion system like L-VIS, and even in the collapse sequences as well, CGI might have been used at least to remove tell-tale visual signatures of the agents of demolition used.
All of those special effects are well within the capabilities of a system like L-VIS, which explains warnings by CBS execs in early 2000 already that this software makes things like “airplanes crashing” look “too real.
https://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/13/business/cbs-is-divided-over-the-use-of-false-images-in-broadcasts.html
As I’ve said repeatedly, we are on shaky ground if we must rely entirely on imagery for evidence for the simple reason that it is fairly easy to edit stills and/or video, or fake them entirely, even while it remains very difficult to do this fakery perfectly to escape detection by eagle-eyed video sleuths.
To look for fakery, a YouTube video may be examined frame by frame with these keyboard commands:
Space or K keys pause the video.
Advance the video one frame forward with the period (.) key – right caret.
Backtrack one frame with the comma key (,) – left caret.
(read – hrs:min:sec:frame #. Video is 30 fps; frame #s are 0-29)
09:02:52:20 tip of airplane wing appears in upper left of frame
09:02:53:29 UA175 is poised to strike WTC 2. 767’s nose still visible outside building
09:02:54:00 Nose of 767 penetrates S face WTC 2 with small flash visible near nose
09:02:54:01 767 penetrates WTC 2 up to the engines but left wing & tail surfaces fading out
09:02:54:02 The famous still frame
09:02:54:03 puffs of smoke appear as 767 wings have fully penetrated WTC 2
09:02:54:04 Only a bit of the 767’s tail remains visible
09:02:54:05 tail of 767 disappears into WTC 2 behind puffs of smoke.
09:02:54:07 The plane is gone but puffs of smoke remain on WTC 2’s S facade
09:02:54:10 pufflets of smoke grown on S face; smoke appears on E face
09:02:54:16 small bright fireball appears on E face
09:02:54:18 Smoke like cumulus clouds on S face begins to glow as they grow
09:02:54:20 growing fireball on E face, growing glowing cloud on S face
09:02:55:20 Ejecta shooting out from E face fireball
09:02:56:01 Odd brief pause as Hazerkhani swings camera around
09:02:56:17 Fireballs are enormous as 767 within WTC 2 beams its fuel back outside
09:02:59:00 Women shrieking
09:03:04:00 Screaming & shrieking. Hezarkhani zooms out. Towers enveloped in smoke
In this video, even casually curious onlookers may see the image of the 767 strike the image of WTC 2 and glide into it like a hot knife into butter, but without any visible immediate reaction by either the 767 or WTC 2 – an entirely impossible feat.
By now many regular people know that a mostly aluminum airplane could not possibly penetrate the dense array of steel box columns that enclosed the WTCs like a cage in the manner depicted in this and other videos.
If it can’t be real, it must be CGI.
We see too that the timing — and certainly the logic — is off for the fireballs, a flub that probably reflects the difficulty the special effects guys had in coordinating a live video insert of CGI on broadcast TV with a real pyrotechnic display set off in the WTCs to make it look like jetliners had crashed into the buildings. But they were about 15 frames late with UA175 and WTC 2 — just half a second — which delay is not very noticeable in real-time, but which sticks out like a diamond in a goat’s ass when viewed frame by frame.
Airplanes don’t just disappear without a trace, and close may be good enough
for government workto fool the credulous masses staring at the boob tube, but this exercise of frame by frame inspection may stir tremors in some critical keystone of the matrix, even for a few of those casually curious onlookers.falso in uno falsus in omnibus.
Let the viewer beware.
Hey Geo – you usually make such sound assertions, but I have to confess being a little confused by your adamant position on controlled demolition – maybe you know something that I don’t (and I skimmed through Mackey).
I agree with your general thesis, but am quizzical about your use of speculation in the above. I think circumstantial evidence would be a more appropriate description of the situation. I think the laws of physics are a pretty strong platform to stand on – and I couldn’t come up with a single other explanation (speculative or otherwise) where a building would free-fall for 8 stories without a deliberate removal of the underlying structures, and I can’t theorize a single way to do that without CD. But, I may be missing something obvious.
Here, we do go into the domain of speculation a bit. My guess is that a third plane, perhaps the one shot down over PA, was intended to hit WTC7, but never made it to its intended target. The best laid plans of mice and men… If CD is what caused it to come down (and I can’t think of any other mechanism given the evidence), then that is pretty damning, because you can’t prepare a building for CD in a day – it would take weeks or even months if done surreptitiously, which would indicate pre-planning. If WTC7 was pre-planned, then so were WTC1 & WTC2.
That would be remarkable to even the sleepiest of our citizenry.
P.S. Could you please cite the piece from Mackey which is irrefutable about CD – I must have missed it.
The K-25 building was the biggest in world. Despite many of its engineers and almost all the thousands of workers performing their assigned tasks being ignorant of what the ultimate purpose of the activity was, they succeeded in secretly making enriched uranium for the Bomb. Only the “architectural” and some of the higher “operational” designers need to know what the ultimate objective a subgoal are truly intended to achieve in the grand scheme of things
A close ally of Cheney, Rumsfeld overruled and micromanaged the military with a very intimidating and centralized style. Defence and intelligence were always of prime concern to Cheney and he operated by stymieing initiatives that were not to his liking for years. He was the most powerful Vice President in American history through being a seasoned White House political safe pair of hands and glutton for work. His management style was to, in person, make it crystal clear to those even four levels below him, not do anything about stipulated key issues in an emergency without going to him first. The paralysis on 9/11 was only to be expected from officials conditioned to play safe in an office politics sense.
A plan for 9/11 would be designed to take full advantage of the lack of grip by Bush and the way Cheney had hamstrung timely decision taking on security emergencies. The noninvasion of Iraq had been something Cheney was once happy with
Unfortunately, after the first Gulf war David Kay’s AEA team reported Saddam was not 5 years (as the CIA estimated), but 6 months from building a nuclear bomb. After 9/11, Cheney approved torture and was primed to believe the Office of Special Plans when they presented their under-assessed evidence (including some obtained by torture) for Saddam-Al-Qaeda collaboration and nukes.
In the aftermath of something like 9/11, Cheney and Rumsfeld would predictably advocate force against Iraq. Ten days after after 9/11 Paul Wolfowitz was told by Cheney to be quiet after become overly- insistent in advising Bush to invade Iraq rather that Afghanistan first . I don’t think the Israel Lobby agents of influence such as Wolfowitz were a crucial factor in convincing Bush, Cheney outweighed them.
Do you realize that you just posted a video that proves my point? All those videos of demolitions feature audible explosions. None of the videos of WTC7 feature any audible explosions.
He’s also on record as saying he doesn’t know or care who killed JFK (and probably others assasisnated if that’s his attitude.) For someone in his field, making sense of society and the world through language and commuication, that is an absurd thing to say, and told me all I need to know about him and the agenda. I wondered why 20 years ago. Now it’s all clear. And anybody who uses the phrase “conspiracy theory” without irony, is comfortable with lies.
Huh? YOU are the one who is arguing that there were a bunch of explosions:
Now you are arguing that there were no explosions? Your argument is utterly incoherent, as most dumb conspiracy theories are.
So now it’s nano-thermite because the explosions were disproved. Figures.
A little OT but you got to read this folks. What our ZOG has been up to. Remember the reporter that uncovered the CIA shipping millions of weapons to ISIS in Syria using Silk Way Airlines diplomatic flights?
https://trud.bg/350-diplomatic-flights-carry-weapons-for-terrorists/
Shes got new article on Pentagon using a base in Georgia (country) to produce DNA specific bioweapons to be used against Russians and God knows who else. This is the work of the devil himself! These sick mf’ers are gonna kill us all if they’re not stopped. Conspiracy theory? I think not…….
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-16/us-diplomats-involved-trafficking-human-blood-and-pathogens-secret-military-program
Worth your time to read through the whole thing.
Not necessarily. As you acknowledge, the kill radius of the nuke is dependent on its yield, nominally, but small nukes could function like shaped charges so that the kill zone would be defined by a cone, rather than a sphere.
I don’t know what the minimum size is for a nuke but my understanding is that fission devices can be made quite small. Already by the early 60s we had a nuke device small enough to be fired by a 155 mm howitzer.
The W48 was an American nuclear artillery shell, capable of being fired from any standard 155 mm (6.1 inch) howitzer, e.g. the M114, M198 or M109. It was manufactured starting in 1963, and all units were retired in 1992.
Dr Christopher Busby has suggested that small cold fusion device is in the U.S. arsenal:
I submit that it is conceptually sound and plausible for the plotters to have installed and detonated a string of shaped charge nuclear ladyfingers (very small yield) along the central core of each building with the blast of each directed upward to that it would demolish a set of floors, but leave its neighbors below undisturbed.
Just as you can break anything with a big enough hammer (force) so too can you be much more precise with the breakage if the destructive range of your force is precisely known, and some of your lads know how to roll these nuke doobies to whatever size is required.
Plenty of video of citizens and first responders saying there were explosions, and reporters on scene reporting explosions……. and do you really think they’re not slick enough to edit out the sounds of explosions from the videos?? Just shillin?
Now go enjoy some more .gov kool aid.
Fascinating. However, while the evidence for nanothermite is solid, I have not seen clear evidence of significant radioactive contamination at “Ground Zero.” Moreover, I don’t see how a single nuclear explosion underground would cut up all the steel columns above ground into handy fragments, nor turn all that concrete to dust. Not to mention the lateral ejections of material as the building collapsed clearly in a timed series of explosions from the top down …
Also remember the “Israeli art students” in the WTC with boxes full of bomb fuses stacked to the ceiling … whatever may have gone off underground, it cannot explain the whole story.
Once he was on Trump’s team, the Israelis that Papodopulous was already close to set him up in a meeting with an Australian diplomat and Papaodopulous mentioned he had heard Russia had dirt on Hillary’s in the form of her emails.
The Israelis were all over Trump and his advisers before anyone else took them seriously, their (Netenyahu’s) requirements were the cancelling of the Iran deal and recognizing Jerusalem as capital by moving the US Embassy. Trump needed Adelson to sew up the nomination and the price (which Adelson is open about) was moving the Embassy. Trump has done one and I expect he will fulfill the contact on the second condition of the deal as soon as a decent interval has passed. I suppose saying the Iran deal was to be cancelled was a little too sensitive for even Adelson to be open about,
In 2016 Michelle Flournoy (who was going to be Hllary’s’ Pentagon chief) told the Israeli minister of defence that PM Netanyahu was blatantly expressing a preference for a Republican, and similar complaints from tother Democrats (and Jewish groups) were the reason Netanyahu did not attend AIPAC and have candidates publicly suck up to him.
I don’t think that the idea would fly. I mean how could child molesters have the means, and why would they have the motive.
What can probably be said about 9/11 is that it was a US-instigated false flag, likely in the planning for many years, under several administrations, and therefore, an essentially bipartisan project intended to ensure the continuation of US global hegemony. The truth about 9/11 will, therefore, never be acknowledged by US authorities, short of a revolution.
The resort to such means of opinion management amounts to the transition of the US to a fully fascist form of government, under which the people are managed through a phony democratic process and a fake free press, which allows people the choice, or rather the illusion of choice, between factions committed to essentially the same program.
Is that a bad thing? It hardly seems a good thing, but real democracy in a country such as the US where a decadent, ill-informed and generally unpatriotic populace is able to vote from the age of 18 or is it 16, and soon probably 12 or 10, would surely be worse.
Better, would be an openly plutocratic system, where money ruled and was known to rule and was thus answerable for its crimes, which it is not now.
Concerning 9/11, a more important question than who dunnit is what have been its consequences. Where is the world heading. The American drive for global hegemony in a world where American strategic weapons are fully matched by Russia’s and China’s industrial base is larger than America’s seems doomed to failure. Who did 9/11 does not, in the overall scheme of things matter very much. What matters is where is America going, and where is the US driving the World.
But perhaps the truth about 9/11 coming out would be good. It might lead to a complete re-write of the US Constitution.
If Busby said that, Busby is a nut.
Hey, C&D – you usually do the same. I’m glad you have taken the time to “skim through Mackey.”
Not sure which of the three buildings you’re referring to but I’m sure it was addressed by RM in his whitepaper. Let me know which and I’ll be happy to point you to the appropriate passage.
First off, C&D, I’d like to commend you on how you couched that query – acknowledging it’s a “guess.” I say that because most others use CERTAIN and OBVIOUS when entering the domain of speculation. A big turn off, AFAIC.
Now, with respect to the likelihood of WTC 7 being one of the 4 targets selected by the planners. Here’s how I responded when someone else put a similar query to me:
Now, at that time, I didn’t want to expend more ink and expand on the last sentence by going into the whole issue of target selection. But, had I done so, I could have continued by making the following remarks:
Agreed. See above.
I don’t recall ever making this assertion. Here is what I said:
Noam Chomsky discussed JFK in the context of Oliver Stone’s film which followed Fletcher Prouty’s JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy. Chomsky scoffed at the idea Kennedy would have ever have countenanced a withdrawal from Vietnam without victory, as people like Schlesinger claimed. Kennedy got elected with phoney missile gaps and as Pres he promised to bear any burden. As Chomsky showed, you only have to look at Kennedy’s own statements about Vietnam as the “finger in the dyke” ect ect to see how preposterous it is to think LBJ’s reign was a reversal of JFK’s.
Chomsky says he is accused of conspiracy theories when he is merely offering an institutional analysis. For example when the board of a corporation say they want to help consumers and protect workers jobs, it is not a conspiracy theory to think they want to make profits and to that end they seek to establish a monopoly, sack workers and influence government to help them.
Did they go to war with the Saudis, from whence 19 of the hijackers came? Are the Saudis on the “list of 7”?
Several, but it’s off topic and I trust you can do your own research on that.
What do you mean by “US”? The country itself has no belief. As to individuals in the country, there are many who believe that 17 cavemen utterly circumvented these defense and intelligence agencies. As to the rest, read this thread, there’s lot of discussion about psy-ops and cover-ups, which I’m not about to repeat here.
Never claimed it did, though I think it does in the more general scheme of things (i.e. eliminating any government the Empire does not control). And if it had stopped at Afghanistan, this argument might carry some water.
Thank you for reading my long post and for your compliment. Let me try to answer your questions.
Dimitri A. Khalezov, a former Soviet citizen, was a Senior Lieutenant of the so-called
“military unit 46179”, otherwise known as “the Special Control Service” of the 12th Chief
Directorate of the Defense Ministry of the USSR. He left the USSR when it collapsed and moved to SE Asia. He currently resides in Bangkok.
His knowledge of the nuclear demo scheme for the twin towers was obtained directly as a result of his job in nuclear intel, specifically the nuclear capability of other countries and nuclear treaty enforcement.
His book includes a reasonable-length autobiography and includes pictures of himself and documents establishing his Army connection, place and date of birth. Some of this information is in Russian, but I know just enough Russian to authenticate the documents’ translations.
In his book he tells the story of why he wrote the book, referring to an NYPD detective who was daily exposed to the carcinogens that gave him the acute myelogenous leukemia that he suffers from today. When the detective (wearing a face mask filter) was working at Fresh Kills (Staten Island) where the WTC debris was sorted and examined, the detective noted that the FBI who went to Fresh Kills were always wearing full hazmat suits. The disparity irritated Khalezov enough that he decided to write the book.
His sources are listed in over 600 footnotes. He is an intel officer so he knows how to read between the lines of open-source documents, even party-line material like Wikipedia, for example. As you would expect there is huge diversity in his sources. Whenever he covered a subject that I had personal knowledge of, I authenticated his information and found him reliable and accurate. Knowing a little Russian helped when he presented Russian web pages and translated them into English. I could at least spot check sentences here and there and again satisfied myself. His English is not perfect, but he’s quite readable. You’ll catch his few idiomatic errors fairly quickly. He can’t wrap his Russian brain around the American term of “good old boy”. He renders it as “good guy”.
I hope I answered your questions and I hope you read and enjoy his book. It covers far more than 9/11 and will make the reader aware of how big the 9/11 event really was and how long it was planned for. I could imagine using his book as a text book in a course in critical thinking, critical reading, and similar subjects.
Yes, I suppose it might have stopped at Afghanistan, which makes one wonder why not pin the blame for 9/11 on Iraqis hijackers and not have to rely on torturing false admissions out of captured . al-Qaida man.
The one the did eventually torture into saying there was a close relationship between Saddam’s Iraq and and al-Qaida was their operative Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi.
Yet, how could they be certain they could waterboard ect , because it was was very far from certain that torture would be authorised after 9/11– many even in the CIA opposed it–and where would an invasion of Iraq have been then. Netanyahu and Sheldon Adelson did not have to torture Trump into moving the Embassy and cancelling the Iran agreement with Iran.They just offered him a contract that he had to fulfill, and Trump being notorious for bilking his contractors, they no doubt are grateful to have a wedge: Trump still has to cancel the Iran deal to make his special prosecutor troubles go away. Trump probably does not want to go to war with Iran yet as the Israelis might abandon him once they get everything they need.
Oh, I don’t recall doing that, what I remember writing is that there is substantial evidence of explosives. I don’t know the precise mechanism how WTC 7 was brought down – was it only C4, only nano-thermite, only some other chemicals, or some combination of approaches (C4 here, thermite there)? I think given the evidence there are a number of possibilities and I haven’t picked a horse to ride. And I don’t think it’s relevant to the question of a true, bona fide, transparent, declassified investigation. My point in presenting the explosion evidence was to refute some people who, quite wrongly, claimed there was no evidence of explosions, in general or with regard to WTC 7 in particular.
I’m fairly certain there weren’t any obvious, loud explosions. I have seen videos of conceded demolitions where explosions are louder than in other ones. The evidence of explosions is somewhat contradictory, though it could just be a question of intensity as well as different causes at different times (e.g., one time C4, another thermite, another a spray paint can). Frankly to me it doesn’t matter what one things about this, the relevant question is whether there are explosives or explosive residues in the dust, debris or steel. End of the day, that’s all that matters. The rest, I am happy to keep guessing (though once one knows a specific explosive was used and the likely amount, one might stop guessing). As to now, there is sufficient evidence of explosions that this alone, without regard to the special collapse progression and circumstances, requires testing for explosives as a matter of scientific inquiry.
When you were young, whoever was responsible for educating you: they really let you down.
That’s quite deft of you to manage a nitpick, argument by assertion, and character assassination in just eight words.
Nitpick because the question of whether or not Christopher Busby is a nut has virtually no bearing on the gist of my comment. You dodged all that with your trivial and unsupported distraction.
Argument by assertion because you’ve provided no facts or evidence to support your opinion: “If Busby said that, Busby is a nut.” You lose credibility because you failed to tell me why you think Busby is a nut if he said that.
And character assassination because someone can be wrong and still not be a nut.
There were some bizarre “art projects” involving the upper floors of the WTC shortly before 9/11. Some artist groups were allowed tremendous access to the upper floors, around the impact area of the 9/11 flights. Apparently they had construction access to the floors and were allowed to move construction and other materials in and out of the building.
https://www.markdotzler.com/Mark_Dotzler/WTC_Artists.html
Now we are far off in the realm of speculation, I do not know the planner’s ulterior motives in excruciating detail.
But I will note this. I think it is quite possible they would have put Afghanistan off for later. If Afghanistan had offered up bin Laden to the US for trial, it’s not clear to me that the US would have invaded Afghanistan when it did. But the Taliban did a very honorable thing here, asking for some evidence of his guilt before extraditing him. US was unable to provide any evidence at all, so, Bush cackled and bombed Afghanistan further into the stone age. And still didn’t get bin Laden.
So, perhaps if bin Laden had been extradited, they would have claimed he implicated Saddam and his sons, both in 9/11 and in future plots, and used that as the basis to attack Iraq, combined with WMD.
Not every single step has to be foreplanned, either. Goals can be more general. As PNAC stated, say the goal was simply to have more leeway internationally to take out Israel’s perceived enemies without any provocation? Wouldn’t 9/11 advance that goal, without any specific target in mind? This “war goodwill” could then be expended as they could make appropriate. In the meantime they also get their Big Brother security state. That’s a big win right there.
I do think Afghanistan was on the list, as it was not a vassal, but probably significantly lower than some of the others.
Not to mention they got their awesome heroine, which the Taliban had just cut off, back.
A 757 airliner fits through a 20′ hole in the Pentagon facade……..WTC7 smokes a little then completely collapses…….the lack of debris at the supposed flight 93 crash site (apparently the mythical Beamer and his “let’s roll ” boys didn’t get the job done). The PTBs, (((lugenpresse))), and everyone with an IQ over 95 knows the official 911 narrative is bullshit. But so what? The official narrative has now ossified into settled law, so to speak, and nothing will ever change it. Let’s suppose Dickie Cheney’s aquarium pump ticker is about to give out and he confesses his role in the conspiracy. Would it change the official narrative any more than Howard Hunt’s deathbed confession as to his role in the JFK assassination?
Careful. The boxes were labeled BB 18. There are BB18 Powr Busbar Series Fuse Holders, described as “Fuse Holder Accessories BUSBAR TERMINAL”
This device is not a bomb fuse at all, but rather a power distribution and fuse holder component which plausibly could have been used for unknown electrical wiring purposes by the Gelatin crew, and/or others.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/cesco-content/unilog/Batch7/079458/111340-AttachmentURL.pdf
Not really solid, because Harrit, Farrar, Jones et al relied on spoon-fed samples.
These presumably experienced researchers should have recognized the need to establish chain of possession with their samples before they ever began their research. Why couldn’t they simply have gotten some dust of their own, established chain of possession, and worked with that?
Rather than solid, I’d say the evidence for nanothermite is inconclusive.
In any event, for the umpteenth time, no thermites have demonstrated the explosive power necessary to dustify concrete and steel, so some other agent or agents must have been responsible for the major destructive force of the demoltion, even if thermite played some role on 9/11.
But everyone wants to keep talking about thermite, but not the other candidates with the necessary destructive force.
Move along. This is not the force you’re looking for.
Yes, good point.
Having him sit in that classroom was atrocious ‘optics’.
But it made the Secret Service look worse than it did the chimp. The chimp is perceived as an ‘awe shucks’, Alfred E. Neuman kind of amiable simpleton. He wasn’t elected for his razor sharp wits, but because he said “Jesus”, and seemed harmless enough.
So I doubt they were too worried about how Dubya was perceived, and most people were probably relieved to think that the situation was being handled by others like Cheney, knowing as we all did, that Dubya wasn’t the sharpest tool in the drawer.
But what about the Secret Service? Once the nation was under attack, they had to know that their protocols called for them to secure the potus. But they did nothing. They were ‘the dog that didn’t bark’.
IOW, the PTB knew Dubya was perfectly safe. That they allowed him to sit there is curious, as you mention, for how it makes the guy look like a clueless clod, but then I suppose that was just due to their arrogance.
I mean they figured their power to create the narrative was so immutable- that they wouldn’t even need the farce of a sham “investigation”. They’d just say it was Osama, and the public would follow their lead as predictably as they did with the Kuwaiti ‘incubators’ right into Desert Storm.
And it almost worked out exactly like that. If it weren’t for the ‘Jersey Widows’, there probably wouldn’t even have been the laughable charade of the 9/11 Commission.
So the chimp sitting there, as the nation under his ‘leadership’ suffers an ongoing attack, looks like just another arrogant oversight, like so many others on that day.
They never figured their total power to create the collective reality would ever suffer a chink in the armor. And if it weren’t for the smoking gun of Building Seven, they probably would have gotten away with the whole heinous enormity, scott-free.
As indeed, in many ways, they already have.
Even now, as most people on the planet know that something’s ‘rotten in Denmark’, vis-a-vis 9/11..
where is any evidence that anyone is being held to account?
The only people that have suffered, are the Afghans, Iraqis and Libyans and Syrians, et al. And the dead and maimed American and coalition soldiers and their loved ones.
These criminal scum,
are feted by the PTB as if they were statesmen and nobles.
The power of the ((media)) to create and maintain perceptions is almost absolute.
But your American Pravda articles, and your inimitable website are the chink in their armor, which will ultimately unleash the floodgates of truth, which will burst upon the world as if by ten thousand dams gushing truth-bombs like a hailstorm of revelations from Heaven.
The deluge will thunder down until there isn’t a lie standing, or murderer left unpunished.
We all owe you a great debt for making that glorious day inevitable.
“What on earth? Are you saying that the towers were burning from top to bottom? Are you blind?”
No, I am not blind and I am not making elementary errors in mechanics as FB earlier did with his wind load argument or in thermodynamics, as he now did in his temperature argument. I am not claiming that the towers came down because of fires. I see quite sufficient arguments to conclude that the towers fell because of controlled demolition. I am only saying that the temperature argument – that the steel structures could not be weakened by fire – is very difficult to make strong.
This is because theoretically, if the fires are large enough and get air in some way, can reach sufficient temperatures to weaken steel. If it could be proven that they cannot, there would not be any need to put fire protection to the steel, but steel is always fire protected. It is very difficult to see how fire could engulf steel beams in office fires to the extent that heat cannot escape by convection. It is also very difficult to see how air could be blown to the fire to heat all columns at the same time. It is nearly impossible to think how fire protection could be thorn from all these columns. But this is not a proof. Nearly impossible is not impossible. The counterargument is that the fires were in fact huge, though videos do not show them, that black smoke only shows that there were cold fires somewhere, not that there were no hot fires in many places. Therefore this temperature argument is only a supporting argument. It cannot be the main strong argument because to make it strong we would have to know more about the fires in the building than is known. If we say that NIST did not find evidence of high enough temperatures of the steel, the counterargument is that NIST concluded as an expert opinion that the buildings collapsed due to fire. Then it is an expert against an expert. One claims one thing, the other another thing. There are better arguments for controlled demolition. FB is trying to sell you a weak argument but if you ask any person competent in physics to read the argument, he will discard it as faulty. Presenting his arguments will only make you appear as an amateur, a conspiracy theoretician in the negative sense of the word. Basically his claim is correct: fires most certainly did not bring the buildings down and it is extremely unlikely that fires can cause a collapse of a steel-framed skyscraper, but his proof is incorrect.
Hey Geo – I was referring to WTC7 – that’s where we had 2.5 seconds of free-fall covering 8 stories in the middle.
Sorry – it’s almost 10:30 PM here and I am turning into a pumpkin, and tomorrow is an intense day at work. I will respond in more detail to your detailed post above when I get a breather.
G’nite!
“utu wrote: It is possible that some fragment of the structure may be in a free fall for a period of time even w/o explosives.
Nosey wrote: No, it is not possible.”
Nosey, it is possible but not relevant. What utu is referring to is parts of a structure. For instance, if a column buckles, what is above it does not have support and without support it will fall in free-fall. We do not have this case in WTC7. What is see is that the whole facade that is visible in the video is falling in free-fall. That implies that all pillars on the visible side have failed at the same time. This alone implies a controlled demolition: the whole front facade cannot fall in free-fall without all columns being removed.
Theoretically the back side that we cannot see from a video photographed from down could fall a bit slower for as long as the front facade falls so low that we could see the back side, but the video shows that this is not the case. We do not see the backside appearing behind the fallen front facade. So, utu refers to an argument that is not applicable here.
Just a little note before heading for bed: One of the reasons for choosing WTC7 (and I am speculating here) is there was apparently $1.7 billion in gold stored in the basement (I can’t confirm this), which subsequently disappeared. Moreover, WTC7 was highly unprofitable, and if Silverstein had anything to do with 9/11, then he would want WTC7 destroyed. There are lots of hints at fiscal considerations surrounding 9/11, from Rumsfeld’s disappearing trillions at the pentagon, to this, and the shorting of airline stocks.
I do concede, however, that none of these speculations are evidentiary and would never hold up in court. So, the main reason for my asserting CD for WTC7 that is provable, is that without CD, the laws of physics would be violated – and we can’t have that.
“j2 wrote: What if the other end is not in a lower temperature but the fire covers the whole building [?]
FB commented: Hmm…you got me there…that’s really an interesting question…
…if you live in a FUCKING ALTERNATE UNIVERSE YOU FUCKING MORON…
Question…what exactly is on the outside of the building…?
Could it possibly be the air of the atmosphere…?”
Take a piece of piano thread, it is steel and quite hard to bend. Suspend this thread over a candle. The part on fire will get red hot and when you take it out of the fire the part bends easily. It is no longer steel. This happens because the thread is so thin. Heat cannot escape fast enough through the very small cross section. Metal conducts heat very well, but conductivity depends on the cross section. Metal, like everything else, heats to a higher temperature if more heat comes in than goes out. Steel can be heated red hot if heat cannot escape. Take a piece of steel, put it on hot coals and blow air on the coals. The steel gets red hot. If you have a smiths workshop with a big enough fire, you can melt the steel this way. The same happens if the cross section of those parts of the steel structure that can lead the heat out is too small. Outside the building you have air, though it is rather hot air assuming that there is a huge fire. Yet, inside the building where you have the steel beams and columns temperatures can theoretically be very high and heat may not be able to conduct through the cross section fast enough. As long as the metal is solid heat can only move by conduction and radiation.
“YOU FUCKING MORON…”
In another thread you presented an argument based on wind load. You claimed superior knowledge and challenged everybody to argue against your claim that the wind load was more important that the weight as a design criteria. It took me exactly the time to read your argument to notice that you misunderstood torque. Indeed, you compared torque to a force, like comparing apples and oranges. Your result was wrong. You do not know mechanics. Here you present a thermo-dynamical argument. It took me only the time to read your argument to find the error. You do not understand that heat conduction depends on the cross section and without specifying the parameters in the particular situation of the tower, you cannot prove your claim. Horizontal beams and also vertical columns inside the building were not in contact with outside air and could have been heated to a high temperature if they were engulfed in fire. Also steel in the external walls could have been heated if flames had reached out, but from the video we can see that it was not the case. Weakening of the main columns inside the building could result into a collapse. Then columns of the external walls could buckle and the whole building would collapse. This all shows that you do not understand thermo-dynamics. You claim superior knowledge, suggest that NIST knows nothing of heat transfer, and challenge everybody to show your argument wrong. Well, your both arguments have so far been wrong and in an elementary way. Either you are self-taught in physics or you are intentionally proposing nonsense arguments to people who do not know physics. You add formulas and graphs to your comments, but the basic logic is faulty. People with education in physics can immediately see the problems in your arguments. When told that your argument is wrong, you can respond only by personal offenses. That is not what a real expert would do.
Why don’t you please explain, step by step, how you would do that, given that the “officials” who had “official” chains of custody, like NIST and USGS, refused to provide any samples?
Who is claiming the explosions caused the pyroclasmic flow? I don’t think anyone is arguing the cement was demolished. That was a consequence of the top-down explosion technique (as each floor was actually collapsing into the floor below it, the concrete was broken into dust) – the explosions only removed the support structures so that the synchronized, symmetrical pancaking could occur at all.
The nano-thermite hypothesis is that nano-thermite was used to avoid the loud explosions. Nano-thermite is, by all accounts, vastly more effective than regular thermite (both in terms of speed and control of action), but the below video shows the exceptional qualities of thermite which make it an attractive candidate for the “silent demolition”:
By the way, that short excerpt regarding thermite was from the much longer video linked below. The short excerpt was a test to show how Popular Mechanics had deliberately sabotaged a “thermite experiment” to make it look like an impossible agent to melt steel – well, if you don’t know what you are doing, of course, but the same would hold for C4.
For those having questions about how and why thermite, thermate or nano-thermite might be used, the full video by Jonathan H. Cole is excellent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
How about when it happens three times in a row and all within a few hours? Is that just nearly, nearly, nearly impossible?
There were 21 known drills conducted on the morning of 9/11. However, I think they pushed the knowledge out of those 21 drills out to distract from yet more drills, some of them involving people on the planes. The phone calls could not have happened at the altitudes the planes were supposed to be at among other problems and it’s quite possible Betty Ong was simply a participant in an anti-hijacker drill conducted at ground level. I do not know.
Telephone calls
http://www.consensus911.org/the-911-consensus-points/
However, not only were the telephone calls part of a drill, the “injured” people we see also display all the signs of participation in a drill too. See the 14 photos of injured people on this Occam’s Razor webpage.
http://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/3000-dead-and-6000-injured-a-lie.html
There is no clear evidence of a single injured or dead person of the 9,000 claimed. I assert that in that case the deaths and injuries are fake. In the real world it would not be possible to have a situation where there is not a single clear photo in the photographic record presented that would not show someone clearly dead or clearly injured out of 9,000. The gruesome photos of jumpers splattered on the pavement look fake to me, however, rather than bother with those you can simply work it out from the injured. Not a possibility.
This is a youtube video of an ABC reporter outside a hospital in NY with lots of empty wheelchairs and gurneys after the alleged attacks. A commenter put this below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw_IfI9BcEw&feature=youtu.be
I was in NYC on 911 and tried to help at a triage unit..there were no injured there at all it was about 8 blocks away from where the Towers were..I asked an EMS worker where the injured were and his response was there were no injured victims..I also watched vehicles coming out of the area and did not see any crushed or flattened vehicles at all … I was there from 12;00 PM until 9:30 PM … all the vehicles that were coming out of the WTC area were in good condition … it looked like a parade of firetrucks and ambulances … there were flatbeds that had vehicles on them in good condition – those flatbeds should have been carrying the crushed vehicles … what we saw on the media was very different from what I saw in person that day … I have many unanswered questions … it was a strange day indeed … I did see people covered in dust but no one had injuries that I could see … all the emergency prep work was done early and stayed unused … they had wheelchairs and stretchers and folding beds that looked like they were on display in front of hospitals and at the triage units … I saw no dirty linen bins at all … so tell me again about all the hundreds of injured people!!!! I wound up cooking burgers and hot dogs at the triage unit for the firefighters and ems workers … one of my questions is why was there a BBQ set up at a triage unit in the first place?? Maybe they knew in advance that they would not be using that area for any injured people …
Many of those listed as dead are not in the SSDI (see same Occam’s Razor page above).
I have no interest in theories only in evidence.
The only evidence you need to prove that 9/11 was an inside conspiracy is the undisputed 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration in the collapse of WTC-7. That is all you need. For free fall acceleration to occur in the collapse of the 47-storey steel frame building all its 82 steel support columns had to fail at virtually the same time and the only way for that to happen was through the use of pre-positioned charges. And there’s definitely no room in the official story for controlled demolition.
It’s incontrovertible.
The collapse of WTC-7 by “fire” must be the greatest case of the Emperor’s New Clothes the world has ever known.
But you know the secret to 9/11 … 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured is a complete fabrication. That’s the very big secret. The perps knew that people would catch onto the controlled demolition – it’s far too obvious and you really do have to wonder why they gave us WTC-7’s collapse on a platter. But they want to limit the secret that no one died or was injured because that keeps the whole truth under wraps. Believers of the official story will never be swayed because they don’t believe the US government capable of killing their own citizens in the buildings – and in that they’re absolutely correct. The US government would never do that – not cos they’re nice, of course – it just wouldn’t be their MO.
I offer $5,000 to anyone who can come up with 10 points that favour “fire” as the cause of collapse of WTC-7 or who can show that 3,000 died and 6,000 were injured on 9/11.
You get to choose your own judge – in the case of WTC-7, the structural engineer of your choice and in the case of the dead and injured your own emergency response coordinator.
I have done my own 10 points.
http://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/5000-challenge.html
“How about when it happens three times in a row and all within a few hours? Is that just nearly, nearly, nearly impossible?”
Yes, that is exactly what it is. Highly improbable but not proven impossible. Then you can spend hours discussing with a person who claims that though he admits it is a rare event, it still happened. Chandler’s argument of the free-fall of WTC7 for 2.25-2.5 s is not nearly, nearly, nearly impossible, it is impossible. These highly improbable arguments are good as an addition to strong ones, but it is highly improbable also by saying that collapse of three steel-frame skycrapers in the same day from fire sounds nearly impossible. Adding more to this argument makes it easier for the opponent to pick up some detail and to discard the argument because of it. For instance, one could say that heat conduction depends on the cross section, you have not treated the cross section, so I will not read further. A typical way to discard any scientific arguments is to say: I will read only up to the first error.
“I offer $5,000 to anyone who can come up with 10 points that favour “fire” as the cause of collapse of WTC-7”
Easy money, you did not say the points must be different and that they must prove that the collapse was by fire (I am sure it was CD), only that they favour fire over CD.
1. fire was seen, explosives not seen, favours fire
2. NIST said it was by fire, favours fire
3. fire was seen, explosives not seen
4. NIST said it was by fire
5. fire was seen, explosives not seen
6. NIST said it was by fire
7. fire was seen, explosives not seen
8. NIST said it was by fire
9. fire was seen, explosives not seen
10. NIST said it was by fire
for more points simply continue.
One thing that doesn’t get mentioned much is the lateral motion some of the building pieces. Large chunks weighing several tons are estimated to be moving laterally (sideways) at over 60 mph.
So, you should stop for a moment and think about what that means. In less than a second, chunks of building with several tons of mass were accelerated sideways to over 60 mph.
In less than a second.
A force that can do that is best described as “explosive.”
Airport security?
NORAD?
Impossibly skillful flight paths?
Controlled demolitions?
Narrative and cover up by the establishment?
Sorry, not buying it. Any Muslim terrorist involvement was peripheral at best.
Hi Petra,
Is there a consolation prize for drawing attention to President Trump’s selection to talk at Shanksville’s Flight 93 National Park memorial where the plane disappeared into ground?
… Kevin Barrett article & Anthony Hall video below focused upon Trump avoidance of appearing at the epicenter of 9/11 and used a National Park site to deliver the rah-rah message, “Fight Back!”
… Yea, Petra, we must fight back & thanks!
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/09/15/ffwn-9-11-anniversary-special/
Nice post. Very thorough.
OK, so it wasn’t a fuse but some sort of auxiliary device for placing fuses. The implications are the same.
As to the nanothermite samples, you must be kidding. Read their paper for how they got hold of their samples, and tell me, short of them being right at the scene on that very day, they could have done any better, without collaboration by the authorities.
Nanothermite may or may not explain every observed feature of those explosions, but it sure explains the molten and sulfur-laced steel. Maybe other explosives were used as well; I’m certainly no explosives expert. But this one proves that explosives were indeed used.
Because the media would have painted him as batshit crazy, and it would ensure these ideas never got serious consideration.
What if Putin came out with 9/11 today? Again, the media would paint him as batshit crazy or a scheming evil russian.
Neither character has enough credibility to deliver such an incredible message and so it’s better they don’t.
Earnest question: What is the observable evidence for the arab hijackers? Do we have CCTV at the airports? Is there anything else?
As far as I know, the solid evidence for their involvement is extremely scanty and we’ve mostly just been marinading in hearsay and outright fabrications.
I disagree with the conclusion that this was an Israeli operation. Yes, Israel was involved, but there is no evidence that they set up the operation.
Some important issues are ignored by the article:
1) The “perpetrators” obviously wanted to LIMIT the number of casualties: therefore the Twin Towers needed to come down in their own footprints, WTC7 was only destroyed after everyone was pulled out of the building; AA77 crashed at the part of the Pentagon building were it could do the least damage, UA93 was probably shot down. This suggest not a “false flag ” by terrorists or Israel (both of which would have been bent upon as much destruction as possible), but an “inside job”.
2) The financial laundering operations and the insider trading on and before 9/11; which has been proven by four independent peer-reviewed papers. Many people financially gained from the attacks again suggesting an “inside job”.
3) The key question about what happened at the Pentagon. It doesn’t make any sense for Israel or terrorists to do what they did according to the official story: ignoring the opportunity to crash the plane on the roof thereby taking out all the tob brass and maybe even Rumsfeld himself, but instead chose to do all kinds of daredevil stunts (making a turn of 270 degree, while descending 2000 feet, bringing the plane to ground level and fly it at high speed just above the law – which remained in pristine condition by the way) to crash it in a part of the building which was just reinforced. It therefore is very likely that that part of the Pentagon was the intended target: but why would Israel want to destroy the Office of Naval Intelligence? There are other suspects which are more likely (I come back to that), which again suggests an “inside job”.
4) Finally, what happened to Building Six? It was destroyed also, but the peculiar destruction has never been explained. Interestingly building Six housed a special department of U.S. Customs investigating all kinds of money laundering scheme’s. The same kind of investigations were done by the…Office of Naval Intelligence.
Four reasons to think it was an inside job, not a “false flag”.
So who were the perpetrators then? An interesting hypothesis – backed up with lot’s of evidence – has been provided by EP Heidner in his Collateral Damage article, later expanded to the September 11 Commission Report.
Or see Mark Gaffney’s Black 9/11
No. I can go as far OT as the mods tolerate, but only while it’s fun (for you, me & the mods). But this is not fun for me; religion:
[COED] the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. Øa particular system of faith and worship.
The main two precepts I associate with religion are a) some alleged supernatural deity and b) eternal life after death. The 1st is to explain how/why we are ‘here’ = a creator. the 2nd is purely personal to the believer: S/he simply cannot abide by the thought that any individual’s death is truly that: A dead end finito; there is and can be no more. A 3rd utterly contemptible aspect, is the thought that villains will be punished in the afterlife, thus largely ‘excusing’ villains being pursued and punished in the ‘here and now.’ Justice delayed is justice denied, and IF delayed up to the death of any perpetrator THEN never served = the perps get off ‘scot-free.’ Q: How fair is that? A: It’s not.
PS My ‘image’ of the big bang as a phase-change obviates the necessity of some ‘creator.’ rgds
Challenging the Big Bang theory may be one thing, securing a consensus quite another. rgds
@j2
What are you talking about? NIST agreed to the 2.25 seconds. It’s UNDISPUTED.
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/free-fall-acceleration
You would need to ask someone who has diligently read right through reports and transcripts of evidence. I have left any attempt to master that area of the story to those who write long analyses or write books, mostly because I have tended to assume that the actual existence of the 19 Arabs as pilot trainees and airline passengers – and their being recorded only as entering the US but not leaving – was so easily checked that the only questions were whether they were actual hijackers when on the planes and flew the planes into the WTC and Pentagon.
Surely the Commission of inquiry and NIST can’t have stuffed up checking the details for several airlines which airline employees would know all about and not fear talking about. Surveillance cameras, lists of passengers ticked off….No doubt lots of corroborative details to be checked including taxis to airports, hired cars, where they stayed the preceding night….
A different consideration, but persuasive, is that plotters who wanted the story to be focussed on the Arabs would surely not expect to be abĺe to cook it up out of thin air. Getting 19 Arabs to take the fĺ
.
Well, it’s election season. Maybe we could ask the candidates if they support a new investigation of 9/11.
Just put them on the record.
The poison of 9/11 is killing America.
Historian Richard Dolan:
9/11: What 17 Years of Lies Have Done to Us
… flights would be child’s play. So, given that the plotters clearly meant the public to believe that 9/11 was an Al Qaeda operation carried out by fanatical jihadists, why wouldn’t they have lured 19 Arabs on to the flights?
I suspect the US targeted Afghanistan to establish air superiority over Iran. The US expected to attack Iran soon after the Iraqi’s welcomed the imperial invaders with open arms. As long as the US remains in Afghanistan, Iran is in the cross hairs.
The Iraqi decision to disperse the 15,000 man Republican Guard into 20 man units, tasked to fight a guerrilla war was the fateful decision dooming the Iraqi people and the American Empire in much the same way the Boer War was the apogee of the British Empire.
The Iraqi resistance is one of the great battles of world history. The strategy, tactics, and results will be carefully studied by experts. The man most responsible for strategy and tactics was the Naqshbandi Sufi Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izzat_Ibrahim_al-Douri
CalDre….Thanks for your outstanding contribution on the thread!
I mean just the opposite of what you understood. The argument is strong. Free-fall for 2.25 s is impossible, not nearly impossible, without a controlled demolition. Read the context from the previous comments to Nosey.
I’m not convinced that ObL’s assessment of how the media – by which I assume you mean only US media – would react is of any significance, assuming he gave it a thought at all. You have to suppose that he was surprised by the collapses (obviously true) but then sees that what must have happened could have the splendid result of hurting Israel. At the very least an Al Jazeira interview, rebroadcast throughout Euro0e and Asia, in which he says “How do they think I arranged to place explosives in the Towers?” ….. “I say to the people of America, and of Europe, that the Zionists who did these evil acts will be exposed if careful search is made for the remains of explosives, and that the failure to make those searches will show what Zionist power can achieve in America”.
Are there any reliable poll results which would support the view that 9/11 is still live and poisonous?
No, you have been overimpressed with FB’s prolix garbage. Haven’t you noticed that no one on these threads has come close to *proving* that the fires in the Towers couldn’t have caused relevant steel members to be weakened to the point where the weight of floors above could cause collapse. (Note I’m not saying that someone better qualified than you or FB might not make a case for the central core being so strong that only demolition could have brought it down).
Your imagination is taking you beyond the words you quote. But let me comment on a couple of matters you mention anyway.
Your reference to NORAD is presumably based on your ignoring the fact that, before 9/11 no one would have dreamt of shooting down hijacked commercial airliners of unknown destination.
“Impossibly skilfull flight paths”. To start with, not true from the admittedly limited time I have had as a pilot. But, more, it leaves you with one of the absurd no plane scenarios which are… well… absurd.
You have picked a Communist’s definition of religion.
Merriam-Webster: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
Dictionary.com: a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects
Wikipedia: Religion may be defined as a cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, worldviews, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organizations, that relates humanity to supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual elements. However, there is no scholarly consensus over what precisely constitutes a religion.
The point of the non-constrictive definition of religion is that the anti-Establishment Clause was to preclude any particular system of beliefs to be put forth by the State, whether or not a God was involved (for example, Buddhism does not have a god). See Nontheistic religion at Wikipedia.
Just because some folks fabricate an explanation of reality which does not include a God does not mean it can be forced onto everybody. The Constitution is about freedom and permitting people to have their own views about the meaning of life, etc., not a State-imposed one. In any case, in the US version of state-enforced secular humanism, God is denounced as a fantasy, and hence it is clearly religious indoctrination, even if it is merely anti-religious (using the very narrow definition of the term).
Anyway I agree this is off-topic so I will leave it at that :).
P.S. I don’t agree you get away from the idea of a “creator”. You still have to explain where did the original energy, and the original laws of nature, come from. You can posit that they came from nowhere, but always existed, but that is impossible to test – i.e., it is no more “scientific” than saying “God created it”. In any case, you are purely speculating, because you don’t know. And all that even assumes that reality actually exists, as opposed to being in a video game, or in a non-material word (Hegel, idealism, etc.).
If Busby said the Twin Towers were brought down by a cold fusion device Busby is a nut because there is no reason to believe that there is any such thing as a cold fusion device or weapon that could have the slightest impact on the stability of a large building.
Busby, incidentally, wasarrested the other day on suspicion of poisoning some policemen.
You comment provides proof of one thing: that if anyone on this thread provided proof of anything, you wouldn’t understand it.
Jeezus, CalDre, you need to get some facts under your belt before saying stuff like that.
That the Taliban offered to extradite OBL if the US presented evidence of his complicity in the crime is pretty common knowledge. In the event, the US’ wouldn’t take “Yes” for an answer, so responded with the diplomatic equivalent of “We don’t need no stinkin’ evidence”.
Quite rightly, the Taliban refused.
Greetings Ron,
I don’t think that they were worried at all Bush loosing the 2004 election. Both times in 2000 and 2004, Bush lost. Between East and West coasts, there is 4 hours difference. Ohio State was called by all major MSM as Blue State. Late Senator Ted Kennedy was literally dancing in the CNN studio. Very late in California, suddenly the Ohio State was changed to Red State, thus giving Bush the win through Electoral College. With Ohio State John Kerry had won the election through Electoral College. But then suddenly the Ohio State was switched to Red State. For this reason he didn’t throw in the towel the same day as required by the loser. He threw in the towel the next day.
Since 2000 all the Presidential Elections are compromised. Don’t tell me the Evil Hellary with her political machine lost the Electoral College to Trump with no political machine at all. Yeah right, in the end she was given a choice between prison time or throwing in the towel. Basically, no choice but to throw in the towel.
No. I’m ‘standing on the shoulders of giants,’ basing my ‘what is always was’ on the conservation ‘laws’ – it’s ‘only logical.’ In any case, one could enter into an infinite regression: IF some ‘creator’ was at work, what created that creator? IF such nonsense is thought amusing by some, THEN I say “Let ’em be” [= I’m forcing nothing onto anybody = do what you want; I know you will anyway.]
As for reality, I have no problem: “D blueme gönd uuf und de vogel uf em baum säit em psunders tüütli, das d nacht verby isch.” rgds
The final election Bush 286 Electoral College and John Kerry 251 Electoral College. Deduct the 20 Electoral College of Ohio State from Bush and add to Kerry. The final and corrected result:
Kerry: 271 Electoral College
Bush: 266 Electoral College
Watch the linked video. Dolan explains it pretty well.
I wonder if there is some way to get a letter writing campaign to put each member of the Congress running for office on the record about things like 9/11.
And maybe go to a town hall meeting or debate and ask if they support a new 9/11 investigation. A lot of people tend to get flustered so keep the question short like this:
“Do either of the candidates support a new 9/11 investigation?”
Don’t start babbling about building 7 or nanothermite.
Take a friend and have them ask about the $21 trillion missing from the Pentagon.
Now is the time. They are your elected representatives. They answer to you. They need your vote.
Make ’em earn it.
Why would the US go to war with the Saudis? The Saudis were and are close to both Israel and the US.
You’ve never before seen the government of a country referred to simply by the name of the country, “The US,” “Germany”, “Israel”, or whoever?
You say 9/11 was intended as justification for wars for Israel, but you cannot say in what way the war on Afghanistan, the first military response to 9/11 and America’s longest war, benefits Israel. Seems like you have a dud hypothesis.
Same for 2000 election. The final election Bush 271 Electoral College and Al Gore 266 Electoral College. Deduct the 11 Electoral College of Tennessee State from Bush and add to Gore. The final and corrected result:
Gore: 277 Electoral College
Bush: 260 Electoral College
In Bush’s 260 Electoral College the 25 Electoral College of Florida is included. One can easily see that Al Gore didn’t need Florida.
Re: thermite
A better question would be why couldn’t NIST, charged with the investigation of the destruction of the Twin Towers and an agency that had developed thermit as an explosive, have “gotten some dust of their own”?
Because they didn’t want to know?
The use of thermitic material in the destruction of the towers is consistent also with the abundance of iron microspheres thoughout the dust from the towers.
Yeah right!
What about Afghanistan having a border with Iran?
Have you looked at a map in your lousy life!
I like that. I have long suspected that Trump did not win the election fair and square. But how did it work?
Who gave Hillary the choice, and how would they have exacted the penalty had Hillary refused to submit?
And how did Hillary throwing in the towel swing the vote for Trump?
Are you saying that Hillary’s machine just laid off stuffing ballot boxes, flipping electronic votes, or however the job is done, or what?
(Note I’m not saying that someone better qualified than you or FB might not make a case for the central core being so strong that only demolition could have brought it down)
Wise of you not to say so. The claim you state can be strictly proven by Chandler’s argument, the core and external walls should not have completely collapsed as the only thing to break them would be upper structures which fall apart and to the sides after floors pancake down. The proof is quite simple and short and only requires noticing that the air puffs far below the destruction level of walls require pancaking of the floors.
I don’t think it’s really the responsibility of NIST or USGS to investigate a crime or provide samples without a subpeona, so we can’t really fault them for not doing what they had no charter or obligation to do.
At the same time, I don’t think the procedure for establishing chain of possession, chain of evidence, or chain of custody is so cryptic, obscure or demanding that only NIST or USGS knew how to do it, or that I need to give a step by step explanation.
Nor should I need to point out that any federal law enforcement or criminal justice agency could have invoked its powers of subpoena to acquire any evidence pertinent to a criminal investigation, including dust.
Faced with a federal subpoena for the WTC dust, NIST or USGS could hardly refuse to provide it, even today.
We cannot assume that among “officials” only NIST or USGS had the dust, or indeed the duty to collect dust, establish chain of custody, and conduct a thorough criminal investigation of the destruction of the WTC, which was an enormous crime irrespective of who was responsible for it.
Did any of the responsible U.S. government agencies–like either the FBI or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives— conduct a thorough criminal investigation of 9/11, search for explosives, or even collect any WTC dust? Did the 9/11 Commission collect and examine any WTC dust?
Well…here we go again…
I had specifically asked commenters here not to make RETARDED comments…everyone here agrees this is a waste of EVERYONE’S time…
But you have ZERO respect for the discussion here or its participants…
So now that piano wire is no longer steel…?…that’s really fucking brilliant…I guess it has turned into FUCKING PEANUT BUTTER…?
And you are here flatulating about fucking physics…?…that is fucking incredible…
I had already called you here the STUPIDEST FUCKING COMMENTER ON THIS WEBSITE…
Is there any possible fucking doubt now…?
You’ve spammed this discussion here with 700 RETARDED FUCKING WORDS…you make all kinds of claims about physics but you explain ZILCH…do you not stop to consider how fucking stupid that looks to a normal fucking person…?
I have already explained very clearly some of the vitally important physics of heat transfer…yet you come here with some bullshit about heating a piano wire with a fucking candle…what exactly are you trying to prove or disprove…[other than your total fucking lack of intelligence]…
Here is a video of a guy trying to melt a stack of nine copper pennies with a propane torch…now the propane torch flame temperature is nearly 2,000 C…
That is TWICE as high as the MAXIMUM temperature of a fireplace or a campfire or a blazing office fire [which blaze we actually never see in the tower videos..but leave that aside for now]…
The melting temperature of copper is 1,085 C [which is almost 50 percent lower than carbon steels like that piano wire]…
And also we note here that the flame from a torch is an example of FORCED CONVECTION…since the propane is under pressure which causes the hot gas to flow with much greater mass flow than in simple natural convection from a fire…if you refer back to my previous comment and the reference about heat transfer coefficients we see that forced convection is an order of magnitude higher…
So we have twice the temperature and TEN TIMES HIGHER heat transfer effectiveness due to forced convection…and this experiment with these known conditions is recorded on this video, but the copper pennies DO NOT MELT…[fast forward to the end and see the big ‘FAIL’ sign]
And we see in the video also that the bottom penny, which is a post-1982 penny which is made of 98 percent zinc [melting temperature 420 C], DOES melt…
So despite those pennies being in the middle of that flame that is nearly 2,000 C…the pennies never actually reach even 1,000 C…the bottom penny has reached at least a little over 400 C, its melting temperature…
So here is the challenge for you POTATOHEAD…please explain the physics of why copper does not reach the fucking flame temperature AS YOU CLAIM IT SHOULD…?
[But your fantastic fucking experiment with piano wire and a fucking candle, turns the steel with the MUCH higher melting temp into into fucking peanut butter…?]
Here is a MUCH BETTER experiment for you to try…[also record it and post it on youtube]…
That will at least be of some use to the normal folks participating in this discussion…and it will help us to understand your general fucking problem…
From what I remember, the Afghan government offered to extradite Bin Laden to a Muslim country for trial, where the USA could bring evidence.
The USA refused the offer.
The Deep State with Comey being the message carrier.
She consented the election and didn’t ask for vote count.
Elections are by county and each county within the each State has its own system.
I see you are Canadian. America doesn’t have one ID system. Even though when they go to WC (loo), Uncle Sam knows about it and spying on them while they are jerking off or being jerked off in their own bedrooms. Why you think that there are so many illegal aliens in the USA, because the White American want that. If they didn’t then they will push a simple ID system for all Americans for voting purpose.
If banks can identify each and every American or Aliens at ATM, with triple system. Inserting the Card, then inputting the pin password and then inputting OTP (One Time Password).
“So here is the challenge for you POTATOHEAD…please explain the physics of why copper does not reach the fucking flame temperature AS YOU CLAIM IT SHOULD…?”
I have not claimed that copper should reach the flame temperature in this your setting. A torch, like your propane torch, does not heat the whole pile of pennies from all sides and they radiate heat to the air and conduct it to the floor. You use a wrong set-up.
I guess you would never make a blacksmith. They know how to melt copper. Put your pennies on hot coals and blow air in the coals. The heat goes to 100 Celsius and melts whatever melts in 100 Celsius. It will take some time but the system will reach thermal equilibrium and if your coals do not burn out, they keep the temperature and metal will melt. Copper temperature will be very close to 1000 Celsius.
You cannot prove that fire in WTC should be like heating with your propane torch rather than laying on hot coals. It is because we do not know how fires burned in the building.
The reason why your effort of proving that fire could not start the collapse is hopeless, since fire theoretically can start a collapse and it depends on the conditions. We do not know the conditions, and we cannot know the conditions since fire spreads quite unpredictably. This is even if we would know precisely what was in the building with the precision of the position of each chair and carpet. So, even if you make a model and model a possible scenario, one can always say that it was another scenario, fire spread differently – have you modeled all possible scenarios? Of course you have not, because their number is uncountable.
Just give it up, you have taken an impossible task. There are very simple and short arguments that solve the problem you want to solve. Your method will not work.
“EMPTY FUCKING CAVITY YOU CALL A FUCKING HEAD…”
This your verbal creativity does not make you any better physicist. You are really poor in physics.
So now there was a BLACKSMITH FUCKING SHOP inside the buildings…?
And heat can only move by radiation and conduction…?
And what about CONVECTION YOU FUCKING MORON…?
You yap about equilibrium temperature…without even having the slightest idea of what that ACTUALLY MEANS…
—Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach; Cengel…page 14
Let me ask you something…do you dispute these two physical facts…
1. That heat moves also by CONVECTION…[as well as radiation and conduction]
2. That the thermodynamic system in which a building fire is burning IS NOT A CLOSED SYSTEM BY DEFINITION…
Let us see your answer to this…it will prove everything about your ZERO lack of physics and thermodynamics knowledge…
You are really a fucking retard…it is hard for me to imagine any human so stupid that he has absolutely no idea as to how far his knowledge goes…
You need medical help…you have no grasp on reality…if you did, you would realize the limits of your so-called knowledge…and those limits are truly tiny and pathetic…
In two places 100 Celsius should be 1000 Celsius.
“The same happens if the cross section of those parts of the steel structure that can lead the heat out is too small.”
Hi J2 ; lovely seeing you around.
Nice comment, obviously all correct. A little pedantry generally settles it: this is the integral for of Fourier’s Law of Thermal Conduction…but I suspect you enjoy this verbal jousting 🙂 🙂 …
Hmm. Hmmm. Hmmmmm. Really? REALLY?
In the very next fucking sentence after what you quoted, I wrote ” But the Taliban did a very honorable thing here, asking for some evidence of his guilt before extraditing him. US was unable to provide any evidence at all, so, Bush cackled and bombed Afghanistan further into the stone age.” So you reply to chide me for my inaccuracy and to “correct me” that the Taliban offered him up if evidence was provided and that US refused to provide evidence and bombed Afghanistan …. exactly what I wrote?
In a nutshell, this is why people can’t agree on anything these days :/.
That’s a non-answer. The fact is, and I repeat, “you are purely speculating, because you don’t know”. You have made an assumption, that the conservation laws have always applied. But that is no different from positing, “God has always existed.”
Exactly, there are also many other dimensions in which one can keep finding another turtle … all the way down.
Exactly, this is my point: it is impossible to know the nature of reality. Hence: Every. Single. Explanation. Is. A. Religion. It is a “transcendental” “leap of faith”. It is decidedly not science. There is no way to test it or validate it. Frankly, you cannot even, scientifically or logically, rule out that the Universe came to exist 500 years ago, all “created” in the exact configuration in which it then would have found itself in accordance with your religious views on the subject.
Here is my reply to your latest gas eruption…
And btw…speaking of how a blacksmith gets objects to a very high temperature, it is mostly by convection…the air blowing across the flame carries much more mass flow across the surface of the object being heated…I already described this in my previous comment…
But a blacksmith forge has NOTHING to do with what you are claiming…that you could heat up a piano wire…which incidentally is not difficult to bend cold…with a candle…
That is not true…the video I showed was exactly the same kind of ‘setup’ you described with the piano wire and candle…so it is refuting your claims…
But then you switched suddenly from the discussion of heating a piano wire to the heating of the steel beams in the buildings…I had already talked about that at length also…I have already posted the flame temperature models produced by NIST…and I had quoted their FALSE statement that the steel beams could reach the maximum AIR temperature in those models, namely 1,000 C…
Now you continue to make a total idiot of yourself, but you actually know almost nothing…a person who knows almost nothing is worse than a person who knows nothing…because at least the person who knows nothing, knows that he knows nothing…
But let us wait and see what you have to say about my two questions regarding equilibrium and convection…
Ron Unz wants to separate the who from the how believing correctly (imc) that there is too much misinformation and too many contradictory theories that discussing the how always obscures the who part. The discussion under the two JFK assassination papers here at UR showed that people rather keep talking about the number of bullets and their trajectories than wondering whether Mossad had part in it. Nevertheless the how part is important so I would like to see an overview of various hypotheses written by Ron Unz if he found stomach to familiarize himself with all kinds of stories, often seemingly absurd, that have been spun since 9/11.
If indeed (as it appears to me) Ron Unz is chiefly interested in putting blame on Mossad and Israel then he should check out Dmitri Khalezov and his incredible story about 9/11 where it was the Israelis who perpetrated the attack on America with minimal if any cooperation of the US and it was the Israelis who forced the US gov to demolish the WTC buildings with nuclear devices because they were made to believe by Israelis that Kursk warheads were placed in the WTC by terrorists.
Dmitri Khalezov claims he knew (in)famous Mike Harari of Mossad whom he met right after 9/11 and together with him celebrated the success of the 9/11 operation somewhere in Asia (iirc Bali or Thailand).
It seems that Dmitri Khalezov was an associate of the arm dealer Victor Bout so one can think that Khalezov had connections to the post Soviet security apparatus and to international Israel operatives. His knowledge of nuclear technology is pretty good. He is intelligent and articulate. So who did put Khalezov into the 9/11 story business? Why did he decide to come up with his story? Khalezov, I think, came up with his story that was launched in Thailand with a quite professional and probably costly interview after Victor Bout was nabbed by FBI in Thailand. Later Khalezov himself ended up in Thailand jail.
Q: Do you have a problem walking down the street?
Here is a question for you…
How does Fourier’s Law apply to the first part of that graphic [on the left]…ie how is the heat transferred from T∞,1 to T1…the surface temperature…
The answer is it DOESN’T…Fourier’s Law only concerns the propagation of the heat THROUGH that wall…as the accompanying math makes clear…
So it tells us ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about how the fire temperature on the left gets into that wall to begin with, now does it…?
And it tells us NOTHING about the surface temperature that the steel would have reached…
And this is the MAIN ISSUE…since we are trying to determine how that heat from the fire would have got into those steel beams in the first place…or rather how effectively…since that is what will determine the steel surface temperature…
And that is the entire point of disproving the NIST claims that the steel temperature supposedly reached 1,000 C…the same as the fire temperature…a physical impossibility…
I already discussed in depth how that heat transfer occurs…in my previous comment here…
Khalezov is a nutter. Try to get a grip?
PS The US attack on Afghanistan had as good as nothing to do with 9/11, research ‘carpet of gold or bombs.’ The WC7in5 was all in answer to cui bono? rgds
Here we see CIA’s first-line disruption tactic in classic form. Notice the fixation on minutia of the WTC collapse, continually escalating in insults and vituperation. The intent here is to divert attention to the full spectrum of ridiculous boners that make the 9/11 official story a joke. Then in other forums someone will use the obsessive fixation on tower fires to caricature skeptics as nuts. With the JFK assassination, CIA’s chosen focus is ballistics.
Any comprehensive review of the evidence shows the whole story stinks. The real smoking guns are not nanoferrite globuloids but the documented actions of US government officials. From Blee and Wiltshire infiltrating terrorists, to DoS harboring them in forbearance of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to Spike Bowman suppressing evidence of both Amerithrax and hijacking, US government criminality is proven to a moral certainty. Only impunity keeps these US government scumbags out of the lethal injection chamber.
http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/25125
Of course he’s talking about consensus911.org
Actually, we can. NIST is tasked with investigating building collapses in general and was tasked with investigating the three skyscraper collapses on 9/11 in particular. Not testing for explosives, despite the obvious demolition-like-collapse, the applicable manuals, and the like, is actually A CRIMINAL DERELICTION OF DUTY. No duty to do?
Again, we have these utterly bad faith “deniers” spouting their utter nonsense.
There is no way to establish a chain of custody except from people who collected on or near 9/11 and explained in detail how they had obtained it and how they had maintained it. That’s exactly what Dr. Jones and his team did – they do have a “chain of custody” for the samples they used, explained in detail in their paper, it’s just not government certified. But somehow this was not enough for you. You still haven’t explained what would be, because, the end of the day, you are emotionally vested in believing your fairy fire tale.
The only one I have ever heard of testing for explosives is Dr. Jones. I have never heard any claim that someone tested WTC dust and found no explosives. If you have such a report, please do link it.
It. Was. A. Cover. Up. Period.
Hi FB; I only posted this drawing as a way to materialise the mathematical concept of integral applied to Fourier’s Law. Couldn’t find a better one.
J2 is entirely correct: conduction cannot happen freely, it is driven by the temperature gradient, but it is limited by the conductive surface’s size.
This is how the thermal model, of which drawing you posted comes from: analogy is made with electric current, which is limited by resistance, which increases when conductive surface decreases.
J2 does not believe in the 9/11 BS. He is just trying to help. Truthers are up against a mega governmental cover-up, the smallest inaccuracy will be held against them. With regards.
Today:
He is proud he got bin Laden after everybody else had failed. US Special Operations Command were trying their upmost to capture Osama bin Laden right from the begining of the invasion.
Invading Afghanistan was quite like going to result in the swift capture or demise of Osama bin Laden, which was its original intended purpose . The many establishment people arguing against invading Iraq had a weak hand mainly because Osama bin Laden was at large. Under torture one of his men had said Bin Laden and Saddam were in an alliance. Saddam had been six months from a nuke according to the Atomic Energy Commission investigators after the First US-Iraq war, and Cheney was terrified Saddam might have a nuke, give it to Osama bin Laden who would nuke a Washinton or NYC. America blamed Germany for selling Saddam weapons technology but the truth is that the American knew Saddam had the aluminium tubes ect because building up Saddam into a regional superpower to balance Revolutionary Iran (the previous America proxy) had been Reagan era policy. The ambassador in Iraq during the Iraq military build up on the border with Kuwait was April Glaspie who came in for a lot of criticism over her “We have to opinion on your Arab-Arab quarrel” remake to Saddam that Walt and Mearshiemer made Saddam think he could get away with invading Kuwait . But in fairness the previous history making Saddam thinking he had Carte Blanche was his pampering by Reagan and his then–young Secretary of Defence:
In their book ‘The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy’ Mearsheimer and Walt note that :
It seems obvious to me at least that Wolfowitz knew that the capture or death of bin Laden in and fine tooth comb search by the US was quite likely to come too quickly, and there would never be an attack on Iraq. Failure to get bin Laden was a key turning point, and I think it might easilly be considered cause of the invasion of Iraq.
Now, the above is a rather long winded way of pointing out that the failure of Afghanistan to hand over bin Laden; the US going all out for getting bin Laden and not finding him; and his successfully going to ground in Pakistan fore several years, were uncertain watersheds any 9/11 plan would have count on all going aright. As it turned out 9/11 led to the invasion and its destruction of Iraq as a danger to Israel, but that was a series of events not one of which were as certain as night following day and some of them were really quite unlikely to happen as they did. A plan predicated on such uncertainties seems a little feckless.
Many criminal acts are committed from a desire to be considered a force to be reckoned with, but those responsible will say they are innocent . People want incompatible things.
You haven’t answered the question…how on earth does Fourier’s Law about CONDUCTION of heat through a solid have anything to do with how the heat actually reached that solid to begin with…?
So potatohead j2 is NOT correct about anything…he is a useless clown whose ‘knowledge’ extends one or maybe two degrees above ABSOLUTE FUCKING ZERO…
He attacked my completely factual comment where I quite clearly explain what neither of you two are able to explain…which is the mechanism of heat transfer by CONVECTION from a flame [ie a hot fluid] to a solid…
If you have anything to add other than chipmunk droppings then please feel free to do so…
Actually, my post was half of what I intended, but after hitting the Publish button accidentally, I had no recourse. My next point was going to be along the lines of:
It’s not the “honourable thing” as much as it is a normal part of extradition law. Nobody extradites anyone without evidence. Otherwise, it’s called “rendition”.
Whatever the legal state of the Taliban rule in Afghanistan at the time, and the likelihood that the word “legal” didn’t have any meaning there, the Taliban had the PR sense to mimic widely accepted extradition law. Not that it did them any good.
If you look at a map, you will see that Afghanistan is crucial to gaining/maintaining control of Eurasia. The invasion was long planned, and in fact was discussed in the summer of 2001 by several media outlets including the BBC as being planned for October 2001.
The PNAC gang got their man into the WH, and were going for broke. Remember Rove’s “We’re an Empire now…”. OBL’s presence in Afghanistan was nothing but the pretext for acting on an Imperial Imperative. The very last thing the PNAC gang would have wanted was OBL in a NY court.
I’d add that any thought that the US has any plans to leave Afghanistan should be tempered by the news that NATO is planning an 120,000 sqft (11,000sqm) Command & Control Centre (aka: Imperial Outpost) in Kabul to go along with their new airport.
Hi Contrarian.
Thanks ever so much for your comment: the explanation you provide for the collapse of the WTC towers, based on Khalezov’s thesis, is extremely convincing and ticks all the boxes.
The thing that troubled me most is that I would have expected post-explosion radioactivity to be so important that it would have been overwhelmingly detected. However, some research I did in my native French-speaking world showed that what you report is entirely correct:
– During the Cold War, it was common to have means of nuclear destruction being embedded, during the construction phase, within buildings that were deemed too strategic to fall under enemy’s control.
– In the 60’s, it was also common to use nuclear explosions for civilian applications. A few examples are the Rulison Project, Colorado, 1969, which used an A bomb to fracture rocks and access shale gas. Another was the Chagan explosion (Kazakhstan, 1965), an experiment to create a dam downstream a river. There was even a project to use nukes for the purpose of digging a 2nd strait of Panama.
From 00:49 of the video below: the speaker is a PHD physicist from INSA, a first-class engineering institution in France. The pictures are self-explanatory.
I would like to again thank you for your much valued contribution, very intelligently summarised and presented. I personally learnt a lot from it.
It does open quite a new perspective: if this thesis is correct, than it proves that the Cabal did not hesitate using nuclear weapons in NY to advance its agenda. God help us all. With kind regards.
Oh, I see. Iran is the enemy of Israel so, according to your cartographical theory, the US attacks the next country over.
I suppose that might make sense, but it must be noted that in the 17 years the US has occupied Afghanistan it has not seen fit to actually attack Iran across the Afghanistan border.
So even though the genius Orloski agrees with your theory, I am just a little bit skeptical.
Hello FB; apologies if my interjecting was rude or irritating
The statement J2 made about thermal conduction being limited by section is correct.
I think that the point he was trying to make is that somebody disingenuous could for instance object to your argument that steel columns did not conduct the heat on their full length, but heated up so much locally at the basis, that this caused them to bend and collapse the towers. And you would have no way to prove this wrong, because there is no way to ascertain how/what fuelled the fire. We all know such objection would be far-fetched and simply BS, but considering that we are supposed to believe that 3 towers can be brought down with only 2 planes, it is better to polish one arguments. That’s the idea. All the best to you.
Permit me to summarize your reply: “Wah, wah, wah, here are some formulas I copied out of a book that proves that fire can not weaken steel.”
I don’t need a lecture on thermodynamics and heat transfer from a dull-witted clown like you. I know far more about the topics than you ever will, idiot.
Do not be naive. Khalezov is a part of game that may or may not be linked to 9/11. He is Viktor Bout’s lackey and was engaged in doing everything they could think of to keep Bout out of American hands. Including coming up with fascinating story of nukes under WTC towers story. Here is the timeline:
March 2008: Viktor Bout arrested in Thailand
July. 2010 Dimitri Khalezov book publication
Oct. 2010 Dimitri Khalezov by Daniel Estulin
Nov. 2010: Victor Bout extradited to the US
Nov. 2011: Victor Bout convicted and gets life sentence
I can’t find when the following v. long infomercial interview was made and who paid for it. Probably paid by Bout’s money.
This all seems to be spy-on-spy kind of stories. Fascinating. Would be great for a movie. But how much of it is true and what of it is true that is entirely different issue.
Khalezov was jailed in Thailand. His current status?
There are two possibilities that Khalezov made up the story in attempt to help Bout or that US authorities went after Bout because Bout was involved or knew too much about 9/11. It is telling that neither Bout nor Khalezov did get any protection from Russian security apparatus. Bout got life sentence in the US ad Khalezov was rotting in Thai prison and now is begging for money.
There are no sounds of explosives prior to the beginning of the collapse of the building. Once it starts to collapse, you are just seeing ejected air, like in a Verinage-type demolition. It’s like a Verinage, just not as neat.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GNhEpHfgfI)
Repeat to yourself: Explosions are common in fires. Demolition charges are explosions, but few explosions are demolition charges. No steel liquified, and explosives don’t work by generating heat, anyway. You can put your hand right on a freshly severed column. Don’t worry, you won’t get burned. Ever hear of a demolition crew waiting for the debris to cool before hauling it off?
They work by severing the support columns, and the results are unmistakable. There are no such reports from Plasco.
He sees what all “truthers” sees – what he wants to see.
Most recently, the truthers have come to the conclusion that the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran is now part of the CIA/Mossad conspiracy.
These people are deranged. There is no point in arguing with them.
I disagree with your nutty crank theories, therefore I must be a hasbara troll.
You people are mental.
You all talk about science as if you understand any or even know what it is. Clearly you don’t.
You’re all just a bunch of chattering nobodies, heating up a fetid little crank-ghetto.
There probably was forced convection in the building, you stupid nitwit. You don’t think a big fire draws in air?
If you are going to claim that every piece of evidence against your theory is faked then there’s no hope for you. No, I don’t think anyone removed explosions from those videos, many of which were recorded from television by people on the day of the attacks.
Yes, indeed it was, but that’s not exactly a news flash, you know.
You’d like to portray NIST as the big villain responsible for the 9/11 cover-up, although in fact the cover-up started already before dawn on Sept. 12, 2001 when Mayor Giuliani’s clean-up crews began hauling away truckloads of evidence from the WTC.
Got any all caps for that?
Indeed local, state, and federal law enforcement and fire inspectors should have been at the WTC immediately to secure the scene of the crime, begin to collect evidence, and prevent any illegal removal of evidence from the scene of the crime, including Mayor Giuliani’s.
Meanwhile, NIST did not even begin its own work until August 21, 2002.
You can keep things too short.
1. The “$21 trillion missing from the Pentagon” would mystify even most of the candidates I guess so easily enough deflected with something like “I wish you had sent me a note asking about that: there is a lot of stuff in the Auditor,-General’s report I could have looked up so we would both be able to know just what the issues might be”.
Also I wonder if you are referring to the $2.3 trillion Rumsfeld set someone on to who found it to be nearly all a problem of bad accounting systems? Now I see
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-missing-21-trillion-6-5-trillion-2-3-trillion-journal-vouchers.t9718/
2. As to supporting a new investigation even an unvarnished “no” wouldn’t affect the 90 per cent of typical audience members unless you got some predatory material into their heads like “in view of X, Y, Z which have become apparent since the Commision and NIST reports of more than a decade ago and the waste of trillions of dollars on unsuccessful wars that resulted from misguided reaction to 9/11 would either candidate support a new inquiry?”.
I have long since noted that no one we know of had a clearer simpler motive for getting the US into Afghanistan than ObL. Indeed, if he planned 9/11 it was his greatest success by far. But, once one gets into longer term more complicated motivations and purposes it is, as Ron has put it, hard to see what country benefited, or was likely to, other than Israel. Getting the US into battle against Israel’s Muslim enemies with a view to leaving Israel dominant in a Balkanised ME may seem a little farfetched but is logical.
Why don’t you continue your peacock display of superior intellect from the beginning of the 9/11 threads by setting out a coherent proof of why the Towers could not have fallen because of heat plus gravity couldn’t have without explosives?
Can you do that without reference to relying on the core collapsing much more slowly than was observed? If not I suppose it would be unfair to require you to actually know the specs of the core. Do you even know how to find out?
Here’s the thing. For those who really believe fire destroyed WTC1,2 and 7 they need to prove this experimentally. We do know that explosions can destroy buildings and other structures. We haven’t experimentally replicated fire causing the implosion/explosion of a steel-framed high-rise. This needs to be done. You can point to the Plasco building, but if you asked any demolition expert to replicate it experimentally with fire only they couldn’t. Repeatable scientific experiments are one of the basics of the scientific method and if they cannot be repeated then they aren’t scientific. So tell me where I can find the method on how to demolish steel-framed high rises with fire? If you can’t do this your views aren’t scientific, they are special pleading.
Then in the next comment MR MORON says this…
Question…what do you call a retard who proves himself an idiot…thereby saving one the trouble of doing so…?
–Fundamentals of Heat And Mass Transfer, Berman…page 594…
Nice going MR MORON…perhaps in your haste to pick up your PhD in thermal science you may have missed the part where I said this…
Well done MR MORON…Well done…we could almost feel that one from here…
Wow…it boggles the mind…
WHERE DID I EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT CONDUCTION…?
And my ‘argument’ has nothing to do with conducting heat through the columns…but with the simple fucking fact that there is a known science to determining the heating of an object exposed to a given fluid temperature…as in the NIST models…
And this PROVES THAT THOSE CLAIMS BY THE NIST ARE FALSE…END OF STORY…
Why do you choose to deliberately muddy the waters…like the know-nothing clown j2 [rhymes with ‘gay too’]…
I spoke very clearly and in depth about how sound thermal science proves that the SURFACE temperature could not have reached the SAME temperature as the flame…that is a scientific fact…
Then a complete fucking retard comes along and says that is not so…and then we are treated to a stoop and poop from a similarly ‘qualified’ chipmunk…
Let it go already…a number of people here have expressed their gratitude for my taking the time and effort to present some real science in a way that is understandable…if you don’t know the subject enough to know what’s even under discussion then that should be a clue not to obstruct here…
And you show that you don’t know the subject because you still have not answered the question…now for the third time…
But bin Laden said he had nothing to do with 9/11, and that as a devout Muslim he would not lie about such a thing.
I don’t see any tangible Israeli benefit. A negative consequence for Israel is that Iraq came to be dominated by Shia Muslims in close alliance with Iran, whereas previously Shia Iran and Sunni-dominated Iraq had been at loggerheads, which was surely in Israel’s interest.
The US, however, gained from 9/11 a pretext, sort of, for wars on seven Muslim countries, aimed primarily at ensuring US control of the greatest concentration of exploitable energy on the planet. In particular, the object was to gain a choke-hold on the supply of energy to China and other potential rivals.
Israel will never be dominant in the ME minus the US of A, Britain and France. Israel is a shitty little country with nukes, but they can’t use their nukes in a first strike without risking total annihilation. Already the Islamic state of Pakistan has nukes, Iran may soon have them and there is no reason to suppose that Russia would tolerate Israel simply taking over the ME by means of actual or threatened first use of nuclear weapons.
This discussion seems largely pointless (I mean the article and the entire thread). The article is not well-informed and many of the commentators are nutty anti-Semites and crackpot 9/11 conspiracy theorists deliberately or otherwise spreading nonsensical notions that discredit the obvious fact that 9/11 was either planned, or at least allowed, by the US Government. Otherwise, why no forensic investigation and no judicial inquiry? Instead the official account of the event was simply announced on 9/11, as if the US Government knew nothing in advance but new everything within a couple of hours after the event: a nonsensical thesis.
Bin Laden was almost certainly a US intelligence asset, who died probably of kidney disease in a US military hospital years before Obama’s Abbottabad raid, where the almost certainly long-dead Bin Laden was supposedly assassinated, his body dumped at sea, in defiance of Islamic custom and without any proof of identity being obtained. But who will discover the truth now? The Seal team that carried out the op was wiped out a couple of months later in an Afghanistan helicopter crash.
I am afraid that Mr. Unz is not a good analyst, and his Web site plays host to such a large crowd of nutters and anti-Semites that it’s really difficult to find any value here at all, with the exception of FB’s thermal analysis, which is new to me and compliments the circumstantial evidence and the kinematics of the collapse of the towers.
If you have anything beside driveling sneers to add to the conversation, go ahead. Otherwise, you might as well go piss up a rope.
The Israel project itself is just a component of a push for total global control. In The Great Game, Afghanistan is an important area to control and, as Jeffery Cohen has pointed out, it has a border with Iran, historically one of the great powers in that region. Then there’s the opium money that has played a huge role in geopolitics for well over a century. Mineral wealth is estimated to be vast too.
Well said, Can…I think you have basically popped their soap bubble…
This is the kind of writing I like to see, clear-headed and to the point…I agree with you on every aspect, in fact it is hard not to…
The amount of nonsense we have seen here is quite incredible…including those putting forth totally wacky ‘theories’ that would make a Ufologist blush…
As for Mr Unz and the over-the-top antisemitism fire that is continuously stoked here, it surely does a lot to discredit anything that appears on this website…
Maybe, you don’t know that. But I am completely convinced that OBL died long before Obama was a twinkle in your eye, and the entire Pakistan operation was a total fraud, and I find it hard to believe US Special Ops Command would not know that, esp. in light of the unbelievable story they presented, including the “at-sea burial” “in accordance with Islamic principles” (as usual, stating the opposite of the truth).
In any case, my point about Afghanistan was that the Taliban’s failure to hand over bin Laden, without any evidence presented against him, is fully in accordance with law. For the US to attack Afghanistan, with no evidence of bin Laden’s guilt, is utterly criminal (it would be a war crime even if there were evidence of bin Laden’s guilt, you would need evidence of Afghanistan’s guilt to justify an attack against Afghanistan).
Actually the biggest risk of a nuke attack comes from Israel. If US destroyed Israel, then maybe I would believe the claim of the Jew supremacists who destroyed Iraq. But instead US constantly helps Israel expand and weaponize its nuclear arsenal. Go figure!
I could go on but this is off-topic. Cheers.
What is the basis for this assertion? You do know that the Taliban had shut down Afghani heroine production, and that, right after the US invasion, that heroine rose to historical highs? And did you know that cheap heroine was flooded into Iran, causing massive (and ongoing) social problems? Did you also know that, due to these serious problems, Iran has the death penalty for heroine dealers, and that the vast majority of Iran death sentences are actually for these drug dealers? Did you also know that the US uses these executions to paint Iran as an undemocratic, illegitimate state?
Do you know also about covert military operations against Iran?
Do you know also about US bases placed throughout Iran, which US uses as a tool in (unlawfully but continuously) threatening Iran?
It’s a military maneuver. It is more propitious to attack a country from multiple directions, in the first place, and from the ground (instead of an amphibious assault), in the second place. Having bases in Afghanistan allows the US to mass troops on Iran’s border, much like it massed troops on Iraq’s border (in Kuwait). Obviously the US (illegal) conquest of Iraq would not have been as successful, absent that launching pad. You might note that, in 2001, there was no such launching pad against Iran.
Also Israel is not just determined to conquer the ME, it is determined to conquer the world. Of course it’s neighbors are a higher priority, as I noted in an earlier post, but all non-vassal states of the Empire are on the list.
No, it is a fact, you are a fucking hasbara troll. This is amply corroborated by the utter nonsense you spread in every single post, each with the sole aim of absolving your Jew supremacist homeland from the guilt it so clearly carries.
Actually Iran is also on the “list of 7”. Of course plans did not materialize as envisioned and Iran is still standing, but if can’t see that they are on the list, you simply aren’t looking.
Here is at least one tangible benefit: Iraq was compensating Palestinian families whose property had been illegally destroyed by Israel because Israeli did not like some family member (i.e., collective punishment). After the invasion, these payments stopped, and to date, AFAICT, have not been restarted. But in the longer term view, US now has troops on both sides of Iraq, providing nice launching pads for anti-Iran aggression. Iran was always at the end of the “list of 7”, according to General Clark.
Oh, I fixed that for ya! Granted, there was inside help too – largely by radical Jewish Zionists, but also some neo-con traitors, like Cheney, who were well-positioned to stop the investigations. Obviously elements of the US government and citizenry were also involved in that covert op, but many of them were Jewish.
This is not a trivial matter, because the problem you immediately have with alleging a wide-ranging and “tight” conspiracy among patriotic Americans is that nobody it is not very credible. Whereas it is obvious that a Jew supremacist/firster would never accuse Israel, come what may, if they did the job for Israel.
Most of the nutters here are the ones believing the perfect symmetrical collapse by fire theory. As to anti-Semites, there are often ones on this Web site, but I haven’t noticed them so much on this thread. You may be coming from the more standard Jew supremacist media, which doesn’t permit any real criticism of anything Jewish, and paints any criticism of anything Jewish as anti-Semitism. If you are not Jewish, it’s just plain retarded, if not suicidal, to let that be your standard.
That mixes goals and successes. Had Iraq been the “cakewalk” that the Neocons envisaged, Iraq would now be a pliant American vassal and a burr under Iran’s saddle. IOW, very good for Israel.
In the event, political incompetence conspired with poor military strategy to turn Iraq first into a hell, and then into ripe pickings for Iran.
Best laid plans of mice men…
As Iran, by virtue of its population, history, resources and geographical size is the natural Hegemon in the region, it presents the greatest threat to Israeli primacy in the ME. They’d love to break it up into smaller, more manageable chunks. Not to mention short-circuiting Hezbollah’s development into a military power. However, taking on Iran without controlling its borders with Iraq and Afghanistan was a bridge too far for the USM, so the strategy was to take those 2 first and so pin Iran in the middle. They failed, of course, on both counts. To the point where Afghan militias are fighting ISIS in Syria.
However, I agree that Israel’s ambitions aren’t the only ingredient in the soup. Plenty of good old-fashioned American Imperialists wanted to go for broke before China and Russia rose to Great Power status and could put Wolfowitz’s Eurasian “resources under consolidated control”. Those 3 countries, along with Syria, would complete America’s control of the ME’s resource base, and that would lend it great leverage over all consuming nations, but especially those of Europe (who had just intro’d the EUR) and China (who was on the cusp of joining the WTO).
In geo-politics, it ain’t the thought that counts. It may be what inspires action, but only results count.
Putin on 9/11 (and also Moon landing) is 100% on board with the official narrative.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkl56gX4_QU&lc%EF%BB%BF=
You are joking when you say that ObL as a devout Muslim wouldn’t have been lying when he denied involvement in 9/11 and said that, as a devout Muslim, he wouldn’t lie about that???
In contrast to wicked Christian liars like George W. Bush? Or any of the CIA conspirators who happen to believe in God? Why is he exempt from the normal questions you would ask of someone who was in danger of being handed over to the US?
I am not asserting anything here except that it would be extremely naive to take a murderers word that he isn’t a murderer. Like taking a pious paedophile priest’s word that he never buggered anyone.
“I spoke very clearly and in depth about how sound thermal science proves that the SURFACE temperature could not have reached the SAME temperature as the flame…that is a scientific fact…”
This is not a scientific fact. You are in error to think so.
Take your butane torch and heat with it a very small piece of copper. The copper will melt. Or put some tin in a steel spoon, put it on the stove and heat, the tin will melt. Or put your oven to 220 Celsius and a cake inside and forget it there for many hours. Your cake will burn as the whole cake (the inside and the outside) will reach 220 Celsius – this is why you are supposed to watch the time the cake is in the oven. If it would be as you say, the inside of the cake would never reach 220 Celsius and you could just scrap off the burned surface and the inside is fine, but it will be all burned.
There is a law that heat transfers from hotter to colder as long as there is a temperature gradient. If heat escapes from any material piece slower than it is added, the piece heats up and it will heat up to the higher heat level. There will be a fast temperature gradient in the surface to the cooler side, but as long as you keep on adding heat the temperature curve in the piece will climb up until it is practically a straight line up to a very fast gradient to the cooler side, which usually will not stay cool but also heats up. This is why you will not be able to approach a huge fire to a close distance, it heats the air around it and also you if you go too close.
Reaching a thermal equilibrium in a limited area does not require the system to be closed. It simply demands that the borders of the system have reached the equilibrium temperature. If you keep on adding heat faster than it can escape, this equilibrium temperature is the temperature where there is no heat gradient in the system. It means that all is in the temperature by which you heat the system. You have to apply heat to the whole area of the system in order to achieve it.
As an example, in a cold day, -10 Celsius, bring a steel beam, just like what was in WTC, and put is on the doorway so that half of it is inside the building in 22 Celsius and half outside in -10 Celsius and cover the doorway with clothes so that cold air does not come in. The inside part 5 meters from the door will reach 22 Celsius after some hours, while the outside part five meters from the door stays in -1o Celsius. The temperature gradient is in the doorway, so close to the door the beam feels cold. The system is not closed in your sense, but the borders of the system are 5 meters from the door and the borders are also in 22 Celsius. Therefore the whole beam 5 m from the door is in 22 Celsius. It is the same whatever heat transfer mechanism (conduction, convection, radiation) is used, only the time to reach the equilibrium is different.
But let us do this differently, let us take a 30 cm piece of the beam and put it in the doorway. Then the inside of the beam will stay cool. This is because heat is transferred to the beam through the surface inside the room and this surface is much smaller than in the previous case. Heat is transferred out of the beam by the same surface, the cross section of the beam. As now heat comes in shower than it goes out, the steel stays cool from inside. Only the surface of the beam reaches the room temperature.
If you still want to do it in another way, bring in the long steel beam half way to the doorway but suspend it to the upper level, not ground level, and set your house on fire. Assuming your house burns for several hours, 5 me from the doorway the beam will have the same temperature as the burning house on that level. There will be a very hot part of the beam inside the house, say 600 Celsius.
Hope this clarifies to you the issue. It looks to me that you have no formal education in physics, and if so, I suggest you read and think what I wrote. In order to convince people with your arguments, drop the offensive language, researchers do not use such, be very careful with your arguments, researchers are extremely difficult to convince, and if told that you have an error, check it and double-check it, in most cases they are correct. Keep cool, check your arguments many times, be polite, do not challenge people or call them morons, then maybe somebody will read your arguments. I am extra kind compared to most researchers as I taught also students who did not have a scientific background (but were not rude and stubborn like you are). From most researchers you should expect only contempt, so change your style, a kind advise.
FB, I wish you all the best. Improve your presentation style, maybe you will one day be a researcher.
Iris, thanks for posting the heat transfer law where the area A of the cross section is explicitly shown, but I do not think FB understands formulae. He mixed up torque with force earlier, which is a very basic error. He copies from books but does not seem to understand the meaning of the text and formulae. I first thought he does it on purpose to mislead people, but now I think he simply lacks education in physics, maybe he is quite young judging from the expressive use of language. But he does try to solve problems, so it is promising.
I sure do like the way you paid types tend towards the Ad Hominem attack, It sure does mark your slop for everyone to see.
Fact is, i have seen some very positive reactions to much of what i have to say about these topics like the Tuned Mass Damper and the sheet RDX in the floor pans, Mostly because it ANSWERS long held questions about the record breaking long fire and the TOTAL pulverization of everything in those spaces over those floors… So far you have not shared one single thing to explain the 100 day long fires or the mechanism to account for the fact everything was turned into dust, I have.
I can see your not going to reveal anything other than attacks and i also see you have a very closed mind as to the reality of this event, Many coming along and doing the hard work of reading the mass this thread has become will have open minds and a need to fathom the reality from the new comments and ideas added to the volume they already know, They will have much the same respect for your Anon screeds as i do. I know you will inflate your own BS to such proportions it will blind you to the fact they will just dismiss your crap.
Having talked with others about these things, having judged their reactions and having seen the counter commentary to the likes of you i can tell i have a very solid basis for continuing to follow the thinking.
I have found the need to attack your type has brandished at most turns in the time stream of these commentary sessions has only driven the normal onlooker to delve deeper into my claims.
I know the game you engage, I can trust the real seeker to make their own minds up about these things said, I don’t need to stand and scream attacks about your posts, your own words do a much better job than i could ever do.
So keep it up, The truth waits on your error. The seeker needs to see the attacks for what they are.
The seeker needs to see your blather and learn the net is full of shill/bot/trolls.
Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM)
Two days after 9/11 Netanyahu: “Next thing it will be not a car bomb in the WTC but a nuclear bomb, it wasn’t a nuclear bomb, it was 350 tonnes conventional bomb.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=81&v=ZJkVaEJ1byM
Netanyahu: Don’t worry about America:
There seems to be some confusion among some commenters that a steel-frame skyscraper cannot collapse because of fire. Theoretically it can.
To say that no steel-frame skyscrapers with a steel-frame core have not collapse from fire is correct, but it is not the same claim as to say that a steel-frame skyscraper with steel-frame core CANNOT collapse by fire.
To say that steel-frame skyscrapers with a steel-frame core do not collapse from fire means that in practice they do not. It is not the same as saying that the CANNOT.
Theoretically they can and more intelligent 911Truthers know they can. Therefore it is not possible to prove that they cannot, what FB has been trying to do.
I can explain a simple set-up where a steel-frame skyscraper will collapse from fire, only this is not occurring in practice. Assume that for some curious reason several floors in the building were filled with coal. (Like, there were the offices of an investment company which bought vast amounts of coal, but the price went down, so they stored the coal to their offices in wait of a better time to sell, very believable of course.) And then for some other curious reason people from the lift company wanted to open lift doors on the lowest floor of this investment company and also in the ground level, and for better ventilation the doors in the ground floor were open. Then for some other curious reason somebody set the coal on fire.
Of course, this is a coal grill with air coming from vents below. It will burn for many hours in temperatures well over 600 Celsius, it can go to 1000 Celsius if air is fed to coals. Assuming there is enough coal and enough time, there is no need to remove fire protection from steel columns. They will heat to over 700 Celsius and buckle. Then one floor will collapse and nothing will stop all floors from collapsing.
So, it is extremely simple to give a theoretical example where a steel-frame skyscraper collapses because of fire. This is exactly why an argument of controlled demolition should not be built on the impossibility of fires to cause a collapse of steel-frame high rises. Basically, the claim is true, steel-frame high rises do not collapse by fire, but they CAN theoretically do so. This is why the argument for controlled demolition is much better to be based on other arguments, which there are several.
I still believe the answer is the corrupt financial, Israeli, CIA and criminal elements that first came together with Iran Contra. These came together in Russia in the 90s as documented by Martin Armstrong, Edmond Safra is tied to Iran Contra, and are still acting in the Middle East.
Be that as it may, the Taliban acting in accordance with the highest principles by refusing to hand Osama bin Laden over to America was not something that the Israelis could have counted on. One might well wonder at the soundness of planning a false flag 9/11 for an invasion of Iraq that was predicated on bin Laden remaining scot-free for years afterward.
I don’t think USA ever wants to have war with Iran. Netanyahu who Obama once called, “Chicken Shit” has those illusions. Netanyahu is a yoyo in USA hands, and a putty who USA molds how they want.
9/11 has three components, and this is how I feel about them:
1. Who done it? My belief it is an Inside Job. Ron Unz with his Freudian Slip agreed with me.
2. How it was done? I don’t care about the chosen method. At the end of the day, we all agree that 9/11 is fake like a 3 dollars bill.
3. The motive for 9/11? I believe that 9/11 was done to destroy ISISraHell. Americans are very pro-Israelis and it takes to undo the brain washing they have been subjected to.
Look at your above post #1570:
Yes, the Shia Crescent has been empowered, from Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon ….. Especially, Bab-el-Mandeb can be closed anytime to deny Israel access through Red Sea.
No doubt about Chuck being a genius, as he was a Rhodes Scholar.
I believe Chuck and my beliefs are same as Mr. Ron Unz and Dr. Philip Giraldi, but I am the only one jumping up and down with glee as a child screaming, “mommy, mommy the King is naked”.
Manafort plea bargain shows that in 2012 he was connected with Israel. US Congress didn’t give 25 standing ovation to Netanyahu in 2016, where he as a foreigner and Head of State was interfering in USA against a sitting USA President. USA Congress is not full of traitors, basically they were exposing Netanyahu interfering in USA against a sitting USA President. Even though Obama is black, no American liked their President being demeaned by a foreign Head of State in USA. And, this was not the first time Netanyahu demeaning Obama.
Do I condone the way USA is going and destroying Muslim’s country to get to Israel? No, I don’t.
Contrarian III says
Iris says
Me: Nutters all [well; perhaps not utu].
How Khalezov is not just wrong, but incredibly, stupidly wrong:
Containment of Underground Nuclear Explosions: “It was not until ‘Blanca,’ October 30, 1958, that a test was conducted exactly at 300 (yield)**1/3 feet to test the depth scale. The containment of the Blanca explosion, however, was unsuccessful and resulted in a surface venting of radioactive material. … Today, the general depth of burial can be approximated by the equation:
Depth = 400 (yield)**1/3, where depth is measured in feet and yield in kilotons. The minimum depth of burial, however, is 600 feet.”
Me: OK; feed in 150kt, cube root = 5.313292846…
400 * cube root = 2125 in feet, ~650m
But the US/Sedan and Russian/Chagan shots were clearly not as deep in the earth as this, and both resulted in *dramatic* surface venting.
“The explosive device [Sedan] was lowered into a shaft drilled into the desert alluvium 194 m (636 ft) deep.”
1. Crater from the 1962 “Sedan” nuclear test as part of Operation Plowshare. The 104 kiloton blast displaced 12 million tons of earth and … the resulting crater is 100m (330ft) deep with a diameter of about 390m (1,280ft).
alt=”The Sedan Crater”
Sedan’s fallout contamination contributed a little under 7% to the total amount of radiation which fell on the U.S. population during all of the nuclear tests at NTS. … The explosion created fallout that affected more US residents than any other nuclear test, exposing more than 13 million people to radiation and marked the end …
2. Described as a “near clone” of the Sedan shot, Chagan’s yield was the equivalent of 140 kilotons of TNT … The resultant lake has a diameter of 408m (1,338ft) and is 100m (328ft) deep.
alt=”Chagan crater”>
Contrast: Khalezov p338
alt=”Khalezov’s demolition ‘idea’ in regard to each of the Twin Towers of the WTC”
“Initially, it was supposed to be the two vertical boreholes under each of the Twin Towers, but later it was changed to two horizontal fortified delivery tunnels starting from beneath the WTC-7 and leading to the zero-boxes beneath each of the Twin Towers at the same old depths (50 meters below their lowest foundations).”
Q: Risible? Untenable? A: Yep * 2; QED; irrational, impossible, finito.
Not so BTW; the above is *formal proof* that nukes going off 50m below WTC foundations would blow great holes in New York.
Q: Who could/would believe such stupid nonsense?
PS Any/all primary sources pushing ‘new physics’ idiocy, like Khalezov (nukes, ‘dustify’) and Judy Woods (DEW, ditto) are cranks, and any commenters +vely citing their work are attempting to do direct damage to the ‘truther’ cause. I offer three descriptors for all such people; 1) stupidly ignorant and/or 2) stupidly destructive then 3) outright nutters. Notice the commonality: Stupid, as in:
No new physics, stupid! Khalezov, Woods & Co, be gone!
Apologies, j2.
Everything here, including the over-the-top antisemitism, was discredited in the mainstream long before Ron Unz created the website. Unz is like an ethnically pure German in mid 30s Germany who thinks the Jews are more sinned against than sinning and tries to improve their image despite increasing personal costs. One can imagine such a person might resort to exaggeration.
You agree with that, but I see a tiny problem inasmuch America is the worlds most powerful economy and also second to none in slick mainstream media manipulation. Any American establishment that could perpetrate or allow other government to perpetrate a false flag 9/11 would be so secure that it could simply act against foreign governments at will and brainwash American citizens into backing their country 100%. Iran would have already been destroyed by such a US government.
The idea of the US allowing a foreign power to execute a terror attack such as 9/11 has a serious problem inasmuch the US would hardly be able to trust that the attacks would not for instance go crashing into a nuclear power stations and cover the East Coast of America in long lasting radioactivite particles.
After the one rogue jet had crashed into the WTC (and so when everyone knew this was a crisis), fighters were scrambled from Langley AFB in Virginia to intercept the rogue airliners –the fighters went straight out over the Atlantic because that is what the pilots had trained to do.
To give one even more of an idea of how difficult it would be run a let 9/11 happen operation without taking an unconscionable gamble of not losing control, look at the way a Russian plane was shot down in Syria yesterday when the Israelis used its flight path to cloak a airstrike, there was also the French frigate Auvergne in the area.
Did you know they had a drill which modeled exactly this on exactly the same day?
Professional pilots disagree with you.
Your emotional reaction is irrelevant. Stay objective, work what is true, and do the emotional bullshit later.
“This is why the argument for controlled demolition is much better to be based on other arguments, which there are several.”
Please elaborate. I am interested in your thoughts.
Having said that, I would guesstimate the odds of your scenario happening in real-life to be roughly equivalent to the odds of flipping a coin and having it land on its edge rather than top or bottom. In other words, negligible
May I inquire whether you can find a rational answer to the objection that none of the Creator gods, at least the Abrahamic versions, can possibly exist because they all posit that the deity is omnipotent and cares what we do but never gets round to telling most of the 6.5 billion of us which version of what to believe and what to do is right?
I suppose the Hebrew tribal deity is a possibility but most Jews seem to have gone soft and reinvented him as an ecumenical SNAG. It amazes me that very bright people are believers so I am always hoping for an answer which isn’t the usual witty evasion.
Iraq was a cakewalk before General Garner was replaced with Paul Bremer who disbanded Iraq military that lead to insurgency. But this was the neocons’ plan from the very beginning. Some Pentagon people like Garner thought that removal of Saddam power structure would be enough and rebuilding of Iraq and building democracy would proceed but neoncons’ objective was to destroy Iraq and turn it into the zone of sectarian and ethnic strife that would lead to chaos and set Iraq development back 40 years. All accomplishment of secularization by Saddam regime were to be destroyed. So when Wolfowitz said it would be a cakewalk and that the war would pay for itself with Iraq money kept in American banks it was an intentional lie. The 2003 war was a part of Yinon plan to destroy all semi-secular functional and industrializing countries in Israel neighborhood like Iraq, Libya and Syria because they could pose a challenge to Israel. Besides under the strife and without functioning Iraqi government the 20 or so billions of dollars in cash could have been stolen under the Paul Bremer watch. When Bremer was about to leave somebody sensible in Washington halted a flight from NY Federal Reserve with tonnes of 100 dollar bills which Bremer still want to have.
I’ll grant you a small point if you are right about the modeling of what you imply was the shooting down of a commercial airliner. But that’s what peacetime warriors do: model everything they can think of. (One reason is so they can see what looks absurd or otherwise suggests problems). Given that it could not be known by NORAD for 99 per cent of the flights that they were heading for buildings where there were people and even shooting them down over New York could be seen as possibly killing more people than leaving them to fly on I still suggest that there is no point at all to be made about the failure of the air force to do anything useful.
Are there lift shafts in this hypothetical building, because you don’t need so much fuel then. (By the way, just a build up of sooty residue on an unswept chimney can go on fire at over 1000 degrees and structurally damage the chimney.)
There was not a single survivor from the the two floors just below the plane impact in the north tower.
Chuck a genius despite not sounding like one? Chuck a genius because he was a Rhodes Scholar? Well Rhodes Scholars aren’t often stupid though I’ve definitely known some who are no geniuses (I cite at least one of Australia’s Rhodes Scholar Prime Ministers, Tony Abbott e.g.)
But I don’t think Chuck claims to be more than a Fulbright Scholar. So not a Rhodes Scholar though I’ve only just looked him up because you surprised me.
Emotions are for dealing with people. He is laughing at you.
I think I saw it in Towering Inferno.
“Please elaborate. I am interested in your thoughts.”
I do not want to make another long comment on this thread, see
http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2018/09/11/919/
Chandler’s free-fall of WTC7 and Chandler’s action-reaction principle applied to external walls of WTC1 are strong, also high temperatures after the event shown by thermal photos is strong, and iron spheres in the dust is quite strong, but suffers from lack of a proof of the origin of the dust.
“Having said that, I would guesstimate the odds of your scenario happening in real-life to be roughly equivalent to the odds of flipping a coin and having it land on its edge rather than top or bottom. In other words, negligible”
Extremely negligible, but if you try to present an argument that the collapse of WTC1 was not started by fire, the opponent can propose this scenario, say that it shows that fire can collapse the building and say that there must be many other scenarios where a fire collapses the building, have you proven that they all have a negligible probability? Then you have to say, no, we have no idea how the fires were inside the building, fire can spread in unpredictable ways, we cannot check all possible cases, there are far too many of them. Then your opponent just smiles: you failed your proof. The argument that by statistics steel-frame skyscrapers extremely seldom fall because of fire and 3 fell in 9/11/2001 is as good as it goes. It has the counterargument that planes seldom hit skyscrapers, so no wonder that the event is very rare.
Where does ObL come into this in the first place? As far as I can tell, his name was magically introduced by a bunch of talking heads and then reinforced by the torture-induced confessions of a possible KSM.
Can I ask you a straight question, WOz?
Do you believe that the towers collapsed:
A) mostly due to structural failure because the fires were just too intense
B) because it was a controlled demolition?
So you’ve never seen any evidence? You just assume the TV that lied to you about all the other things is telling the truth this time.
Nice.
My bad, and I apologize for my mistake. However, I consider Chuck to be very intelligent and well versed.
Not all the Zodiac letters are genuine, and he did not expose himself by writing them because he did not do investigators the courtesy of giving his real name and return address. They had no clue who he was. Rumsfeld is known and were someone to want to kill him as vengeance for 9/11 he is very vulnerable now. Cheney too. The state of Israel is also very vulnerable if it became widely suspected by American that they had been behind 9/11. Nothing would need to be proved but the subsidies would dry up. Anyway,your argument has nothing to do with the case because Griffin is known and would be easy to shut up or discredit or jail for internet chld por and then suicide.Or just jail him for tax evasion. He has never even been tax audited–unlike Tea Party donors.
Rumsfeld and his former protege Cheney are not going to walk around as sitting ducks waiting for someone to be convinced enough by professor Griffin’s arguments in book after book to do a John Hinckley Jr. on them. The other side of the coin is Griffin is either a brave man or he does not actually think he is is any danger.
Re: US attacking Iran from Afghanistan, I was speaking of conventional warfare. What you say about the US-stoked Afghan heroin trade is, I believe, correct and it is not surprising that it has caused serious harm in Iran as it has in other neighboring countries and throughout the world.
Whether the Israeli Government truly aims to conquer the world is something to which I am not privy, but the way that the Israelis had their arses kicked during the their attempt to occupy Southern Lebanon and steal the waters of the Litani River in 2006 suggests they have a way to go before they achieve a successful occupation of Moscow and Beijing.
Far from it. I come from the point of view that holds that anti-Semitism is absolutely essential to the maintenance of Jewish influence in America and Europe. Without overt anti-Semitism, the harm that Jewish interests do to the communities among which Jews live would be subject to open condemnation and restriction. As it is, Jewish interests vigorously and openly promote the destruction of the European nations as both racial and cultural entities, while at the same time covertly promoting harmless but visible forms of anti-Semitism — the painting swastikas, the cartoon portrayal of Jews with large noses, etc., and indeed the kind of anti-Semitic comment that takes up so much space here at Unz.com.
Thanks for the grown-up comment. A good summation, I think.
125 is a very high iq. Not high enough to plan something so monumentally complex as 911, along with its ultimate long term goal of coverup and mass deception, aided by willing allies in the MSM, with the intention of long term, unending war in the middle east to the benefit of Israel. I refuse to believe Bush was capable of being the mastermind of something like that nor would he have any personal reason to want 911 to happen.
I believe the people who planned this are probably of the same caliber as Henry Kissinger intellectually and with the morals of Machiavelli. Bush is smart but, but not that smart. And he was a bit morally corrupt, but certainly no Machiavelli!
Overall I don’t view Bush, the man, in a horrible light. I hope you understand my meaning now.
I’d just hit the LOL button, but it mostly doesn’t work for me, as now.
But I had a serious point, namely, that there is no real evidence that Osama bin Laden was in any way responsible for 9/11.
Although on the FBI’s most wanted list, that was for the bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa, not 9/11. And it is a fact that he was reported by the MSM (I gave a link above) very shortly before 9/11 to have been treated for kidney failure in a US military hospital, which suggests that his relationship with the US Government was not exactly as the US Government has sought to convey.
What would be the point? Do you think that the FBI presenting parts with serial numbers would convince a single person? Truthers would just claim the FBI fabricated the evidence.
Idiotic truthers keep lying about this. The small amount of freefall time only applies to the “north face” of the building:
And, once again, the video clearly shows the interior of the building collapsing first.
Except by actually reading the NIST report and understanding it.
Ladies and gentlemen (but mostly Nazis), a new Unz stupidity record has been set. Can anyone top it?
Nonsense. That “open condemnation and restriction” would be attacked as anti-semitic. You’ve completely lost the plot.
crimson2, while I understand the point you’re trying to make, please watch this brief footage starting here at 6:3o. The footage is of Ashleigh Banfield and Brian Williams of MSNBC both revealing that they and the fire department were all expecting WT7 to fall –all along– and that when it fell, it was no surprise to them. This is simply inexplicable:
Starting at @ 6:30 Ashleigh Banfield of MSNBC, with WTC behind her states: “The brown building, the tall one, is number 7 world trade center, [I] heard several reports from several different officers now, ‘That is the building that is going to go down next’”.
Then at 6:45 Brian Williams states (with footage of the WTC7 collapse on screen): “What we have been fearing all afternoon has apparently happened, we were watching number 7 World Trade [sic]… which was part of the ancillary damage of the explosion and collapse of the other 2… “
Then later in the footage (7:15):
I really recommend everyone to watch that full video. You are able to hear the demolition explosions on camera just before the building falls. Demolition is really undeniable.
Many Cass Sunstein followers doing his bidding by trying to obfuscate facts. 911 was a fraud and a false flag. Office fires do not bring down steel buildings. If any of you still do not believe, listen to the audio of a victim on September 11th. CeeCee Lyles was a flight attendant on United Airlines Flight 93. Prior to that she worked as a police officer. Here is the message she left to her husband in which she asks him to “listen carefully.” Note the 35 second mark and what she whispers.
No, in the film Towering Inferno the lift just came back and people fell out burning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermobaric_weapon
At the North Tower the jet fuel fell down the loft shaft and seems to have ignited something like a fuel air explosion than sent the elevator like a bullet down to the ground floor lobby and blasted though the doors into the ground floor lobby so that people who had been standing near the doors waiting for an elevator were burned to death and the windows of the lobby were blown out. You can see for yourself the blasted ground floor lobby and hear the screams when the filmmaker walked into that lobby with firefighters maybe 5 minutes later.
A: IF so THEN by you. You clearly have not been paying attention;
wherein this video was cited, showing the opposite side of a more common video’s point of view of WTC7 free fall collapse. Noteworthy to be seen on Rurik’s video are a series of flashes…
No, IF anyone is lying THEN it’s you.
Wow. This pathetic piece of shit thinks his life is worth something because people at Unz agree with him? Kind of sad, dipshit.
Going back to your first dumbass post:
A bullshit, stupid lie.
Here’s the NIST report on fires: https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=101028
Chapter 5 is called HEAT TRANSFER MODELING and it starts on page 83.
The NIST describes in great detail the tests they performed to validate their modelling. Get reading.
This how-did-they-know-before-it-happened guilty knowledge stuff is like an episode of Columbo, and like that very satisfying show the implication is something has been proved to a “beyond reasonable doubt” standard whether the suspect denies it or not. But in fact if they denied it there would be a lot of difficulty getting a conviction in a real world court for Columbo’s fictional screen cases.
Maybe there were explosions, but that is a long way from establishing that the audible apparent detonations that many people heard were set off deliberately by General Myers on the instructions of Donald Rumsfeld and Giuliani (who was in on it) forgot not to take the fifth around reporters.
To Jeffery Cohen, Wizard of (Zio)Oz said: “But I don’t think Chuck (Orloski) claims to more than a Fulbright Scholar. So not a Rhodes Scholar though I’ve only just looked him up…”
Greetings WiZ!
… Fyi, in January 1986, the American Fulbright committee nominated me to matriculate at Sofia U., Bulgaria; area of research, the Pan Slav movement and its impact upon the Bulgarian revolution.
… A question on ex-Australian P.M., Rhodes scholar, Tony Abbott, who you claim is “no genius.” (zzZigh)
… Maybe not all that bright, but at least P.M. Abbott never fucked with government prosecutorial minds about what the meaning of “is” is. (Re; Sex, WJC: what is it?)
I don’t think you have to go the route that ObL is a committed truth-teller (though, do you know of any other “lies” he made?)
But here’s the rub: he claimed responsibility for many attacks. The whole point of “terrorism” is to claim responsibility for your attacks. Why? Because the definition of terrorism is violence against “innocents” in order to advance a political agenda by spreading terror, causing the attacked population to follow your political agenda. Indeed, this is the kind of terrorism US, UK, and Israel constantly engage in. They openly attack a country – economically, militarily, etc. – and threaten further attacks unless the country makes a political change. In countries like Iran, they are even more direct, saying they hope the population, reeling from the terror attacks, will overthrow the government and install one friendly to the terrorists.
To deny responsibility is to negate your most perfect, stunning “act” ever. I.e. it is to have done this miraculous operation but get no result at all.
It simply makes no sense in the “ObL is a terrorist” narrative, which is the official story.
lol. Check out the 0:31 mark on slow speed. I think we found the real culprits!
Or maybe UFOs are really Mossad agents? Anyway, thanks for the laugh. Yes, Rurik is an absolute fucking moron so him falling for a fake video is not surprising in the least.
Guys, even the Youtube commenters noticed this video was fake. Come on.
I have yet to hear any argument that the failure to apprehend bin Laden had anything to do with the planning of 9/11 or that his apprehension was an integral part of the plan. There was always the possibility he would be caught even without Taliban involvement. I think ObL was simply one of the patsies for the operation. Indeed, failure to capture him could be seen as beneficial to the plan, as they could continue to raise his spectre to invoke fear, which is the best mechanism to make their war and police state propaganda effective.
Never forget how dumb you guys are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8VAsoVuShM&feature=youtu.be
Nobody, and I mean, nobody, has the “ultimate answer”. Even the Big Bangers, at the end of the day, resort to “witty evasion” (it’s always been there, which is akin to, it’s “turtles all the way down“).
I don’t subscribe to any Abrahamic religion so I am not an expert to answer your particular question. I do have a fair amount of respect for people who believe it, to the extent it is non-violent and non-oppressive to non-believers. And I also have a profound respect for the morals – if not the narrative – of Christianity.
LOL…I’m very familiar with this ‘document’…
That’s not actually a heat transfer analysis…it is the equivalent of that guy heating pennies with the propane torch…
That’s what they did here they used a ‘spray-burner’ of unspecified flame temperature and heated up sample steel beams…
Like the fool with the pennies they actually didn’t get the results they were looking for…have a look yourself at the graphs…mostly the SURFACE temps don’t get past 400 C…
Then they upped the ante and used a 3 megawatt spray burner to get surface temps up to a maximum of 800 C…
And the funniest thing about this is that all those charts showing the heat curves start going down with time, after the initial heating…LOL
And nowhere in there do even the surface temps reach 1,000 C as they claim on their website and which I cited…as I already explained that is a physical impossibility…
Also have a look at their references…that is quite a joke…mostly building engineer publications where they deal with thermal science on a mickey mouse level…
Thanks for the chuckle numbskull…
The world works in mysterious ways.
Any chess player knows that to win sometimes requires sacrificing a pawn, or to advance, sometimes requires taking two steps back. Israel was defeated in this particular ambition because of Iran. I do think Iran is outside of Israel’s control orbit, outside the Empire, hence the Empire’s efforts to destroy it.
Note that I wrote, the Rabbis (and Blue Bloods) are determined to conquer the world. I never claimed they have achieved total success. But I suggest reading the Protocols. They provide a lot of useful context. Implementing such a plan by a small group – maybe a few thousands who really understand it – is no trivial feat. Doesn’t mean they aren’t trying, and aren’t remarkably successful in countless ways, but 1,000 people herding 7 billion in unison, who were all quite extremely different only a short 100 years ago, is, to me, a sign of remarkable success.
You do not think Khalezov is a dis-info agent of sorts? I surely think so. If he knew so much about 9/11 why is he still alive or not in prison? You do no suppose that he was turned while in prison (for his release and dis-info services)? He certainly makes outlandish, unsubstantiated claims that, if one is to belief his story, one would do so purely by his word-of-mouth. If you have not read his book, I offer these passages from his book and let the reader make up his/her own mind.
From Dimitri Khalezov’s book: 9/11thology:The “third” truth about 9/11 v.4. July 2013
Download from here a PDF version or from his website, which you’ve referenced:
***pg numbers refer to the numbering in the pdf itself and NOT the acutual numbers of the book (they are off by one page) …. emphasis is my own.***
So much nonsense in your post, but I thought I’d bite on this one.
In classic demolition, the inside of the building IS collapsed first in what is termed an implosion. What you want to do is have the building collapse into the middle of the building, which increases the chances the building collapses into its own footprint, as opposed to outside. As described here:
And this one – also linked in the thread and showing the opposite side:
What can I say – crimson2 is a gift that keeps on giving. Lol!
No need to be nasty. FB made some good posts. If you don’t like it and you can’t manage a civil rebuttal then probably better you go play elsewhere.
Another idiot who fell for the hoax video!
Did they create the wave, or are they just the surfer? Coalescence of humanity seems to be inevitable, with or without the protocols. To what degree are they really in control?
That’s an open question, btw. For lack of comparative reference points, I’m at a loss to say whether they are in a bit of control or a lot of control over our lives.
The north face of WTC7 is where they measured the free-fall collapse from. However, I’m not really sure why this is significant. If it was only the north face that fell at free-fall for 2.25 – 2.5 seconds then this is still evidence of demolition. Column strength does not go to zero and free-fall still occurred for roughly 8 stories. Why did resistance all of a sudden just stop for 8 stories? There is no way within the confines of the fire theory that this is possible. The NIST model itself does not allow for free-fall.
You do see the west penthouse start to collapse right before the roofline, but the west penthouse is still visible above the roofline when the roofline starts to descend at free-fall. Once again, how does this in anyway provide evidence for a fire theory opposed to demolition? In an implosion you want to pull the building inward so this is still evidence for demolition.
Yep,
and is clearly attempting to become an apprentice ‘truther,’ since s/he has now taken to exposing fake videos. But even fakes, when mis-using real footage, can’t disguise what ‘went down:’
If it looks like a duck – fake that.
FB is the idiot who said to me:
Now, I’m not going to indulge his little corn fetish, but I am going to remind him that he’s a huge failure. He knows it, so it’s not even that much of a dig.
Now, if you want to play ref, call it fairly. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
It isn’t.
How do you know this? All free fall means is that none of the exterior columns are providing support. They are broken/damaged, have fallen inward–whatever happened they aren’t providing resistance.
The interior collapse is not evidence either way, but the fact that the interior collapsed first proves unequivocally that the building itself didn’t collapse at free fall speed, only part of it fell at free fall speed.
What disproves the demolition theory is that there are no explosions.
Objection. My “what is always was” is based on my interpretation of the conservation ‘laws,’ as I wrote – and is not now and never was any attempt at “witty evasion.” A ‘creation’ by some alleged supernatural deity, based on *zero* evidence, with the same conservation laws making no ‘external communication’ possible = *no* evidence even possible makes a laughing-stock of any ‘believer’ in any such nonsense. AFAIK, ‘run of the mill’ Big Bangers claim that the universe appeared out of nowhere [possibly as a result of some ‘rogue’ quantum fluctuation] = a really screwy interpretation, and hardly different than a supernatural creation.
allow priests to bless soldiers going off – to murder for spoil. Bah.
It seems Bin Laden was pronounced dead 9 times overall – which means he must have been resurrected 8 times. So we needn’t worry about him, he was apparently very cooperative.
The only conservation law that holds, allegedly, in quantum physics, which obviously is involved in the Big Bang theory, is conservation of energy. However there is no way to know that this principle would hold in the past, or particularly in the case of the Big Bang. You are assuming a historical continuum where the laws of nature, as we understand them, are constant, with no foundation for so believing, particularly in the Big Bang scenario. While you don’t refer to that as a “witty evasion”, I do, because you have evaded the question of “where did the energy for the Big Bang come from” by saying “it was there before”. So I can keep going back to some event, and ask where the energy came from, and you will say “it was there before”. You see, turtles all the way down.
Now, the only real meaningful distinction between a God universe and an energy universe is that God has intelligence. So, essentially, religious folks posit that thus “energy” which, in your model, always existed, is called “God”, and that this energy has intelligence. This intelligence manifests itself in the sun, the planets, life, man, consciousness, etc.
Now you can claim: well, there is no proof of this intelligence, I choose to deny it.
To which I would respond: there is indeed abundant proof of this intelligence, which you just choose to ignore. As a follow-up to my earlier post, which I posted before completing it: I posit that, absent intelligence, the formation of only a small part of life, mammalian glands (and all of its requirements), is impossible). I had calculated, in that prior post, the odds that a random mutation would yield mammary glands at 1 in 10^155 if it only requires 512 base pairs to express all of the required hardware (including brain firmware for nursing)! That is equivalent to having a number of “observable universes” equal to the number of atoms in our observable universe – where that universe consists of sextillion stars (i.e., all of the stars which science has ever observed). I.e., if you would count the number of atoms in a system having the number of observable universes equal to the number of atoms in our observable universe. The point here is that the odds of that are virtually zero.
But: can only 512 base pairs really suffice to express mammalian glands and the nursing instinct? How much is 512 bytes? Well, a single ASCII character is composed of one byte. So 512 bytes is roughly a short paragraph of text. I don’t know the exact number to express all of that complexity, but let’s assume it’s 100,000 base pairs. This is a reasonable estimate, given that a human genome contains about 3 billion base pairs, and mammary glands are a fairly complex organ, akin to the heart, kidney or liver, and 100,000 occurs 30,000 times in 3 billion.
Now what is 2^100,000? WOW! 10^30,225! Remember, from above, how massively large 10^155 was, so very very large that the “there are so many star systems” does not even begin to offer a satisfactory explanation! 10^30,225 is so large it is far beyond any capacity to conceptualize it. It is, for all purposes, infinity, and the odds of 1 in 10^30,225 is 0 – i.e., impossible.
So I think there is intelligence in the universe, and so there is a God. Assuming, of course, that we are not living in a video game :).
What always strikes me as utterly amusing is that smug atheists think they are so superior, just because they pick some other fantasy to believe – but in their case, I actually think the fantasy is impossible. On the other hand, I do not think God is impossible.
That’s not Christian or moral, that’s amoral politics (Satanism perhaps). Such acts violate numerous Commandments (against killing, stealing, coveting, etc.).
How stupid does one need to be to take a run at a 7 ft, 300 lb bouncer…?
That requires a degree of stupidity that actually goes against the most basic instinct…self preservation…
That’s you ‘gay2’…you think that because you’re sitting at a keyboard, you’re safe…but you’re going to be taken apart here…I’m going to pop you like a big juicy zit…
You make the BIG MISTAKE of mentioning here that other thread where you also took a run at me, regarding the wind load issue…and do you remember what happened…?…I sent you flying across the yard with one swift kick, like a retarded little chihuahua that makes the mistake of taking a run at an angry biker…
You think that’s not there for everyone to check…?…well let me refresh your fucking memory…you demonstrated there that you don’t know the first thing about physics…and then you ran away crying…
You see stupid one…there can be no bluffing or bullshitting in physics…everything is quite precise…so your stupid little gibberish about making cakes and piano wire doesn’t change the fact that you are unable to answer the two very simple questions I asked in my last message to you…
You choose not to answer because you know you are trapped…so you try to ignore those PRECISE PHYSICS QUESTIONS and go into some kind of little dancing jig instead…
No matter, let us first examine the issue of that last thread since you are stupid enough to bring it up [you never cease to amaze me with your stupidity..one would think that after being so humiliated you would never bring up that humiliation again..but you are way more stupid than average]…
So let us recall that exchange on the other thread…I stated quite factually that very tall buildings are designed to handle wind load as the biggest load…as opposed to the weight of their own structure…this is well known…
But being a complete fucking moron who knows absolutely nothing about engineering or physics…you decided to take a run at the wind load calculation I performed…you claimed this…
I had said in that discussion that because of the high wind loads they were designed to withstand, the towers would have actually been built up to 10 times stronger than needed to carry their own weight…here is an article by a professional engineer on the tower strength calculations…
So who the fuck do you think you are fooling asswipe…?
Do you really fucking think that you can spew bullshit here about physics and engineering…which can be easily proved or disproved…?
But don’t worry…we have a lot more ground to cover to expose the true depth of the bullshit you have piled onto this discussion board…and that’s what is really the problem here…that you have no respect for the discussion or any of the participants here…that you think you can throw horseshit in everyone’s face here and then simply walk away…thinking that nothing will happen…
Well it’s fucking happening bozo…right here and right now…your entire bullshit is being dismantled like a cardboard box…
Let us continue…in my comment here I presented the wind load calculations…
I found that the building would need to be able to withstand a BENDING MOMENT of nearly 7 billion newton meters…about 2.5 million ton feet in US units…here is a free body diagram I have constructed that shows the calculations…
The units are in SI [metric] but the result is the same…the total bending moment is nearly 7 billion newton meters…[2.5 million ton feet]…
That’s where you jumped in claiming that a moment is not a force…which is technically correct…but a moment is a LOAD, just as a force is a load…and BOTH MOMENTS AND FORCES NEED TO BE REACTED BY THE STRUCTURE…ie the structure must be strong enough to withstand all forces and moments…
That is elementary physics…namely Newton’s Third Law, which states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction…that counts for not just forces but for moments…which are simply forces multiplied by a distance…
Any kind of structure needs to handle both moments and forces…do you dispute that…?
It is elementary physics…
–Mechanics of Materials, Hibbeler…page 6
Wikipedia has an adequate explanation of bending moment…
Now all of that is very straightforward for any engineer [which you claim to be…LOL]…yet you came back to my wind load analysis with this horseshit…
So there we have all the evidence we need to expose you fully my dear little retarded chihuahua…
There is plenty wrong with everything you said…all of it is pure bullshit…first of all a moment [aka torque…aka couple] must be reacted also…just like a force must be reacted…as we have already discussed…strike 1…
Now you have also stated here that the forces resulting from a couple using my numbers are found by dividing the torque by HALF the distance of the side of the building
Of course that is complete bullshit…I replied to this garbage of yours and pointed out to you that to find the axial forces in a couple, the torque [or bending moment, these terms are generally interchangeable] must be divided by the FULL distance of the side of the building…as per my reply to you here…
I pointed out to you that what you attempted to do is to calculate the axial forces of a torque [aka couple]…which is fine because as you can see from the free body diagram above, the bending moment does produce forces of a couple…the side of the building farthest from the wind will be in compression, so there will be a couple force acting down and adding additional load to the existing gravity load…
The side on which the wind is hitting will be in tension by the same amount, thereby subtracting from the gravity load on that side…now that is all well and good, because those EXTRA forces [albeit small] still need to be taken into account…
But this in no way provides the REACTION THE BENDING MOMENT…
That bending moment MUST be reacted by the structure…as we have seen in the citation from Hibbeler…ALL FORCES AND MOMENTS MUST BE REACTED…
That is such a HUGE ERROR that it completely disqualifies you as having any real engineering knowledge at the professional level…and to make matters worse, you actually MADE A BASIC MISTAKE in computing the forces of that couple…strikes 2 and 3…
I also referenced in that reply this excerpt about forces and moments of a couple that clearly shows your error…[note…below is the ‘reference 1’ that I mention in my free body diagram]
–Vector Mechanics for Engineers, Beer…page 111…
Now we clearly see here that the forces of the couple are multiplied by the FULL DISTANCE between them, not half the distance as you incredibly claim…so you are not even able to compute the forces of a couple…never mind addressing the real issue…which is the bending moment…
As you can see from my free-body diagram above, the correct results are HALF of what you calculated…namely ~107 million newtons…versus your WRONG computation of ~212 million newtons…
I then went on to explain to you that in order to react the BENDING MOMENT as seen in my free body diagram above it is necessary to SIZE THE STRUCTURE TO WITHSTAND [IE REACT] THAT BENDING MOMENT…
I provided the math equation for this…namely the moment of inertia required to handle the bending load at the allowable stress of the material used in the structure…
You of course disputed this known fact of physics as taught to each and every engineer who takes a ‘Mechanics of Materials’ course…which you obviously never have…because all of this known science came as a complete surprise to you…I replied in my next comment…
Now it is abundantly clear that you know absolutely nothing about mechanics and that you are a nutcase who has no compunction about shitting on the heads of everyone here…a disgusting fucking retard…
I had challenged you at that point in the discussion to compute the sizing required for that building, as shown in the free body diagram above…it is a simple matter for any engineer with even a basic knowledge of mechanics…
I had already computed the moment of inertia and given the yield stress of structural steel, so the only thing remaining is to size that structure appropriately…but you were unable to do so and RAN AWAY…
And now you have the fucking nerve to point to that discussion, where I showed you up as a complete fucking fraud…who doesn’t even know the very basics…
So let’s go dickhead…you’ve been making all kinds of assertions here about physics, without actually backing anything up [except ridiculous fucking stories about baking cakes and piano wire]…
Yet you are unable to actually solve a very basic mechanics problem…why not…?
And like I said in that last thread…yes I know the answer to sizing that structure to take that BENDING MOMENT…and I will demonstrate that in my next post…and that will show exactly why the building needed to be 10 times stronger than its own weight…
And btw…this just the first installment…I will also tear apart your bullshit about thermodynamics…just like the subject of mechanics, you don’t even have the first clue about thermo…which is why you haven’t even answered the two simple questions I posed to you…about thermal equilibrium and convection…
You’re days of shitting on this thread without any respect to any of the fucking participants here are over…
Hey CORNBOY…
I guess you must have missed my reply about that NIST ‘document’…
Like I said that is NOT a heat transfer analysis…has NOTHING to do with a heat transfer analysis…read my comment…
Abrahamic religion “non-violent and non-oppressive to non-believers”. You must have been living in a parallel world of reading about history and religion. So the followed of Moses were perfectly tolerant in matters of religion – just genocidal? (Except they weren’t. Consider what happened when Moses discovered the golden calf). And so on for 3300 years or so.
Well maybe I have faith. I simply see no alternative to evolution by building on the (possibly temporary) survival and reproductive advantages of random mutations and recombinations. And I assume that serious scientists have done the kind of calculations you have given examples of and shown that magic is not required. Hence I am happy not to believe that that there is any kind of thoroughly unpleasant and capricious God such as you necessarily postulate if you include him in your understanding of causation.
Another piece of earth shattering brilliance on CanSpeccy part.
Witches vanished when we stopped the anti-witchism. There are no vampires because we eliminated the anti-vampirism.
So obviously to curb the Jewish power we should fight anti-Semitism.
ADL is the most anti-Jewish organization because secretly they want to destroy Jewry if god forbid they manage to eliminate antisemitism.
You are very subversive anti-Semite, CanSpeccy. Wow, very successfully pretending to be Shabbos goy and yet being an anti-Semite..
I’ll concede the logic of your point – up to a very limited point. As you say terrorism normally – no, actually, just often – needs to proclaim itself to achieve its objective of terror and whatever that is intended to lead to. But ObL didn’t need to do that. The US Government was doing it for him. So perhaps he was enjoying the luxury of messing with his enemies heads and, more concretely, sowing division and discord – maintained to this day on UR.
I’ll let you in on the secret. Obama so enjoyed that cool TV of him as CinC in his bunker watching the Seals that he wanted everyone to see it and so couldn’t admit that ObL was still alive. Hey, he’s still alive helping to write scripts for South Park to keep his brain sharp for his next appearance on the stage.
Good thing he didn’t record it then.
I’m not much into believing. I am inclined to the view that the possibility of the Towers collapsing because of huge mass plus gravity on fire weakened steel hasn’t been definitively disproved. On the other hand reading UR threads and a few links has helped me understand how nanothermite could have played a part in controlled demolitions which could, conceivably have been contrived to coincide with hijackings and could conceivably have been an important, possibly essential, part of the plot, given plausible versions of its motivation.
You “just assume” that I get my views from TV??? I don’t.
I agree, of course, that Judaism as expressed in the Torah and Talmuds is fundamentally Jew supremacist in extremely perturbing ways. But, alas, Judaism has evolved, and there are many sects of Judaism that reject those portions of the Torah and Talmud. Christianity in general has far less of those extremely perturbing passages, at least, if you don’t consider the Old Testament as part of Christianity (granted, the Catholic Church does, though it really downplays the genocidal aspects).
So, to the extent Jews, Christians or Muslims have adapted their scriptures to be “non-violent and non-oppressive to non-believers” I respect it, to the extent they haven’t, I don’t.
There are different types of “anti-Semitism”, as CanSpeccy noted. One type is the vulgar “all Jews are evil” kind, which does occur on UNZ, but not in my experience as often as CanSpeccy seems to put forth. Then there is the core ADL version of anti-Semitism, which means any opposition to Jewish power, including, most importantly, any opposition to Jewish supremacism.
I think CanSpeccy has a point, that Jewish groups exploit the first vulgar kind of anti-Semitism (and, indeed, fabricate it: many Jews have been caught spraying swastikas on their own synagogues, in an effort to raise sympathy for Jews after some particularly vile Jewish supremacism led to some adverse public relations) to empower the ADL and other Jew supremacists to fight the second kind, which isn’t anti-Semitism at all. Indeed a universalist would be a most despicable anti-Semite not just to the ADL but to Jew supremacists everywhere.
Er, yes, well, if I ever figure out what your on about, I may have a specific response.
But it is nonsense to claim that I am an anti-Semite because I make an observation on the role of anti-Semitism in (a) the maintenance of Jewish solidarity in the diaspora communities, and (b) the legal and quasi-legal exemption of Jews from criticism or restraint for ethnocentric behavior damaging to the host community. Unless, that is, you are saying that merely to state a sociological fact uncomplimentary to Jews is deemed in the West to be anti-Semitic, a view which, if generally held, would indicate that the West is truly suicidal.
Hi crimson2,
I’ve put up a $5,000 Occam’s Razor challenge for anyone to come up with 10 points that favour “fire” over “controlled demolition”. My challenge has been languishing unresponded to since October last year despite lengthy email and YouTube exchanges with passionate believers of the “fire” theory, including Mick West of metabunk infamy. You choose your own judge, a structural engineer of your choice.
So crimson2 why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and respond to the challenge?
http://www.occamsrazorterrorevents.weegly.com/5000-challenge.html.
I love the “north face” business. The roofline moves as one but we’re told “north face”. What were the rest of the faces doing?
But please put your money where your mouth is. Please. In fact, of course, you don’t have to even put any money at all, only your mouth. 10 points that favour fire over controlled demolition and you choose your own judge. How hard can it be?
Or was he America’s Emmanuel Goldstein, the Muslim hate figure identified by the US, to justify wars of aggression against seven Muslim Mid-East states.
Your reply was vapid and it was clear you hadn’t read the report.
You said:
Yes. That’s because they were performing sensitivity tests on their heat transfer model. You know, the one you said didn’t exist.
They also put steel beams in a furnace at various temperatures.
It took 18 minutes for a beam to reach 650 degrees in a 700 degree furnace. Only 12 minutes to reach 700 degrees in a 900 degree furnace, and just 6 minutes to reach 700 degrees in a 1,100 degree furnace.
But apparently you think it would be impossible for something to get hot inside a furnace filled with hot air. I’m wondering if you’ve ever heard of an oven before?
I’ve heard that theoretically a monkey banking away on a keyboard could produce the complete works of William Shakespeare but of course, like steel framed sky scrapers tumbling to the ground in seconds as a result of fires, it has likewise yet to be proven.
Wolfowitz caused the pre 9/11 failure to kill Osama bin Laden that caused 9/11.
And then post 9/11, Wolfowitz caused the Iraq invasion by facilitating the failure to capture bin Laden.
The purpose of this comment is to anwer you, and the cause of this comment reply I am writing is your preceding comment. We can see your comment came first. and therefor is the cause of my comment. The purpose of American military action after 9/11 was to punish Osama bin Laden, and bin Laden’s escape beyond the reach of the American army came before any decision to attack Iraq. Bush said he first told General Tommy Franks there was going to be an invasion of Iraq in late December 2001, which was while there was still fighting in Afghanistan, and about ten days after bin Laden escaped from Tora Bora heading for the tribal region of Pakistan where US troops could not go. Not a single American soldier had died in Afghanistan by late December 2001.
If the Tora Boa operation had been better planned and got Osama bin Laden,then the many, many foreign policy expert and ex general (including Colin Powell) who were opposed to invading Iraq would have been successful.
When given access to Bush, in the week following 9/11, Paul Wolfowitz was so insistent on invading Iraq first at the initial planning meetings that he got on the President’s nerves. It seems perfectly obvious to me that Wolfowitz was very worried about the Afghan operation being too successful. Wolfowitz ran rings round the aging Rumsfeld and the multiple-coronary diminished Cheney, to get the importance of bin Laden de-emphasised. I do not think it unlikely that Wolfowitz advised Bush against telling the Army they would have to invade Iraq until late in the Afghan invasion because Wolfowitz intuitively understood that General Franks would less likely to get bin Laden that way.
Tommy Franks was doubtless being told to keep up the good work with zero casualties right until ben Laden had disappeared into Pakistan, whereupon Bush (who had major heart surgery himself in 20013) announced the army were going to have to invade Iraq, (and Franks started swearing his head off). What kind of a general invades a country and fights the decisive battle without losing a single soldier in combat ? Franks was clearly being reigned in and he went along with it for reasons of personal aggrandizement and stupidity. He should have been court-marshaled for his performance in Afghanistan, but it was exactly what Wolfowitz wanted. This is how the Israel Lobby work and once you let people like the Wolf of Camp David owitz be in a position to promote Israel’s interests, events such as 9/11 are far less important that you might be forgiven for thinking.
“That mixes goals and successes”. That’s a bit high falutin for most of these discussions. Quite a polite way I suppose of telling CanSpecy that you expect better of him. Generally, if I may say so with respect, you have provided us with one of the more coherent (set of connected) comments. As not too many of the good oĺd fashioned imperialists would have argued as if they were I suspect quite a bit of the weight of motivation would be the more missionary style of neo-conservatism.
So they had a furnace in the towers…?
I thought it was a blacksmith shop…?
Look peewee…what part of THAT IS NOT A HEAT TRANSFER ANALYSIS did you not understand…
It’s a ‘I heated pennies with a torch youtube video’…
That’s a chicken dance for people who know zilch about thermal science at the expert level…
A furnace is not a building which is open to the atmosphere…that’s a very BASIC thermodynamic distinction…look up closed system, isolated system, and control volume…not that you’ll understand anything of course…but just saying for the folks of normal intelligence here…
The flamethrower they use is an example of FORCED convection…just like a torch…there is no torch nor forced convection in a building fire…the difference in heat transfer coefficient between natural convection like you have in a fire and forced convection like you have with a torch is on the order of 100 times…I already posted an authoritative reference on that…
The fact that they are trying to ‘model’ this with a furnace [isolated, closed system] and forced convection [100 times more powerful heat transfer than natural convection] makes this a fucking joke, like I said from the beginning…
And yes, I am well familiarized with all of the hilarious details of this joke ‘heat transfer’ report…That is why I have been saying that this is the ABSOLUTE DEATH KNELL for the NIST…
Oh and PS…did you check those references…?
Like I said ‘construction journal’ and the like are not quite Lawrence Livermore when it comes to thermal science…LOL
Go have your caregiver put another ear of corn on the fire…make better use of your time than trying to argue heat science…a subject that may as well be nuclear physics to you…[oh wait nuclear physics is part of thermal science…oops]
Methinks the wanker crimson2 doth protest too much!
Until you can come up with another possibility that can explain the free fall collapse across the entire north face, demolition is the only game in town. And when I say “another possibility” I mean one that can be tested experimentally.
.
So basically you have no idea why the columns did not provide support and you don’t really want to know the answer either. Your philosophy is believe whatever you want to believe about the collapse of the towers as long as it can be made consistent with the official story. This is the intellectual attitude of a cult, not someone seeking the truth. But we already knew that.
But your friends at NIST don’t really even agree with you.
Shyam Sunder, lead NIST investigator, said this in their August 2008 briefing; “A free-fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it…. What the analysis shows…is that same time it took for the structural model to come down…is 5.4 seconds. It’s about 1.5 seconds, or roughly 40 percent, more time for that free fall to happen. And that is not at all unusual because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place. Everything was not instantaneous.”
So in their Final draft report they are saying that the building did not enter free-fall because there was structural resistance provided. However, David Chandler challenged them on this and NIST had to go back to the drawing board. In their Final Report released in November 2008 NIST did admit free-fall.
It is interesting to note how they revised their statements from their final draft report to their final report. In their draft report(August 2008) describing the collapse along the north face they stated that the collapse time of the upper 18 floors was 40 percent longer than free-fall and “was consistent with physical principles.” However, when after they had to revise their report to include free-fall they no longer stated that it was consistent with “physical principles”, they only say that it is “consistent with the results of the global collapse analysis..”
So once NIST admitted free-fall they no longer stated that their model was consistent with “physical principles”, only that their model is consistent with their model. Haha…pathetic….
Hey tac,
Yep, Khalezov is 100% BS/disinformation.
Thanks for posting.
Cheers
Religions that work to preserve the community that believes in them have justified their existence. John N. Gray on Leopardi
This is idiotic. The support columns crumbled THEN free fall was achieved. That truthers don’t believe it is irrelevant.
Because they were destroyed. This isn’t that hard.
lol, you guys have no self-awareness.
Are we really back to this stupid lie AGAIN. The NIST said there was free fall of the north face for a short period of time. This is what anyone would expect from a part of a building that has had its supports broken. The NIST didn’t “admit” anything. Sunder’s statement is still 100% accurate.
I’m running out of descriptives for the dreck that you guys come up with. Arguing for demolition because of a minor edit to a sentence is..just dumb. If it’s even true. And given how many times truthers have lied in this thread, it’s a good bet that this is another lie.
You continue to provide non-answers. This isn’t surprising since you don’t actually have any answers. Describing what happens to a column does not tell why how or why such an event occurred. So let’s see if you can actually answer the how and why.
Why did the support columns just crumble?
How were they destroyed?
If this is what anyone would expect then why wasn’t this mentioned in their final draft report released in August 2008? It tool a 9/11 Truther, David Chandler, to correct NIST on this. NIST initially denied free-fall stating that WTC7 did not enter free-fall.
You can just stick with one description, Truth.
They did speak as if that was what they thought, but it is a very big assumption that the Wolfowitzs ever really envisioned a cakewalk; an internally peaceful and united democratic Iraq would hate Israel and support the Palestinians just as much (maybe more) than Saddam era Iraq and current Iran. The Wolfowitzs needed Iraq to become a hell hole and as they were very keen on invading Iraq the hellhole outcome probably was just what they expected. Iran’s leadership is not benefiting from the hellhole next door in any real sense, they got involved in killing hundreds of America troops with EIDs , made Saudi Arabia hate them for Yemen, and got a lot closer to a war they cannot possibly hope to win. Where are their allies?
A truth that has had no negative consequences for David Ray Griffin. What do you make of that?
No; you show incredible ignorance. It’s ‘conservation of mass/energy,’ where energy and mass are ‘interchangeable’ in the sense that one may be converted into another – like when fissionable uranium ‘decays’ into ‘daughter products’ plus energy, as in nukular-bombs where the liberated energy can be used to murder people à la H&N, say, or nukular-power reactors using the liberated energy to generate electricity. What is going on there is converting mass into energy; the ‘daughter products’ actually have less mass, previously being used to hold the larger nucleus together which corresponds to the energy liberated, appearing as heat.
That process is analogous to the ‘big bang;’ before = incredibly super-dense&concentrated-energy and after = an expanding, cooling state which is the current state of the universe. That required nothing more than some sort a quantum fluctuation = *not* intelligence. Nor is there intelligence in the Sun = ‘merely’ a ball of ‘left over’ big bang mix of hydrogen and helium, big enough to sustain fusion = let there be light. As for evolution of life, you could try getting used to it – because it exists, as do the conservation laws. IF you say ‘conjured from nothing by your supernatural deity, here today, gone tomorrow’ THEN there’s nothing to even think about, no cause, no effect just random chaos. No, thanks.
Apart from one thing left, the rest of your post is TL;DR, short for “too long; didn’t read”. I’m simply not interested in your religious ravings; kindly try to find an alternative podium, some interested chat-bot, say.
The one thing left:
That’s not politics, that’s corrupt religion. It’s both the believers and the priests violating commandments, making religion a deadly poison. I bid you “Good day!”
Great! With luck, you’ll be cleaned out soon and move on to facts and considered arguments. Or, better, fall silent.
Excellent idea for a scene in a movie. Not as good as Dimitri Khalezov’s script, though.
FB, there is no point in discussing with you. You are not an uneducated but basically good-willing person who has made mistakes in his calculations but will correct them. You are a troll who spreads false and weak arguments which seemingly are against the official collapse theory of 9/11 but which are immediately broken by experts and using them discredits critics of the official theory.
You do the same thing as those who propose ufos as the cause of the collapse. The goal of this disinformation spreading is to get 911 truthers to use weak and faulty arguments. It helps the supporters of the official theory – all those who present weak and faulty arguments can be discarded as ignorant crackpots. You are not only a troll, you are a H-troll under a false flag.
About trolls, it seems to me that there are not white rats and black rats on this site. All rats one sees are black and from the same family, only some have painted their fur white.
The most striking feature of both the 9/11 and Holocaust ™ narratives is their absurdity.
While Truthers & Deniers found easy pickings, one has to be astonished that the script writers apparently treated these narratives with so little care. One would think that they would want to create a narrative that made sense and was at least physically plausible, no?
Well, no, they don’t and they didn’t. Much more subtly efficacious than plausibility is the genius underlying Orwell’s “2+2=5″. Orwell’s lesson is that absurdity gets the audience to invest in the narrative more effectively than plausibility. That by proclaiming his belief in absurdities, the “investor” invests himself fully in the downstream political developments that are the real goals of the operation.
Voltaire is credited with saying: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Whoever said it, that fundamental truth is what Orwell, and the 9/11 and HolocaustTM authors were tapping into.
America’s “Outer Party” believed the absurdities of 9/11, and dutifully marched off to commit atrocities in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Libya. Only the Russian Resurrection stalled them on their way to committing more in Lebanon and Iran. Even so, Russia’s level-headedness seems to be no match for the absurd accusations coming out of the West. Would they have marched as willingly for a well-constructed, evidentially based, physically plausible narrative that contained few histrionics and no absurdities? Frankly, I doubt it.
That, for me is the lesson of 9/11 and the Holocaust ™. The narratives had to be absurd, or they wouldn’t work. One rational explanation can be assessed on its merits vs. another, but an absurd narrative becomes sacrosanct once internalized. It demands of the believer a Kierkegaardian Leap of Faith, and there’s no leaping back. Very few will ever admit to believing an absurdity, so it is no surprise that the narratives’ every salient point turns out to be another “2+2=5″ working its magic.
For reasons not entirely clear to me, humans live their physical lives through narratives. Some are mundane and harmless and most are in fact positive and useful, while some are utterly absurd. The absurd demands Faith, and Faith speaks to depths in the human psyche far deeper than an understanding and appreciation for (say) Newton’s Laws of Motion. Nobody went to war for the 3rd Law of Motion, but we’ve been going to war and committing atrocities to defend or to propagate absurd narratives since the dawn of time.
And so one sees 1600+ & 2000+ comment discussions about events that should have long since been fully explicated were it not for the Faith that large numbers people invested in their absurdity.
“I’ve heard that theoretically a monkey banking away on a keyboard could produce the complete works of William Shakespeare but of course, like steel framed sky scrapers tumbling to the ground in seconds as a result of fires, it has likewise yet to be proven.”
All I am saying is that it is generally accepted by construction engineers that also steel-framed skyscrapers can theoretically collapse from fire. That is why steel has to be fire protected, to give time to evacuate the building (fire protection does not prevent a collapse if fires last too long). FB proposes weak arguments that have basic errors. All experts will notice these errors immediately. FB is a disinformation troll trying to make you use faulty arguments so that you will appear as an idiot] it you ever present them to somebody who understands the topic. If you want to appear as a crackpot conspiracy theoretician, keep on believing in FB’s arguments.
AFAIK the occasion you refer to is the only one he actually was not resurrected from. If you have information to the opposite, that would be intriguing.
Soon it will become crime to discus 9/11 and then it will become 911 ™.
Skrik, you should read this first :
Edward Teller gives you plenty of scaling laws for cavity radius as a function of explosive yield, depth of burial etc.
And maybe make a difference between alluvium and hard rock…
It is perhaps worth speculating about what might have been said to those possible “assets” on various hypotheses. Let’s say that it is a case of Mossad facilitating the hijacks and also helping Larry Silverstein get the right experts to arrange the demolitions. The Israeli embassy could have put a case to them that any talk of Israeli involvement would be very bad for Israel and for the US (with arguments which mightn’t have gone down as well with other US public servants). Then it would be said “of course we don’t know what our intelligence people knew but my sense is that Mossad actually knew about some of the Arabs involved and did their best to warn your people: CIA, probably,maybe FBI, maybe NSA”. In short the “assets” are given reason or excuse to try and keep all inquiries as limited as possible without having
to characterise their actions as disloyal to the US. If Mossad involvement was much greater then the “assets” needn’t be told that or believe it might be so.
I’m not interested in your little gimmicks. If you have evidence that will convince any structural engineer then you should spend your time convincing them, not random people on the internet.
Several eyewitnesses have been killed over this story, but DRG is not an eyewitness – they can’t go after everyone who publicly doubts the official story. Also, why I do respect and admire Griffin for his courage and his clear mind, he does not really do investigative work; he merely marshals well-known facts and then makes the case. He apparently does not rise to (((their))) current threshold of violent action.
Why don’t you read the NIST report. The exterior supports crumbled as part of the progressive collapse. From Wikipedia:
Truthers claimed that WTC7 fell at free fall speed. The NIST showed this wasn’t the case: the building took 40% longer to fall. So the truthers changed their story–as all conspiracy theorists do when faced with inconvenient facts. The fact that you think it’s some gotcha that the building fell at free fall for a brief period after loss of support just shows how ignorant you are. Truthers have invented this argument that if a building falls at free fall acceleration for any period, then it could only have been caused by controlled demolition. This is just a stupid argument and if you can’t understand why then I don’t think I can help you.
Deferring to absurdity is notargumentum ad absurdum. The latter can win arguments while the former is just a rhetorical device often associated with impotence.
1) There were NO hijacks (but pre-planted explosives and/or missiles directed into the Twin Towers AND video “editing” my MSM (see Ace Baker videos “The Great American Psy-Opera”).
2) They did not need to “arrange” the demolitions since a nuclear built-in underground demolition device had been designed from the very beginning (see Khalezov).
btw, Khalezov considers Silverstein as innocent. I don’t know.
Q: Did you bother to download & peruse the .pdf from princeton.edu? Snip: “Counter to intuition, only minimal rock strength is required for containment.” I conclude from that that the depth-formula given stands, regardless of alluvium or hard rock. And from that formula, ‘ground zero’ in NY would resemble the Chagan crater, had Khalezov’s bombs been deployed.
IIRC, a photo in Khalezov’s book claims the bedrock under WTCs 1 & 2 is some sort of igneous rock which, Khalezov claims, illustrates the melting caused by nukes. I have read of an alternate theory, namely that the igneous rock was polished by glacial action.
Q: Why do you care; what’s your point? Kindly take some care in responding.
I really don’t care how I appear to you or to anyone else. I couldn’t say if FB’s comments have basic errors or not but I do think he has a gift for explaining complex information in layman terms. I would expect that he and I would disagree on many matters but on the fact that the WTC buildings could not have been destroyed the way they were said to have been according to the official narrative is something that any clear headed person would be able to reach agreement on.
Assuming the steel infrastructure of a steel framed skyscraper were to be weakened by an inferno, which was not the case in any of the WTC buildings, then I would assume that it would buckle or twist in some manner but not in any event would one, and certainly not all three, plummet straight down into its own footprint. For that to happen all of the steel would need to be super-heated to the same degree at the exact same time. That’s not advanced physics, it’s just straightforward commonsense.
On March 6, 2002, the U.S. House of Representatives held a Hearing before the Committee on Science “Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center” with Sherwood L. Boehlert, Republican, N.Y. as Chairman.
Reading through the minutes of the hearing is to review a litany of complaints from the federal investigators about how they were impeded in their work by lack of access to the WTC site, lack of authority to impound material, refusal of several authorities to release WTC blueprints, requirement to sign nondisclosure agreements, ongoing criminal investigation by the FBI, even refusal by the “news organizations” to provide all available videotapes.
—
Dr. W. Gene Corley, P.E., S.E., American Society of Civil Engineers, was Chair of the Building Performance Assessment Team reviewing the WTC disaster
You know of course that 3,000 architects and engineers have already signed a petition to investigate this affair, implying that they understand the official story is bunk. You are fighting a pointless rearguard action here with nothing but smoke grenades, and you know it.
Your stories are so full of holes that no amount of eloquence and arrogance can hide them, and you are not stupid enough not to know this. Therefore, I suspect that your true purpose here is not to convince the people here but to make them hate you – and, since you are an obvious Zionist troll, to make them hate Jews in general, so that they may circle the wagons around Israel, regardless of her crimes.
I think the whole idea promoted by Khalezov is preposterous – a single, large nuclear explosion underground could never guarantee that the building above would collapse in an orderly fashion into its own footprint, and no regulatory authority in their right mind would approve such a plan (Khalezov claims that the nuclear charges were pre-approved and pre-installed during WTC construction). In addition, whatever went on underground on 9/11, it is clear from just looking at the videos that the WTC1 and 2 collapses were started by explosions high up and then progressed through multiple successive explosions from the top down.
Have you watched the Danny Jowenko video? Notice how he stresses that WTC7 collapses differently from the twins – WTC7 collapses bottom up, implying that this is not what happened to the twins. There is just too much in Khalezov’s story that doesn’t add up for it to be taken at face value.
When trying to understand one of the most important aspects of 9/11, the details are very important.
The report of the “dancing Israelis” is well known. In some versions, they had set up their cameras before the first plane hit the WTC. The events are obviously far more sinister if this detail is correct.
The white van that was stopped and its Israeli occupants arrested. Was it really heading for George Washington Bridge, and how much explosive was on board?
Are there any sources for this information, apart from news reports? Is official information on the matter classified?
Did you read (or at least had a glimpse at) Teller’s book ? Obviously no.
I did.
With common sense-insight, Sean asserted: “… if the Tora Bo(r)a operation had been better planned and got Osama bin Laden,then the many, many foreign policy expert…”
…. Greetings Sean!
… Doubtless, and as you know, the W. Bush administration deceptively lied and pinned 9/11 blame upon OBL as chief culprit, minus an investigation.
… Subsequently, the ZUS military self-handicapped its pursuit to capture OBL, and punitively attacked the Afghanistan Taliban government for the following multiple purposes which come to mind:
1. Establish strong ZUSA military presence in Afghanistan that would serve as partial containment of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
2. Protect essential flow of Afghanistan natural gas (oil) pipelines projected to the subcontinent.
3. Gain access to Afghanistan mineral resources, lithium; and, seize (management) control of the precious and profitable poppy fields, with which international pharmaceutical companies & privileged opioid drug trade peddlers love.
… Now shall speak to your words, quoted above, Sean.
… The W. Bush administration’s highly advertised military hunt for OBL in Tora Bora was fiction. Here’s why:
… As international Jewry’s appointed False Flag-9/11 “patsy,” OBL was more useful for the proliferating propaganda-lie to be a fugitive!
… Uh, Sean.., and what better phoney circumstance was available for the administration’s planned, unnecessary & immoral “Liberation of Iraq”? All that was needed — scary & fake videos featuring the “evil” OBL and George Dubya’s lyin’ linkage of Saddam Hussein to the 9/11 False Flag attack.
Thanks, Sean. The freshman-level deception makes me sleepy. (zzZigh)
How exactly do all the supporting columns simultaneously stop providing support? They all went from enough strength to support the building to no strength at all in zero time. That’s not random. They were cut, deliberately and precisely. By explosives.
Check some of the other posts. There are lots and lots of videos of eye witnesses reporting explosions.
Remember, each thermite cutting charge would have been quite small. If they were staggered, the explosions would all overlap into an indifferentiable roar.
I don’t know that the rest of the world cares enough about 9/11 unless a smoking gun appears linking Israel to it, but if it ever becomes illegal to discuss it in the US it’s likely to be at about the same time that Holocaust also officially becomes Holocaust™.
Once again, one of my comments (#1686 • September 19, 2018 at 2:34 pm GMT) is being held up in moderation for seemingly inexplicable reasons known only to Unz and his helpers.
I did fail to include a link to the minutes of the House hearing, so maybe that’s it.
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy77747.000/hsy77747_0f.htm
As my comment has been in moderation now for well over an hour — while #s 1687-1693 have been published — I can conclude only the long moderation is simply another heavy-handed ploy to bury my comment in the hope that it will be overlooked.
This is why we’re on a different thought paths. I’ve thought about this long and hard and come to the conclusion that 3 towers collapsing symmetrically onto their own footprints at close to freefall is absurd, unless it was a controlled demolition. After that, the logic flows a lot more easily.
A brave (secular) prophesy, Jeffery Cohen wrote: “Soon it will become crime to discus 9/11 and then it will become 911.”
… Shall be quite an ominous day in American life when a citizen dissents from the phoney 9/11 Zelikow Report, gets police knock-on-door, panics, calls 9-1-1 for help, and the “smart” cell phone is seized as evidence. Thanks, Jeffery!
… Post scriptum: one more thing to commenter Sean? Regarding OBL’s having incredibly escaped the ZUSA military manhunt around the Tora Bora perimeter.
Given sophisticated aerial (simulcast) imagery at hand, I find it quite impossible for OBL & his comrades to have made an undetected escape. Fyi, I am informed that in real time, satellite imagery can focus upon the shifty butt movement of a Scranton-based street walker! So please, please, someone, please tell me how I might overate the late-2001 ZUS military system of aerial monitoring?
Grrr! And you didn’t bother responding to my specific Qs . Are you retarded? The Princeton paper *specifically* addresses containment, and is about 21 years ‘younger’ = much more modern than Teller’s book. Now kindly get lost, dragging the whole sackful of Khalezov’s wild fantasies behind you, thus obscuring all traces that you ever dared to try ‘debating’ in here. Khalezov is a nutter, and since you don’t appreciate that, it makes you an hopeless nutter too. I bid you “Good day!” Grrr.
What a fantastic quote.
It seems to me that as we evolve to higher potential, we need to be simultaneously the creators and believers of our own illusions. It’s a hell of a trick, and I hope we can manage it.
Sir, you just took this discussion to a whole new level.
I think you should be writing articles, not comments.
The rest of the world doesn’t care enough about Israel. To most of the world, Israel is just a shitty little Middle Eastern country best known for producing unpleasant tourists. Given that the other Middle Eastern countries are also well known for producing unpleasant tourists, it’s really not that conspicuous.
9/11 is fairly well known throughout the world. People generally don’t have strong opinions, are generally open to logical reasoning, but generally don’t care much whatever the outcome. The exception would be the Muslim world, where it seems every single person already knows the Jews did it and no one is particularly surprised.
G’day.
Me: yes.
Me: yes. The evil masterminds would, of course, have tried to plan to eliminate all error beforehand; the stakes being about the highest possible. IF there were ‘hijacked plane impacts’ [absolute priority needed to start the GWoT], THEN the planes would have been guided by internal nav/autopilots, so setting the charges in WTCs 1 & 2 could have proceeded on the basis of accurate ‘hits.’ But that leaves WTC7 free fall alone and ‘out in the cold,’ stranded as a shag on a rock. Perhaps they triggered some ‘plan B;’ we’ll almost certainly never know. But it really destroyed their day, so’s to speak.
Then, that’s one of the joys of ‘conspiracy theorising;’ we consider all ways to cogently answer: “How did they do that?” – and by ‘evolution,’ we zoom in on ‘most likely scenarios,’ like PETN det cord for the WTC 1 & 2 floor slabs giving rise to the billowing pyroclastic clouds of concrete dust, liberally ‘spiked’ with asbestos, office furniture fragments and office -worker bone-fragments. Nooo; I’m not doing ‘atrocity’-propaganda, just pointing out the utter viciousness of the *inside job* perpetrators. rgds
Me: Haw. Reality being insufficient for these two, they retreat in to fantasy.
Q: What dope are you’se mainlining?
There are deluded people in every profession. 3,000 out of the millions of architects and engineers in the world is hardly impressive. It becomes even less impressive when you realize that ae911truth pads their numbers with electrical engineers. This is why truthers are a fringe movement. The group trumpets over 100 AIA members who have signed its petition. But there are 90,000 AIA members total. I’d guess more members of the AIA have been diagnosed with schizophrenia than have signed the truther petition.
Oh, I know that the vast, vast majority of the Nazi and white supremacist morons here at Unz won’t change their minds. It was fun, however, to find Rurik and company falling for a hoax video.
And I don’t want anyone to hate me, I just don’t care.
Your Jewdar is seriously compromised. I hate Netanyahu, and detest Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians and support the BDS movement. Israel’s leadership is conventionally evil, not superhumanly evil.
I do agree with their stance on hunting down Nazis, though. 🙂
Doubtful. He’s a typical Hasbara amateur volunteer. Short-sighted, obvious, knee-jerk lying is what they do. They told him that he’s smarter than the goyim so he’s trying to sell 85 IQ lies while barely hitting 90 IQ himself. Happens all the time. Trust me – he really believes that he’s convincing the cattle.
Besides, Israeli wagons are already in place. Him pissing off the goyim can only help us to organise and unite.
I’m incredibly ignorant? OK … enlighten me then, genius.
What does the “=” in “E = mc^2” mean. To you it means “interchangeable”, so you are telling me that “=” means “interchangeable”? You know, you might be able to remember an equation, but you haven’t a clue what it means.
Thanks for sharing details of your sectarian religion.
Kindly learn some manners, to suppress your projection, and how to use your scrollbar. Oh, and what “=” means.
There seems to be about one 16-hr shift or two 8-hr shifts of moderators (though it may vary as some bloggers do their own moderation). The “down time” seems to be around 6:00 am to 2:00 pm GT, which would seem to indicate a Western US moderator.
Sometimes, the moderator seems to go to lunch, or take some other break.
Why there is a moderator, when seemingly everything gets past him/her anyway, is a bit puzzling (would seem to work better just to have a “flag” button and let the moderator delete a post in the rare case it would not withstand original approval – and actually allow the moderator time to read posts before approving them, but hey, it’s not my website).
But the delays in approval are hardly “inexplicable”. See the comment numbers? They are sequential across all the articles on the site. Lots and lots of comments being approved every day. (E.g., your comment is #comment-2525961, 24 hours earlier, it was #comment-2524314, meaning over 1,600 comments in one day on the site.)
Explain this: why Jowenko watching WTC7 for the first time recognized it as a controlled demolition though he never made a peep about WTC1 and WTC2 which collapse he have seen like everybody many times?
(1) Does it tell us that Jowenko was hypnotized like most people by the official 9/11 story and thus his normal thinking process was disabled when watching WTC1 and WTC2?
(2) Does it tell us that WTC1 and WTC2 fell in such manner that expert like Jovenko could not recognize it as controlled demolition?
If you object that there is a third option that Jowenko privately recognized WTC1 and WTC2 underwent controlled demolition he would not be not familiar with WTC7 and could not be tricked into revealing his true opinion about WTC7.
So if it is (2) because I do not believe in (1) then how the towers were demolished might be an open question. That some nonconventional method was used that was beyond the expertise of Jowenko.
Very good.
One of rare posts around worth skimming through all…..this.
Especially:
One day, maybe (I doubt it but there is always that hope) we’ll be able to “clear” that what’s not clear to you (and me for that matter).
Before The Launch that is.
You mention those two “topics”. For more, say, practical reasons I prefer this “Russia thing” from “election meddling” to the rest.
What I’ve found truly fascinating is how it’s been bought and believed by, apparently, cognitive elites in West. The “best and brightest” young and people in their prime, with high IQs, long education and access to accumulated human knowledge at fingertips.
Makes you think…………..
And, as one of anonymus here said:
Keep at this.
Now..hehe….just to clarify: I still don’t buy your main geopolitical point (Russia/China able to counterbalance The Empire) and, IMHO, overoptimistic outlook re Russia/China.
Nevertheless, posts/comments like this are worth wadding through all this trash around.
Again, especially re:
and
Anyone can see for themselves that the ground floor lobby windows were not intact minutes after the plane hit, although the heavy panes were maybe sucked in by the backdraft,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Manning#Surviving_9/11_attacks_(2001)
She was standing near elevators in the lobby and suffered burns on over 80% of her body with 75 percent of those burns third degree.
1st, we use the proper terminology/letters: e = mc² – and what that means is that a) IF you can convert some mass into energy – like, say, prompting an atom of uranium into splitting = nukular-fission THEN b) the amount of energy ‘liberated’ [as heat, say, caused by the ‘daughter’ products flying off at great speed then being slowed in the environment, as in a nukular-power electricity-generating reactor, say] – is c) given by multiplying the mass converted by the speed of light, squared. With me? I suspect that you don’t even know what you don’t know; better you stop agitating in here and find something useful to do, perhaps?
No. If they had gone to no strength at all then the exterior would have fallen at free-fall speed.
The exterior supports were under greater stress because of the interior collapse. Once one of the exterior columns gave way the load was transferred to the rest–and not gently either. It’s not surprising that those columns failed in rapid succession.
We have multiple videos of WTC7 falling and none* have any audible explosions. Controlled demolitions feature audible explosions. As for witnesses–perhaps they are mistaken, perhaps they did hear explosions associated with the fires. Whichever it was, the accounts are relevant.
This seems, at best, a guess. Are there any videos of buildings being demolished with thermite? If not, then why would truthers believe such a thing? And if it’s an “indifferentiable roar” then how are witnesses hearing it as an explosion?
*Except for the hoax video that Rurik fell for. 🙂
Any “other” argument ?
Khalezov is a nutter whose writings obey physics (approximately at least, he makes some mistakes).
You’re a genius who thinks he can tell physics to do what he wants.
#So if it is (2) because I do not believe in (1) then how the towers were demolished might be an open question. That some nonconventional method was used that was beyond the expertise of Jowenko.#
Yes. Demolition that is made to look like it could be a gravitational collapse. The twin towers come down with a typical acceleration of a gravitational collapse. Pulverization of concrete is by gravitation. Only a more careful look shows that it was not a gravitational collapse (walls do not stay up though floors pancake, the building leans and straightens). Had a plane hit WTC7 and had it gone down like the twin towers, most would have taken these as gravitational collapses. Doing such a demolition would not be beyond someone like Jowenko, but it would be a way he never had tried as there never was any sense to do it. Essentially it probably is not any more difficult.
Haw. Let me guess: ‘Dustification by nukular-bombs positioned under WTCs 1, 2 & 7?’
{These shills from the little army headed by Judy Wood pretended not to notice the definition of “ground zero” in pre-9/11 English language, they preferred not to notice high temperatures that unexplainably persisted underground for almost 4 months, and they preferred not to notice leukemia and other radiation related cancers strangely endemic among the ground zero responders.
They continue to stubbornly insist that the WTC was demolished by mysterious “laser beams from space”, which, in their opinions, should successfully explain both – “dustifications” of the Towers and the underground fires (along with “ground zero” name). Moreover, they claim that I was allegedly hired by the U.S. Government to “dissolve” their alleged “truth” (supposedly provided by Judy Wood) with a certain “plausible lie” – because, they claimed, I could not satisfactorily explain why “my” underground nukes did not damage the “bathtub” and PATH trains and stations.}
~pp416, Khalezov
Ma-a-ate: IF the above is a sample of what you are ‘hinting’ at, THEN you put yourself right into the poo.
The part in italics is right. Wood has some problems with physics, although she pretends to be a physics teacher or so. And Khalezov is right: the “bathtub” was heavily damaged in some places.
You are moving the goal posts – you challenged your correspondent to convince just one structural engineer. There are many who are convinced. The number of 3,000 signatures is quite large, really. For comparison: how many people have signed a petition to reopen the U.S.S. Liberty inquiry, or the JFK murder case? And yet, everyone knows that these stink to high heaven.
Not credible at all. Your previous posts make it quite clear that you are just another Jewish supremacist and don’t give a shekel about Palestinians.
Indeed. How many Nazis are there left to hunt down in 2018? How about hunting some Assyrians, Mamluks, and Visigoths, too?
Me: No; one cannot argue – rationally – based on irrational premises – like Khalezov’s – and yours.
In a conventional demolition cut-charges give loud bangs. WTC7 falls like a controlled demolition but there are not as loud bangs. Therefore normal cut-charges were not used. Why. Probably because the building was not supposed to fall like that but in a different way, more like the twin towers, with an acceleration of 7 m in s2. Probably a third plane was supposed to hit the building after the twin towers fell. The third plane was shot down, so WTC7 collapse was rearranged to look less spectacular. Rearranging takes time, so collapse of the twin towers was delayed and WTC7 still falls much later. Cut-charges can be replaced by thermite. Thermite is not used in civilian demolitions but may have been well known technique to the military, which also needs to destroy buildings. I would not take a lack of loud pangs from cut-charges as any proof that it was not a controlled demolition.
About columns buckling in a fast sequence without explosives. This is not possible because if one column buckles, the building still stands quite well on the other columns. It does not start a chain reaction. Several columns must buckle at the same time independently to start the collapse. That will not happen without explosives.
Fail. It means mass is energy (and, conversely, energy is mass). Two words for the same thing. That’s what “=” means. Same thing.
Another way to look at it: whenever you have mass, you have energy; and whenever you have energy, you have mass. There is no “conversion” or “interchange” needed.
I suggest studying quantum physics, it’s a quite interesting topic. Beware, it’s not easy to understand, and you may never be able to grasp it – vast majority of people cannot. Not understanding quantum physics is fine, no shame in that, but making arrogant and erroneous denunciations based on ignorance is not.
Agree.
I don’t see what scale there would be for the “gravitational collapse” for a building constructed the way the twin towers were – not aware of any precedent.
That would seem impossible. If you drop a block of concrete from the height of the WTC – even in free fall, without any deceleration on the way down – will likely shatter to pieces, but not to dust. The dust alone is sufficient proof of some source of energy other than potential energy alone.
I’m not arguing that thermite/mate was not used on 9/11 (airplane outline cookie cutter, e.g.) My point is that it was not doing the heavy lifting of taking down the buildings. There is ample evidence of far more than just radioactive contamination at Ground Zero.
For really hard proof of radiation at ground zero, Uncle was not kind enough to send experts to ground zero on 9/11/2001. The Nuclear Emergency Search Team (part of DOE) was in Europe at the time engaged in an exercise called Jackal Cave until 9/15/2001. We therefore have to look at relatively hard proof.
In an earlier post (#1434), I denigrated the theory of William Tahil (in “Ground Zero: The Nuclear Demolition of The World Trade Centre”, available at http://www.nucleardemolition.com/files/Download/GZero_Report.pdf) because his theory of tower takedown is that someone caused the atomic power plants underneath the towers to explode atomically. This theory is obvious nonsense for several reasons: Why would anyone put atomic power plants under two Manhattan skyscrapers? Where is there any proof that any atomic power plants were there? How do you get reactor grade uranium to explode atomically? And many more.
Please do not interpret my view of his theory with my views on his book. An early part of his book analyzes and interprets results of the chemical analysis of WTC environment dust samples performed by the USGS. In their assay of their own samples, USGS apparently made no attempt (or at least made no mention of any attempt) to examine the dust radiologically and made no attempt to tease out the significance of the elements found in the dust. By contrast, Tahil does an excellent job of interpreting not only the significance of the elements found but also comparing the ratios of some particularly important elements on a collection site by collection site basis.
Tahil’s motivation in doing his interpretation was stimulated by his apparently good knowledge of the fission products of Uranium-235 under its many fission pathways. These pathways are described very well by Tahil and are generally available in the literature. As an example, a very commonly taken fission pathway ends in relatively stable (long half-life) isotopes of Barium and Strontium. There are of course unstable isotopes of other elements upstream (in this pathway) of these two elements, but these isotopes of other elements would not be expected to be found in the dust samples because of their short half-lives.
Tahil’s conclusion about the nuclear effects significance of his analysis is best summarized in this short quotation:
“The presence of rare trace elements such as Cerium, Yttrium and Lanthanum is enough to raise eyebrows in themselves, let alone in quantities of 50ppm to well over 100ppm.
When the quantities then vary widely from place to place but still correlate with each other according to the relationships expected from nuclear fission, it is beyond all doubt that the variations in concentration are due to that same common process of nuclear fission.
“When we find Barium and Strontium present, in absolutely astronomical concentrations of over 400ppm to over 3000ppm, varying from place to place but varying in lockstep and according to known nuclear relationships – the implications are of the utmost seriousness.
“The presence of Thorium and Uranium correlated to each other by a clear mathematical power relationship – and to other radionucleide daughter products – leaves nothing more to be said.”
Tahil’s fission pathways are all for Uranium-235, but are presumably equally valid for Plutonium-239, since the dominant fission of the latter is, by loss of an alpha particle, to Uranium-235.
For other proof of radiological activity at the WTC, please note my earlier remarks about radiation-induced cancers and the dosimetric work of Dr. Alison Geyh and her colleagues from Johns Hopkins which started shortly after 9/11/2001. (if necessary, press MORE on my earlier post #1434).
Yet more proof of a nuclear event is presented in Khalezov’s book (page 390 et seq.) in the form of pictures taken by Silverstein Properties in 2008 during contruction of the new World Trade Center. These pictures and the accompanying story from Science on NBCNEWS.com and UK’s Daily Mail appear in the book. The Daily Mail article is still available on their website
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1060043/Pictured-The-40ft-pothole-shows-Ground-Zero-site-Ice-Age-glacier.html
Unfortunately, the Daily Mail pictures don’t clearly show the “volcanic” (aka nuclear event) nature of the 2008 revelations.
The better Silverstein pictures are available using the wayback machine. Neither the current Silverstein web site nor the MSNBC website contain the pictures and story, respectively. A wayback machine URL that works is
https://web.archive.org/web/20110419110445/http://www.wtc.com/media/images/s/archive-glacial-rock
In particular, see 14_56_T4-Rock-Formation—Credit-Joe-Woolhead-(1).jpg and 14_56_T4-Rock-Formation—Credit-Joe-Woolhead-(2).jpg.
This volcanic specimen was located under where WTC2 once stood, in fact around the east wall of WTC2 where Khalezov posits the demolition nuclear device would be. This huge formation is exactly what I would expect when a large underground nuclear blast cooled down. You might ask yourself how the builders of the original WTC2 would build so close to this boulder if not directly on top of it.
I urge you to download Khalezov’s book (a mediafire URL was previously published by me; there are others) if you want to see this and far more. He doesn’t charge for the book, but asks for voluntary donations.
His book explains what a large underground nuke (he’s talking about 150 kilotons) will do, dustifying parts of the building and tearing other parts apart. Dustifying does NOT mean just turning the concrete to dust. What I’m referring to is the physical turning of things like steel into dust (particles in the 1, 2, 3, … micron range).
Cole is seething mad
http://takimag.com/article/holocaust-denial-triumphant/#axzz5RaD4CuWG
http://www.countercontempt.com/archives/5908
By the way, what I have described is the mass-energy equivalence. But
is the special case of a mass at rest. The more general equation is:
This is because momentum also adds energy to a system. Hence we can see that in a closed system (such as the “universe”), energy is always constant, but mass is not. Hence, my reference to the conservation of energy, and not the conservation of mass/energy.
Of course this is also not a complete picture (we still don’t have a unified field theory), but I thought it sufficed for purposes of my comment.
The question was why Jowenko did not recognize the controlled demolition of WTC1 and WTC2.
And you react like hysterical teenage girl or an old spinster. Do not answer. You showed enough histrionics already.
Wow. You realize what you did? Didn’t you warn somebody above against coming up with “weak arguments that have basic errors [because] [a]ll experts will notice these errors immediately.” And it will cause the damage to the cause. And trolls do such a thing.
By admitting that setting up demolition was possible after plane impacts or after WC1/2 collapse you defused the strongest argument of truthers that WTC7 was wired by the same people who presumably wired WTC1/2 long time before planes’ impacts. Why long time before? Because it takes lots of time not just 5-6 hours.
You should not have touched the issue of soundless demolition if you did not know how to handle it. You let the troll crimson2 score a point he did not deserve.
I’ve experimented with thermite. Its quite easy to make. Its not very loud as it does not explode like conventional explosives. You wouldn’t be able to hear it on any video that I’ve seen. Thermite acts kind of like a flare, in my experience, in that it burns. Indeed, thermite anti-tank grenades were used to burn through the tanks armor, not blow the tanks up. It is quite bright though. Anyway, thermite charges could have been used to cut, or weaken, steel beams without producing any sound waves capable of being recorded in any of the currently known videos of the collapse.
Thermite does give me pause though. I’m not sure how one would affix it to a vertical steel beam, because it will burn through whatever you’ve affixed it with once its ignited. And, it’ll probably do so long before it burns through the beam. I’m actually not sure if “cut” is even the right word to be used in conjunction with thermite. It more so just burns or melts its way through whatever it touches, in my experience. For this reason, I doubt you will find any videos of it being used in a demolition as it does not allow for the precise “cutting” of supports the way high explosive do, and this is necessary for a controlled demolition that brings a building down in its own footprint. Anyway, those are just thoughts off the top of my head.
I think you correctly understood my use of the term fratricide in a nuclear sense to mean the fratricide which can be experienced by nuclear missiles defending against nuclear payloads borne by ICBM re-entry vehicles: The defender has to ensure that no other defense missile is within the kill radius of each of his missile warheads. A 60s/70s ballistic missile defense system that got killed by a USA-USSR treaty would have had this problem for its Sprint missiles.
Where we may part company on this is how easy it is to avoid this problem if mini-nukes were used to effect tower take-down. I base this on the following model. The towers were approximately 64 meters square. To dustify a floor, let’s assume a mini-nuke is placed at the center of this square. That means that a dustifying blast radius of about 45 meters (32 x sqrt of 2) is required, just to dustify that one floor. That is a mini-nuke but not a small one (Uncle could tell us what the yield would have to be, but he’s not talking). If we want to dustify floors above and below that one, we need an even larger yield because our 45-meter sphere won’t reach all of the floor above or the floor below. The more floors we want to dustify with a single mini-nuke, the larger the required yield.
Whatever we wind up with by way of yield, shaping the explosion is only going to help us in dustifying a larger area at the expense of yield. Shaping is not going to have significant effect on the prompt results of the detonation, some 99% of which is X-ray photons (with some gamma added, plus alpha and beta particles). There still will be a significant burst of neutrons which would then be the fratricidal agent in our case because the building would only attenuate the neutron flux, not stop it. With enough neutrons what happens is that the other mini-nukes fizzle (pre-detonate) or just burn before they can be slammed together or, more likely, imploded. Can it be done — yes — but it’s a serious gamble. Someone would then have to do some fast footwork if the towers just burned and didn’t collapse. Upward directed blasts as you suggest would not prevent half of the neutrons from going downward (yes, some will go outward whether up or down).
Why not use the built-in WTC nuclear device demolition system? This is exactly why they slammed a Granit (Russian) missile with a 500 kt warhead on it into that small hole in the Pentagon. They wanted to stampede/convince DoD into destroying the twin towers in a hurry. The Granit’s warhead was real, but not functioning — Suppose one or more of the “planes” in NYC was a Granit with a live functioning 500 kt warhead timed to detonate at 11 AM, e.g.? Bye, bye Manhattan, etc.
While I’m on the subject of dustify, I should point out that the composition of the WTC dust is not just pulverized concrete. That myth has been promulgated by government disinformation shills. There was a lot of concrete in the towers but a lot of that was actually in the lowest floors where it served a structural purpose. Above about floor 7 (I’m not sure of the exact floor) the only concrete used was for the floors, not structurally. Moreover, the floors were only about 4 inches thick, about as thick as the driveway in front of your home.
To explain the composition of the dust, I have to lean again on Judy Woods (the apparent inventor of the term dustify) who asks “Where did the towers go?”. The dust clouds that billowed down the lower Manhattan streets and left many acres of thick dust were a hot composite of concrete, steel, office furniture, vaporized humans, etc. is the answer. The blast waves from the underground non-mini nukes dissociated the towers and much of their contents. The only things that were spared were things not well coupled to a blast wave. Poor coupling was apparent just above the part of the building damaged by the real or imaginary airplanes, for example. Papers that landed in the streets may be another.
The debris piles at the base of the towers were just not big enough. The basements were also not deep enough to contain more than about 5% of the debris. Only WTC7 had a decent sized debris pile and that was due to unsupported parts of lower exterior (curtain) walls just toppling over into the otherwise also small debris pile.
Actually, I can see a potential use for mini-nukes but the perps would have to careful. A few conventional (better choice) or mini-nukes could help take out the water intended for fire suppression. This would be done shortly after “plane” impact time and well before the maxi-nuke detonation time.
As an aside, I’ve noted that a poster or two has termed Khalezov a “nutter”. I rather doubt that such poster has read Khalezov. Most of his book stands up to close scrutiny.
You can see something that appears to be thermite leaking from the 82nd floor of South Tower a few minutes before it collapses.
As far as using thermite to cut vertical beams, engineer Jon Cole, experimented with some techniques. I’m sure the military has far more sophisticated methods.
MikeP to Zionist troll ‘crimson2’:
Indeed… ‘crimson’ boy is one of the most ridiculous of the many miserable Hasbara rats polluting this and many other comment threads.
So true.
Anyway, sad to see the comment section under the article degenerate into the usual nonsense.
At this point, anybody who’s serious and looks at the evidence can see the official story is total garbage.
Ron Unz is right; we gotta move past beyond the how and look at the why and who.
But as this thread shows, no go.
P.S. anybody ever seen a ‘story line’ with so many tremendous coincidences, such as the ZUS government official conspiracy theory for 9-11??
I have… in Jewlly.. er, Hollywood movies.
I suspect it’s to stop advertisements, solicitations, various other commercial scams, click bait operators etc. Who knows how much of that crap gets stopped by the moderators, but I bet there’s plenty.
What puzzles me is that regular commenters with a history of acceptable comments are held up in moderation as if they were Anonymous and/or 1st time posters, but it’s not my website either.
It’s truly very kind of you to attempt to educate the Wiz on some of the very basics of physics. I blame his deficiencies on his parents who at the very least should have given him a little set of wooden building blocks to play with before they ever gave him a dictionary/thesaurus to eat.
I take it you are quoting this person Tahil. But what truly authoritative evidence is there of high concentrations of barium and strontium? Three thousand parts per million is 0.3%. Where was this concentration found? Such massive contamination with radioactive strontium would leave the entire area of the WTC heavily radioactive to this day. Yet Architects and Engineers know nothing of this ? They say there is: “No evidence exists for elevated levels of alpha, beta, and/or gamma radiation consistent with nuclear blasts.” I strongly suspect, therefore, that your source is worthless.
There are, it is true, videos that record the sound of explosions at the WTC followed by clouds of dust rising from the ground before the collapse of the towers. But why would the demolition of the towers have required more than a truck-load or two of ammonium nitrate and diesel oil to destroy the foundations of the building, as seems to have occurred? I don’t think it would have. In fact I would say that what you are offering is total BS. Which makes me wonder whether you are one of Crass Bumsteins agents of cognitive infiltration. If so, American taxpayers should demand their money back, as in the case of several other nitwits commenting here.
Reliable witnesses who were inside the towers reported a series of explosions including initial very large ones underneath the buildings followed by smaller sequential ones, see janitor Rodriguez’s testimonials and several video accounts given by firefighters for starters.
I cannot begin to comprehend how Khazelov’s notions can even begin to account for the precision required for the three buildings to come down as they did. It has been stated by others many times that if one building was wired with explosives then they all were. That seems completely logical to me.
No, I didn’t.
Way larger than it should be for intelligent people to believe nonsense, but confirmation bias is a thing.
Yes, but if one of you gets your steak cooked medium well instead of medium rare you write 1,500 words about how it’s a Jewish plot. Musical interlude:
Too goddam many, man.
Nanothermite is different. With a particle size of under 100 nm, nano-thermite is highly explosive.
Why is it there are so many people here talking about things they know next to nothing about?
Thank you very much for those references, I will have to do some reading. Still wondering though how exactly a nuclear explosion could fit into the picture.
Atomic binding energy according to E = Δmc 2 is a myth
Fortunately for 9/11 truth, video sleuth Simon Shack has shown how the discredited Khalezov made a major blunder with his CGI collapse footage when he somehow got hold of a model and/or rendering where the image map had been incorrectly applied to the 3D model of a WTC, thereby giving away the whole magic show with this flub.
Images prepared by Simon Shack from Clues Forum
https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=802&p=2350844&hilit=Khalezov+scrap+copy#p2350844
Nice pile-driver effect by Etienne Sauret however, and he had a model with the image maps correctly applied and perfectly aligned, but I still don’t believe a section of the upper part of the building could smash through lower floors like Sauret’s video portrays — at least without help — so it looks like a bad special effect: just as phony as the proverbial $3 bill.
I‘m not so sure about that. There are a number of problems with Khalezov’s theory at least as it was posted at VT, but I don’t doubt that some method for the eventual demoltion of the WTC was incorporated into their original designs, perhaps in the form of specially designed chambers or cavities to accommodate explosives, possibly in conjunction with critical keystones or linchpins in the main support elements of the central core.
Unfortunately, Khalezov draws off most of the interest in the possible use of nukes on 9/11, but I’d call him a pied piper, and his theories a red herring to distract attention from and discussion about more realistic and potentially viable methods by which the towers might have been demolished using small shaped-charge nuclear devices.
Sure it is, at least theoretically. After all, that’s why I specified cone shaped kill zone from a Nuclear shaped charge, rather than a spherical one, so the destructive force is directed upward and away from the rest of the bombs below, and there is no fratricide. I can’t prove that such devices exist–nuke or conventional either one–but I see no reason to rule them out, nor to think that the Generals and others who like to blow things up wouldn’t be just delighted to have small designer bombs like that.
http://dc.medill.northwestern.edu/blog/2018/02/09/exactly-low-yield-nuclear-weapon/#sthash.3CKWVULJ.dpbs
I agree with this. WTC 7 looked like a classic controlled demolition where most of the building’s debris did fall into its own footprint, but much debris from WTC 1 and WTC 2 did not fall into the respective footprints of those buildings.
Rather dust and debris spilled out well beyond the edges of the twin towers’ footprints, as should be readily apparent just watching the demolition sequences–assuming credulously, of course, that those sequences are not CGI– or looking at the aftermath of the demolitions in the photographs of Ground Zero taken from aircraft. Note in this photo, for example, the damage to the Winter Garden atrium, and also the holes in WTC 5 and WTC 6.
First, no it wasn’t. Second, the idea of them altering the demolition at the last moment is nuts.
The military “may” have used alien technology.
First, claiming things are impossible is the go-to for conspiracy theorists everywhere. It’s utterly unconvincing. Second, several columns had buckled. The core of the building collapsed. You can see this in the videos–the east penthouse drops several seconds before the exterior collapses.
Thanks, CanSpeccy, that reference is excellent and really finishes off the whole nuclear bomb hoax.
Frankly, none of the shills for the official story have refuted Ron’s arguments or the arguments in this video!
THE ANATOMY OF A GREAT DECEPTION How 9 11 Woke Me Up David Hooper Film
It makes perfect sense and I was sober before, during and after.
I apologize if it went over your head.
LK is just mad because I pointed out his fake quote in the Holocaust denial thread. It turns out that lying bitches rarely appreciate having their lies pointed out for all to see. Strange.
Still waxing on and on about how superior you and your tribe are? LOL You Jews have devoted about 20 million man years to this nonsense.
Yawn.
lol. That video uses the hoax video that Rurik brought to my attention. (Thanks, bud!)
The UFO makes its appearance at the 38:50 mark.
The 911 truth movement is a huge joke. You keep falling for hoaxes and bad arguments.
Interesting. Maybe we don’t need a unified field theory after all then :).
I’m scoring points all over these guys.
Thanks for your kind words.
I’ve sat gobsmacked listening to coherently, emphatically, and occasionally eloquently presented absurd arguments by just such a person. One has come to expect that sort of thing from politicians and lobbyists, but when it comes from someone with no obvious axe to grind in casual conversation, one shakes one’s head.
Once the magic of 2+2=5 is understood, one realizes that it is exactly those people that the propaganda targets. Orwell’s Inner Party didn’t pay much attention to the Proles. Sedated by alcohol, pornography, and the vicissitudes of making ends meet, they were powerless, but it was very concerned about what the Outer Party thought.
If you read “cognitive elites” for Inner Party the package ties up nicely. They are the ones most heavily invested in the socio-political system and have the most to lose if the system falters. They are in turn the class in which the system has invested most heavily and depends on for its functioning. The system loses most when it loses them. It needs their total commitment, and it rewards those who internalize the narrative most effectively.
So, while still fascinating, it’s no longer surprising.
He he. Reading your more recent posts, I think our views are converging. I’m certainly less optimistic than I was a year ago, and if I read you right your view of the current Empire ain’t what it used to be either.
Why are you lying again? Is that all you do?
There is no UFO at the 38:50 mark or for for 10 seconds either side.
At 38:50 it shows WTC7 and the windows blowing out when the explosives went off.
Answering “How?” won’t change the world. Answering “Who?” will throw it into a blender. That’s why people who know the answer stay silent, and why the likes of crimson2 et al are charged with wading in to these kinds of forums.
Throwing everything they can into making sure that the discussion stays on “How?”, they are the first line of defence against those who would place the question “Who?” front and centre. Perhaps one needs to go through the process to internalize the fact that the official narrative’s answer to “How?” is bunkum before one can ask “Who?”, or maybe it’s just easier to deal with.
After all, we’ve all had some experience with fires, steel, airplanes and buildings, but I’d bet that very few of us have any experience with the sort of psychotic mind that could plan this out and then execute it in the coldest of cold blood.
Anyway, similarly sedated as Orwell’s Proles, the American people don’t really care about “How?”, Who?” or “Why?”. As long as they can make their mortgage/rent payment this month, they’re just as happy to ignore the Inner and Outer Parties’ antics and lies as they were in 1984.
How exactly did they fall apart into neat little sections?
Wouldn’t the exterior supports tend to stay whole, even if they detached from the floor they were supporting? In this case, we’d get a bunch of floors collapsing and then a spaghetti mess of bent and twisted exterior columns still standing and eventually collapsing in all directions.
So who cut the supporting columns?
Was there a fireworks depot in each of the WTC? The eyewitnesses report staggered explosions. Where did they come from? Controlled demolition explains this easily, structural failure does not.
You’re right, it’s a guess. It’s evidently a controlled demolition, which means we can be absolutely sure that some kind of explosives were used. Nanothermite residues were collected and characterised in a well-written paper, which means NT was almost certainly involved in the collapse. Was it the only explosive? No idea.
I said ‘if’. My statement means that a lack of witnessed explosions doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of cutting charges.
Another point is that thermite’s reaction speed can be tuned by controlling the grain size. Very ‘nano’ thermite goes super fast, while coarse grain regular thermite goes slowly. It’s probably possible to tune the thermite so that it can deliver the energy fast enough to cut the column while also not producing too many decibels.
‘buckles’ is a perfect word. Steel doesn’t snap or shatter. Steel bends, especially when it’s hot.
So in this kind of collapse, the steel would buckle and we’d be left with a whole bunch of full length steel I-beams sticking out all over looking something like an exploded steam boiler.
particle size is irrelevant. The characterized NT samples were made of alternating layers of Al and Fe2O3 which means the key metric is layer thickness.
Having said this, why do you think the synthesis cannot be adjusted to change layer size? Or perhaps the finished product can be milled with some regular thermite to reduce the average burn speed.
One only needs to watch the penthouse (the rectangular shape on top of WTC 7) IMMEDIATELY AFTER flashes and explosions of the columns supporting its vertical load as seem in the video (directly under the penthouse itself) and notice the penthouse imploding, then caving in under the demolished column vertical section used to support it. Classic controlled demolition!
Look again. The guy that made that video revealed it was a hoax years ago. He flipped the CBS video, added the explosions and added the UFO (38:56 to be exact).
And truthers STILL keep falling for it.
No, particle size is what determines what is nanothermite and what is not. Nano, means tiny, i.e., in the nanometer range. Right? Nanothermite is defined as thermite with a particle size of less than 100 nm. Nanoscale mixing between the fuel and the oxidizer results in a large interfacial contact area and low difusional resistance, and hence a high reaction rate, i.e., explosivity.
I wouldn’t dispute that. Certainly they were the most vocal.
My working hypothesis (NB:≠ conviction) is that a deal was made between several ideological factions/nodes with converging interests and that each contributed to planning/executing 9/11 and shared in the “proceeds”. I further conjecture that the factions had quite a bit of overlap.
IOW, it weren’t Mossad, the Saudis, rogue CIA, rogue USM, rogue NSA, rogue FBI, the Neocons, or whatever other group one cares to name, but rogue elements within each/some of them who felt that the Imperial Imperative had to be answered. Go big, or go home was the Either/Or the Empire faced, and they forced America to choose “Go Big”.
Alas, “big” ≠ “big enough”, and so we are where we are – somewhere in the No Man’s Land between an inconclusive thrust for Global Hegemony and Collapse.
Bah! That should read:
Your confusion about the size of nanothermite particles arises, perhaps, because the thermitic chips found in the WTC dust by Harrit et al. were millimeter sized, but the chips were coated with nanoscale particles of thermitic material, visible only with an electron microscope.
Yes but…. Suppose you came to a firm view that planes full of passengers weren’t used but were diverted so the passengers and crew could be disposed of – or that there was no hijack but remote control of aircraft. Isn’t that going to affect the reasoning about who and why questions?
THAT VIDEO IS FAKE.
Supposedly you guys can tell if a building collapse is a controlled demolition just by looking. Yet you keep falling for the same fake video. Weird.
Waste of time PC, talking to the crimson2 troll. It only encourages it to clutter up the place with more lies and nonsense.
Given that the motive for 9/11 was no great prize yet still caused the top officials in the most powerful country in the world to violent murder thousands in the glare of publicity, that threshold is rather low and when you consider that Griffin marshals fact with the prestige of a university professor to indict American government and its officials as part of the 9/11 conspiracy he had surely risen above the subliminal awareness of the a putative conspiracy among elements of American establishment.
Griffin says in his Cognitive Infiltration book
They supposedly run the country and can destroy or collude in the destruction of the WTC and kill thousands of people, but they can’t discredit Griffin by means such as convicting him on illegal drugs, child pornography, tax fraud, they cannot administer some drug that will make him lose his mind and behave strangely. They cannot fake him having a sudden stroke or heart attack or murdering someone and committing suicide or just committing suicide. They cannot frame him for acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign power, electoral interference fake news, and they cannot take him to civil court for slandering officials and take his money from the books away. They could not do all this right with a mugging in which he had his skull shattered right raise 9/11 conspiricies at the begining before he got published because they were not keeping an eye on who was trying to raise objections to the official theory. There have been a thousand or more 9/11 conspiracy books now, largely following Griffin. You have to wonder at ruthless people with vast covert resources at their disposal not nipping Griffin in the bud.
It seems mere than a little unlikely that the 9/11 conspiracy was domestic ( Vice President, Secretary of Defense Joint chiefs and intelligent agencies), because any domestic conspiracy would have to (and would have) put a stop to credible people like Griffin pointing the finger at them out of fear the conspiracy theory would gain momentum–as it has.
Well, in the first place I don’t pretend to read Wolfowitz et al’s mind, but I note that you’ve also, quite disingenuously replaced my words “pliant American vassal” with “peaceful and united democratic Iraq”. The two, fyi, are not the same at all.
For Imperial purposes, I can’t imagine any advantage chaos has over a stable client state (democratic or otherwise). Chaos means limited profit (if not a significant drain on resources), and unpredictable outcomes. “Hell holes” are particularly unpredictable, so I have no idea why one would think Wolfowitz would “need” that Iraq become one. Makes no sense to me.
Established Empires don’t like chaos. Never have. Never will. Empires want tribute. Now, using chaos to turn a hostile state into a pliant vassal has merit as a strategy, but only if it succeeds. So far, we’ve watched Libya, Iraq, Ukraine, Afghanistan and much of Syria be plunged into chaos, but we haven’t seen one come out of it on the side of the Empire. They’re all still mired in it, with the exception of Syria which was pulled out of collapse by Russia at the 11th hr. That’s why the “War on Terror” gambit has been called a failure.
The current Empire’s best and most profitable vassals are precisely “peaceful and united democratic” states who align their policies according to the Empire’s wishes and send tribute. Look no further than the EU for examples. Even KSA is probably a little more unstable than the Empire would like. It would be much better if it was more like UAE. Its instability is tolerated because the US learned its lessons with the others, and KSA sends a LOT of tribute.
Usually the indicative answer to these underlying questions can be summed up quite easily: CUI BONO???
Any cursory look at the shape of the ME presently will, along with the intrinsic interests of those involved, lead one to the epicenter of this long-planned and subtly announced hinted-at by means of its targets–throughout the years–to the ‘group’ which stood to gain the MOST from this ‘DOCUMENTED EVENT’ (as some confessed to) … and that is the key
what happened to David Cole over the years since leaving the revisionist camp is anyone’s guess. What is quite clear is his descent into conformity to the holocau$$$t narrative. Seething mad is one way to put it. The years of intimidations by the tribe have taken its collective toll on David. Really sad.
utu writes #Wow. You realize what you did? Didn’t you warn somebody above against coming up with “weak arguments that have basic errors [because] [a]ll experts will notice these errors immediately.” And it will cause the damage to the cause. And trolls do such a thing.
By admitting that setting up demolition was possible after plane impacts or after WC1/2 collapse you defused the strongest argument of truthers that WTC7 was wired by the same people who presumably wired WTC1/2 long time before planes’ impacts. Why long time before? Because it takes lots of time not just 5-6 hours.#
I did warn of basing the claim of controlled demolition on weak arguments that have basic errors.
FB claimed to have proven that fire cannot have caused the collapse, but his proof was faulty.
I think everybody who read my last comment understands that this particular comment is not proposed as a strong argument or a proof but as speculation. Naturally, hypothesis and speculation is needed in all research, but a hypothesis or speculation is not to be confused with a proof.
I did mention that weak arguments are good as supportive arguments and certainly I do not reject speculation.
So, this is not a proof, this is a speculative scenario what might have happened:
– The collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 imitated a gravitational collapse in having the acceleration 6.3 m in s2. Crushing WTC1 the concrete and steel structures by kinetic energy of the upper floors gives about 7 m in s2 acceleration. Thus, we can say that the collapse of WTC1 could have been a gravitational collapse from energy point of view. Air puffs in WTC1+2 can be explained as pancaking floors, I suggest they were pancaking floors. The dust cloud can be created by the kinetic energy crushing concrete. F. R. Greening s article „The Pulverization of Concrete in WTC 1 During the Collapse Events of 9-11” seems to show it.
– But most of the external walls and core would have been left standing, therefore they were destroyed by controlled demolition. It probably used some kind of thermite cut charges, where hot thermite melts the steel and it pushed horizontally through the column by a small explosion. Certain amount of energy was needed to throw steel beams horizontally from the building. Fall of the building core and walls had to be controlled, otherwise a leaning tower would not straighten.
I accept that the presence of thermite has been proven by the Danish-authored journal paper, but the estimation of the amount of thermite in that article was incorrect: based on the sample being typical to all WTC dust and the sample was not typical but taken close to a thermite charge.
I did not admit that setting up demolition of WTC7 was possible after the planes hit. I said that rearranging the explosion order was possible after the planes hit, but it took some time and they had to take a quite standard controlled demolition timing. If the charges were there, probably connected with wireless, the rearrangement means only changing the timing of firing the charges. That is a software issue. It takes some time to remove the intended collapse order and to replace it with a standard controlled demolition. Physically putting the charges still takes days and measuring and calculating the parameters of the building takes long, but all this they already had.
The thrust for Global Hegemony has to be maintained ongoing while the Collapse outcome only needs to occur for a limited period to have a long lasting effect. The odds are on Collapse and as always there will be winners and losers. Who is poised to gain the most from such an engineered Collapse and how are they linked to those who created this calamitous situation? There’s an American expression that serves us pretty well, follow the money.
It may impact the “Who?”, at least at the operative level, but I can’t see how it would impact the answers to “Why?”.
Perhaps he may or may not have at that exact point, but the direct Q put to him was [snip at 0m:28s stop at 0m:48s paraphrased]: ‘What about this?’ where ‘this’ was a video of WTC7.
Ho, hum.
1) I never expected that anyone would dare introduce Khalezov’s utter rubbish into UR.
2) When I saw it [not immediately; there is life outside UR], I cited this .pdf.
3) That *should* have shut any/all pro-Khalezov idiots up, but oh, no; almost nothing but brick-bats.
Me: In your ear. The only sane/rational response available to the pro-Khalezov crowd is to *prove* that my princeton citation does not *dis-prove* Khalezov’s nuke/dustify idiocy. IMHO impossible. The princeton paper is not opinion, not arguable, not mine etc. – but it is a true Khalezov stopper.
By “inner and outer parties’ lies”. you can only mean an internal American establishment conspiracy. The WTC Towers’ structures took a tremendous precision force to bring down because the towers were huge and robust, but short circuiting the established check/ balance hierarchical organisation of American government (above all the military because only they have the necessary manpower and skills) to use that power against the country they swore to defend would be orders of magnitude more difficult than taking down any buildings. Organisations are alive, while buildings, even just nuclear reactors, just sit there.
Even if the Delta Force or some other unit obey any order from their commander in chief (it is actually a “lawful order” they are indoctrinated to obey) gives them, the armed forces and intelligence organisations have procedures to counteract any unauthorized orders for utilization of resources. A false flag 9/11 would have required a massive mobilization of command and control equivalent to operations such as the attempted rescue of the US Embassy hostages in Iran or the raid on Entebbe; how could knowledge of it it possibly have remained within the conspiracy itself? Only a foreign country could have the done a false flag 9/11
I disagree with the above except from Griffins book (Cognitive Infiltration) that one should call Al-Qaeda a conspiracy, as the word is commonly understood to characterise a clandestine plot held together by self interest crossing the boundaries of the various explicit groups, government organisations or countries that each member of the conspiracy is ostensibly allegiant to.
Al-Qaeda was an explicit international organisation that, much like the Israeli Army, wwas be bound to together in a shared fate and took orders from a known hierarchy. The Cheney Rumsfeld oil conspiracy would be bound together by what ? A conspiracy that takes control against a large establishment is then extremely vulnerable to being supplanted and overthrown by a smaller number of the original conspirators. A false flag 9/11 would require massive technical resources manned by a unified force without an internal control problem. Only a country could possibly have the wherewithal:
Not really. The culprits would be dead of old age before anyone was willing to proceed with punishment at that rate. But of course arguing ’bout the magic bullet, sorry, controlled demolition, gets one out of actually doing anything, or much more importantly being suspected of intending to. Without any willingness to act, one’s comments are not worth taking seriously. It’s safe to stay engaged in arguments about the explosions and whether some unknown method was used. Anyway, I do not expect there will be any change to this endless futile put-on game of debating the method.
It’s an Eddie Currant fake. He thinks he’s a genius for fooling some folks by lying. As if 9/11 truthers are the only people in the history of the planet ever to fall for a lie and as if that in any way changes what happened, but, it works as good propaganda for the Truth Deniers.
You draw attention to another point to be made in answer to Ron and to Erebus inter alios. That is that the who if not why can become more problematic if some versions of how are posited. Suppose elderly political leaders – indeed any of them over 40 – had been told in 2000 of the smoke and mirrors versions which you and others are imagining. Suppose the use of a nuclear device was proposed. Who can you think of that might have mattered who wouldn’t have knocked it on the head. Can’t you hear “I wouĺd like something whose weaknesses I can understand. As it is I would have more faith in planning to revive a few Zulus from Rourke’s Dtift” or a much shorter more pungent version?
In Israel can’t you hear one of Shimon Peres’s generation saying “Yes, nothing could go wrong: just like the Lavon Affair”.
#And trolls do such a thing.#
I define a troll by the language used, so someone calling me moron or retard I consider a troll, not because of defending whatever theory or country, but a troll defending some views may change my classification to H-troll. Utu become a troll to me only by calling my calculations garbage (instead of using a civilized term, like unverified, questionable, doubtful, faulty, erroneous in a subtle way, or even erroneous in a so elementary way that it raises serious doubts that the author knows the topic, not garbage or BS), not because of supporting his views and opposing mine.
I think the best way is to start with the theory and data of the opponent and to derive a contradiction from it. After the theory of the opponent is shown impossible, it is time to look for a different theory as a replacement. In Holocaust, I started with AJY numbers and derived a contradiction for Auschwitz and also for Operation Reinhardt camps. These number need not be correct (they can be garbage if you like that word), it is good to start from the data of the official theory and derive a contradiction from it, only later consider what could be correct numbers.
Thus, I would grant the starting assumption that WTC1 fell by a fire as NIST claims. If so, carbon-hydrate fueled fire must have acted by radiation (like being a bit above hot coals) or conduction (having contact with coals), not mainly by convection (flames) in order to weaken steel. Here was the main error of FB, he only considered convection (flames), but a flame torch is used for welding while metal is melted in the old way by radiation and conduction. Metal mainly cools by conduction, but also by radiation and convection, especially if there is wind. This did not make FB a troll, it was his language and unwillingness to reconsider his theory.
It is possible to arrange that a fire starts a collapse, so it is not impossible, NIST people are no idiots. For instance, pile coal next to supporting pillars over some floors, set to fire and feed air. I also grant that the visible air puffs are collapsing floors, as that is the only explanation without explosives. Then the collapse leaves a large part of the external walls and the internal core standing. This did not happen, so the NIST theory is false, there had to be explosives. If there were explosives and fire initiated the collapse, then the fire was not natural since it is very rare that a natural fire would start a collapse of a steel-frame skyscraper and if there already had to be explosives, starting the collapse could not have been left to a rare event. Thus, coals or something were piled intentionally next to columns, or the collapse started because of explosives or thermite. Which is most probable? Probably explosives. But the floors still could pancake, unless there is a good argument against it. External walls had to be cut to pieces and blown off. This is one possibility, but I am fully open to weapons somewhat similar to mininukes or what ever, assuming there is good evidence. I claim no expertise in this topic and this is only a hypothetical scenario. I consider all hypothesis useful and also failed proof attempts are good, as long as the author is willing to correct errors that are found.
Haw. Proof, please.
As it happens I just read an article about “what happened to David Cole”. He’s still a revisionist (not a true “denier”), his recantation was recanted, but actually produced Holohoax documentaries for a while.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/03/david-stein-cole-holocaust-revisionist
Proof? Sure, I’ll prove 2 millennia of physics for you. Here and now.
Better yet, scratch that. Do your own research. It’s called conservation of energy. That mass is not constant flows from the facts that (a) Energy is constant, and (b) the equation I linked in my prior post (which shows that mass can be converted into momentum, and momentum into mass, but that energy remains constant).
Physics, haw, calculus, haw, chemistry, haw. Haw haw haw. Hee hee haw haw. Hee-haw.
May I humbly suggest a reading of The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein? Profit can easily be sacrificed in the short term when total ownership is the longer term goal. Out of chaos, order.
Me, musing: I’ve read of people who liken the US/Z rogue-regimes to a mafia [= a group exerting a hidden sinister influence], and in this likening, they’re in a large like-minded group. One method employed by serious Mafias [like the original = an organized international body of criminals originating in Sicily and having a complex and ruthless behavioural code.] is blackmail: “Do what we say and nobody gets hurt!” One could imagine, that such tactics could credibly be ‘turned on their head.’ IF Sean [a seeming pro-rogue-regime troll] thinks that Griffin may be leading ‘a charmed life,’ THEN what of Sabrosky’s “They Did It!?”
{When an event occurs that that fundamentally changes the dynamics of global geopolitics, there is one question above all others whose answer will most assuredly point to its perpetrators. That question is “Cui bono?” If those so indicted are in addition found to have had both motive and means then, as they say in the US, it’s pretty much a “slam-dunk”.
And so it is with the events of 9/11.
Discounting the Official Narrative as the absurdity it so clearly is, there are just two organisations on the entire planet with the expertise, assets, access and political protection necessary to have both executed 9/11 and effected its cover-up to date (ie the means). Both are Intelligence Agencies – the CIA and the Israeli Mossad whose motives were arguably the most compelling. Those motives dovetailed perfectly with the Neocon PNAC agenda, with it’s explicitly stated need for “…a catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” [1] in order to mobilise US public opinion for already planned wars, the effects of which would be to destroy Israel’s enemies.}
~https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it
Perhaps the only significant question left is: WHEN the US proles find out what their so-called ‘leadership’ not merely allowed but actually cooperated with [oh; murdering ~3000 of ‘their own people’ + mass-murder, 1st in Afghanistan then in most of the WC7in5], THEN will the resulting anger be a) strong enough and b) directed effectively enough? As a PS, I take the opportunity to remind Sean that assisting criminals is called ‘accessory’ = self-assigns part guilt. As if that may ‘modify’ Sean; haw!
Well, maybe we don’t have the same definition of “precision”… at least for WTC1 and WTC2.
Again, as I said earlier, go fetch “The Constructive Uses of Nuclear Explosives” in a university library (or order it somewhere since some used copies can be found) and you’ll see that a deep underground nuclear explosive can do something consistent with what we’ve seen: big (invisible) cavity first and later a collapse chimney just above, because of the shockwave which destroyed the rock and because of gravity. It’s the collapse chimney that brings the building down, together with the weakening effect of the shockwave.
However I must say the following:
– I think Khalezov is wrong when he thinks the “glacial potholes” found during the cleaning of GZ are indeed “nuclear cavities”. These are natural ones and the nuclear cavities are much deeper… and filled with rubble.
– I do not say that underground nuclear explosives were the only ones, but just that they were necessary to complete the demolition.
Withour trying for a complete and complicared, or jest detailed abswer, the short answer is that the who and why are inevitably connected. Several different agents with different motives perhaps but you can’t have one without the other.
I don’t follow your thinking on why Griffin was not discredited, framed, or heart attacked, because a domestic governmental conspiracy involving the CIA could hardly have afford to let him continue to talk. Israel could. It is clear to me that a false flag 9/11 was 100% non American.
Killing foreigners in their own countries is a dream job for many men, it’s what people join the special forces hoping to do. In America and elsewhere. Convincing people to kill their fellow countrymen would be orders of magnitude more difficult that getting them to kill foreigners in a foreign land.
imbecile
I usually pass over your remarks like walking around dog shit rather than stepping in it.. and then smelling it. But now you’re invoking me, so I guess I have to reply.
so you’re suggesting that the video I posted was a fake.
I did see once when some nunce SAID that he added the audio of the explosions, but there’s zero proof of that other than the dipshit’s own words.
If you can prove the video is a fake, then by all means, do so…
“Please, sir, ignore the person who keeps catching us posting fake videos as evidence!”
Y’all are pathetic.
Haw; you ‘outsmart’ yourself. You, having declared that
then
which even the blind may see, and all in only your own words, forms a *contradiction*. And as even most novice students may know, any single, tiny contradiction kills the whole thesis stone dead. Haw. Giggle yourself to death, for all I care. Or try to grow up.
PS The ‘conservation laws,’ note ‘laws’ plural, there is ‘conservation of angular momentum,’ say and etc. but specifically ‘conservation of mass/energy’ is my preferred proof for the – not outright ‘non-existence,’ [hard but not impossible to prove a negative], but non-detectability in one direction [= ‘outwards’] and non-influenceability in the other [= ‘inwards’] , both together meaning, in colloquial terms, ‘can’t see your god, can’t hear your god’ – so your alleged god = neither use nor ornament – and may as well not exist, except as a sour, self-serving concept to provide the ‘spiritual crutch’ some religious sickos seem to crave.
PPS Energy is not mass; they have a independent existences [a quantum of electromagnetic energy, aka a photon, is *not* a proton, neutron or electron, etc.] but one may be *converted* into the other, as I showed with my ‘nukular fission’ example; here’s another:
In your ‘closed system,’ by ‘conservation of mass/energy,’ the net of mass/energy may not have changed – but the rest mass sure did – at the ‘cost’ of adding to energy, which also changed. One up, one down. Kindly do not now invoke relativistic effects, except possibly by departing UR at or at least approaching light-speed.
Erebus,
what the Unz troll- the lizard of oz- is doing here, by stating the excruciatingly obvious:
is deflecting from honest discourse with puerile idiocies.
suffer him if it amuses you
Wrong. You seem to think it’s a mixture of powdered aluminum and iron oxide. This is incorrect. Please check the SEM images in the original paper to see the layered structure.
Like I said previously, particle size is irrelevant because each particle already contains a self-contained thermite mixture. LAYER thickness matters, PARTICLE size does not.
A troll is someone who aims to get maximum emotional reaction for minimum input. Their art form is to use rhetoric and flawed argumentation as force multipliers.
If they make you go crazy with little effort of their own, they’re a good troll. If they write for hours and you spend 2 minutes to put them down, they fail. But even the hasbara here are not usually trolling. They’re attempting to steer discussions for their own outcome, not just for the lulz.
WoZ seems so earnest though. It’s like he’s really trying to understand yet he just can’t get past his emotional blockages.
~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shadow
In all ‘serious’ conspiracies, one assumes that knowledge is tightly restricted on an absolute ‘need to know’ basis. So, in the name of a ‘cable-upgrade,’ say, electrical contractors could replace old 3270-style coax-cable with new, you-beaut supposed cat-5+ material, whereby the “+” meant a ‘fatter than usual’ stock, as provided by the contract-giver. In addition, new ‘modems’ or such-like would be installed at the cable-terminations, replacing, say, old 3277 controllers. The contractors would just get on with the job, a bi-i-ig job, literally spread over 100s of floors. The cables were laid/replaced in conduits cast into the light weight ~10cm thick concrete floor-tops. Little did the contractors know that their provided ‘fatter than usual’ cables were a mix of ‘normal’ cat-5 and PETN det cord, and the ‘modems’ contained a WiFi-style communications module, plus possibly ‘shaped charges’ of bulk PETN. Ditto for any ‘upgrades’ in the core/elevator shafts, etc. All carefully, ‘air-tightly’ separated, get the materials off the loading docks with these ‘stamped, signed, sealed and delivered requisition forms.’ The workers were, essentially, innocent in their ignorance.
It’s only at the rarefied upper-management reaches where it all ‘came together.’ Then, there’re so-called ‘geniuses’ like Leo Strauss [the ‘noble lie,’ etc.], whereby “If it’s good for xxx then it’s good for yyy.” Only the ‘top’ [as The Shadow] knew. But we already knew, latest with H&N, what vile, murdering thugs they were/still are. *A* case could have been: ~3000 of ‘their own people’ vs. the desired ‘security’ of some alien illegitimate entity.
Q: How would you choose?
No, Anonymous three-Two-One, I didn’t say that and I don’t think that. You apparently missed my explanation at #1760 as to why you are wrong.
If your nanothermite has the texture of granulated sugar or cornflakes, it aint nanothermite. Nanothermite has by definition a particle size of 100 nm or less, that’s one quarter the wavelength of blue light, which means the particles are too small to be seen with a light microscope. The nanothermite reported by Harrit et al., was attached to macroscopic colored chips of some sort.
It is the nanoscale mixing between the fuel and the oxidizer that results in a large interfacial contact area and low difusional resistance, and hence a high reaction rate, with combustion being transmitted at rates more than ten times the speed of sound. It is the speed with which combustion propagates that makes nanothermite explosive.
First, your humility is misplaced :-). Second, unfortunately Ms. Klein’s book is unlikely to be easy to get one’s hands on where I am.
Be that as it may, my point was that chaos was not the Empire’s final goal as some around here suggest. Rather, that order should come asap after the chaos of invasion. As it is, it never did, and as was already visible by the end of 2003, Iran had placed itself to take advantage. When Iraq finally stabilizes and begins to prosper, it’s much more likely to be Iran’s client than the US’. The diametric opposite of the purpose of the invasion.
Bollocks.
Griffin has continued to talk with no significant effect whatever.
Had he been hit by a truck, questions would have been raised. As it is, he can be safely ignored in the knowledge that not one American in a thousand will have read a word he has written and not one American in a thousand has the education to follow the kind of complex reasoning that Griffin’s case makes.
The truth about 9/11 will never be known by the majority of American people because the majority of the American people are incapable of grasping the truth about any complex issue. They’re into porn, political correctness, and the rest of America’s bullshit culture, which is completely inimicable to the capacity for logical analysis.
Ding! 2nd round; I ‘skipped over’ this bit
Der. Consider some ‘countervailing’ threat [= tactics ‘turned on their head.’] Specifically, IF somebody knew something which would be guaranteed to collapse the entire illusion, exposing exactly all ‘personas’ destined to become extremely ‘non grata,’ THEN could that not provide ‘immunity?’ In ‘Get Smart’-type talk:
“I know who dunnit. Touch me/mine and you’re done, like a dinner.”
Hmmm; looks like you and Wizard of Oz share a NIMBY problem. A little serious inspection/introspection could cure you both. Tip: Do you really think that our so-called representatives, MIC etc. are working for us, we the proles/sheople? Next haw.
No, I saw that post and you’re still wrong.
Why not? It’s cornflakes at the macroscopic level and nanothermite at the microscopic level. Where’s the problem?
I agree, but this interfacial area is nothing to do with particle size. For the love of god, please look at the SEM images in the original paper.
I’ve been enjoying your comments here, as with others as well.
these are salient questions
The intention for states like Iraq and Iran, Syria and Libya, et al. Are, IMHO, more nuanced than just tribute.
The Roman or British empires sought tribute, and fealty and submission.
But today’s motivations are more Biblical, if I may..
https://yournewswire.com/intelligence-chief-admits-israel-prefers-isis-over-assad-in-syria/
It is rather well-known and established that Israel wants ISIS to be ascendant in Syria, just as I believe they want general chaos (horrors and misery writ large) spread throughout the Greater Levant.
This isn’t about an American empire. We are not in the Middle East to serve any American interests..
Every single thing done in the Middle East since 99/11, has harmed American interests. We’ve spent 5 to 7 trillion dollars destabilizing the place, making it harder to profit on oil.
No, the reason we’re in the Middle East is specifically to plunge the Islamic nations unfavorable to Israel into utter chaos. Israel doesn’t need the tribute. It gets all the tribute is needs, and more, from a slavishly servile Germany and ZUSA.
What Israel wants, what it craves, is an Old Testament judgment upon its myriad and well-earned enemies.
It wants to see the Iraqi people suffer.
It wants to see the Iranian people suffer
Ditto Libya, Palestine, Egypt, Germany, England, France, the ZUSA and Canada, Ukraine, Russia and beyond…
It wants to see the people of Syria so despondent and crushed by its raw power, that for generations the people of Syria will be so shattered and disconsolate that their very will to live will be reduced to some animal level of stone age mere existence. Like they’ve done in Libya, and elsewhere.
Col Miles Quaritch, in the move Avatar said it best:
that’s what Dresden was about
that’s what shock and awe was about
and that’s what this whole, insane, fiendish century is slated to be about. Old Testament judgment upon the tribes that fail to submit to Jewish supremacy.
and 9/11 was the pretext to put it all in motion
Truly amazing!
Dope. One of Khalezov’s own drawings was posted by me, here, Khalezov’s own text: “50 meters below their lowest foundations”. IMHO, your head is much deeper… and stuffed right up where the sun don’t shine. IF you continue to ignore the Princeton paper, THEN please explain why, and most specifically, why it does not *totally negate* Khalezov’s nuke/dustify rubbish-ravings. Part repeat: The Princeton paper is *real science*, aka not opinion, not arguable, not mine etc. – but it is a true Khalezov stopper.
PS Q: When will you stop embarrassing yourself?
that’s part of his shtick
but the lizard knows very well that Israel did it
but he also knows that if it ever gets widely known that Israel did it..
that this will not be ‘good for the Jews’
so we get to laugh at his feeble efforts here at Unz! 😉
You’re just disingenuous. The comment you responded to set forth this alleged “contradiction” in that the simple formula (thought it means what I wrote) only applies when the mass is at rest. When mass is not at rest, the second formula I provided applies. I also explained this second formula is why I used conservation of energy.
Never mind, I don’t care what you think, bye :).
I would have to agree with this. For a number of reasons, the prime one being it is the easiest to pull off and cover up. Their could have been on site help provided to make sure everything went smoothly. Perhaps demolitions charges were triggered to help bring the towers down in their own footprint. I find it plausible these charges were installed when the towers were built. Their purpose being to bring the towers down in their own footprint in case the tower’s were ever compromised. This may not even be a part of any conspiracy and was just a tough decision somebody had to make in order to prevent greater harm. I imagine such a thing would never been made public, because of the fallout for the person and anyone involved. Then again, it could’ve been part of the plot and CIA/FBI/Mossad agents planted and ignited the charges to insure that the towers really did collapse.
As for why everything was turned to dust as others have mentioned. An enormous amount of potential energy was released when those towers collapsed and that debris hit the ground. The fact that the majority of it was turned to dust is not all that surprising.
On jet fuel, its important to note that while kerosene can burn at 1000 degrees and steel beams melt at 1300 degrees. The beams would still be weakened. I don’t know if this would be enough to cause a collapse. For one, you would have to know the exact weight the beams were supporting and two, what temperature they were heated to. Just because the kerosene was burning at 1000 degrees does not mean that the beams were heated to that temperature, because a lot of thermal energy could, and likely die, escape into the atmosphere instead of being transferred directly to the beams. The towers were not an oven or furnace. At least, they weren’t designed as such. A model would have to built and experiments run to attempt to figure out what the loads on the beams were and what temperature they actually reached. Then you might be able to establish whether they would’ve held or not. A scale model would be quite insightful as would a virtual model for use in something akin to solid works.
HE PUT A UFO IN THE VIDEO, MORON!
Look, we both know you’re a pathetic piece of shit. But now you’re just being lazy. You believed the hoax video without question because you’re just a dumb Nazi who will believe literally anything if it supports his stupid “Jews are ruining my life!” conspiracy. Even when it’s pointed out that it’s a fake, you can’t be bothered to look at it yourself. I wouldn’t be surprised if you turned around and said that smoky looking UFOs are a well-known Jewish distraction.
Take some responsibility for your own gullibility and your own life. You’ll actually be happier.
Should anything untoward happen to Ron, we all know who the likely suspects are.
Reaction speeds can be varied. Why are you arguing for it to be more explosive and thus more audible/noticeable? Also, why so committed to nano-thermite? The most appealing tool to any conspirator would be one that is likely to go unnoticed (ie quiet). That being said, I doubt any of the early 2000s recording equipment being used would have captured the sound wave from any shaped demo-charges used, if indeed such devices were used. Shaped charges are nice, because they only explode in a pre-determined direction which could be used to reduce ejection of debris from the buildings due to said explosions. Also, you wouldn’t have to “cut” every beam, just enough to overload the others would work and look much authentic. In short, the lack of an audible explosion on any videos is not evidence that said explosions took place. After all, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
some thoughts on this
They had a prosperous client state in Iran under the Shah’s regime, and look what happened there.
Do you really think (((they))) would ever welcome a day when “Iraq finally stabilizes and begins to prosper”?
You’re right about it blowing up in their faces vis-a-vis Iraq and Iran, but that’s all because of Adolf Hitler (Putin) ruined their well-laid plans.
which is why Vlad went from being someone who you could look in his eyes, into a full-blown ‘enemy’ of the zio-‘west’.
Because he put the kibosh on the goals of a destabilized Middle East, with ‘seven nations destroyed in five years’
Just ask yourself, is there any reason in Heaven or Earth, for thinking ((they)) ever want stability and prosperity in Gaza or the West Bank?
Or..
Do they simply revel in the suffering of the Pals? Setting up couches and picnics to watch the bombs and white Phosphorus drop on schools and hospitals?
There’s something in ((their)) narrative that demands that their vanquished suffer, and the more suffering, the better.
If there’s anything I’ve glimmered over my decades on this rock, is that these people are never so contented and happy as when they’re watching their victims writhe in terror and agony. Upon which they will then blame their victims for all the motivations and crimes that they themselves are guilty of.
And this pattern simply repeats itself over and over and over.
The Germans wanted to burn and genocide us!
The Palestinians want to terrorize us out of our lands!
Assad wants to wipe us off the map!
Iran wants to dominate the region!
Russia wants to rule the world!
blah, blah, fucking blah….
Q: Did you write this?
A:Yes
Q: Did you write this?
A:Yes
Q: Did I write this
A: Yes.
Q: Who wrote anything about rest/not at rest? A: Only ‘restless’ you.
Q: Is there a contradiction? A: Yes.
I ‘rest’ my case. Tip: Try looking up the word KorinthenKacker.
By now it should be obvious that, despite their non-stop fascination with nanothermite, the 9/11 nanothermite enthusiast crowd has failed to produce even one scientific paper demonstrating any high-explosive properties for thermite or nanothermite.
By contrast, here I cite two scientific papers showing
1) Nanothermite’s explosive velocity is less than 900 m/s
2) Thermites burn bright and hot “…but are unable to move objects.”
Nanostructured Energetic Materials with Sol-Gel Methods
A. Gash, J. Satcher, R. Simpson, B. Clapsaddle
November 26, 2003
So the presence of what some have called “copious amounts” of unreacted nanothermite in the samples tested by Harrit, Farrar, Jones et al should raise questions about how so much of this material apprently avoided igniting on 9/11.
Page 10:
Formulation and Performance of Novel Energetic Nanocomposites and Gas Generators Prepared by Sol-Gel Methods
B. J. Clapsaddle, L. Zhao, D. Prentice, M. L. Pantoya,
A. E. Gash, J. H. Satcher Jr., K. J. Shea, R. L. Simpson
March 25, 2005
aww
did I hurt widdle crimmy’s feelings?
LOL
does that mean the whole video is a complete fabrication, fuck face?
the video shows building seven imploding, fuck face
is that all an illusion?
Because that is what Harrit et al. found in the WTC dust that they examined.
Is it really too much to expect that people commenting here on technical matters take at least ten seconds to check their facts before displaying their ignorance.
Thanks, not, for the misinformation. Here are some actual facts:
Not as wrong as you are, if you are still maintaining the silly claim that particle size has nothing to do with the definition of nano-thermite. Just because nano-thermite may be painted on a chip of some other material does not give nano-thermite a macroscopic particle size.
But idiots here have all the time in the world, apparently, to argue about four-fifths of fuck all.
Why don’t you study the collapse of WTC7 a bit more closely and try to deny what is the known evidence vs what the official story is as presented by NIST. There is simply no other conclusion than what NIST proposed is false. Just ask NIST to provide the data that they used to model the collapse…ooops it’s classified for your own good.
Now for the facts:
Try to see what is left of WTC7 after the ‘collapse’ of FORTY-SEVEN story building.
WTC7 debris:
Nice explanation of workings of the system, Outer Party in particular.
You are correct.
The reason is what’s been happening since Trump election. Especially watching Outer Party and, say “Trump base” (for a lack of better word).
Now…not so much re Outer Party. I knew they were delusional bordering to insane and they did surprise me with the next level of their idiocy (“Russia thing”), but that’s not a problem, just annoying. I don’t mind that type of opponent. Delusional shills. There are fast and sure methods to deal with them when/if the time is right.
The true disappointment has been the “Trump base”. They feel, mostly, as Proles in your post. Incompetent.
So…when you have a superpower population mostly made of delusional shills and incompetents……..well….The Launch feels more and more likely. Not by design but by a combination of (accumulated) stupidity and a just a little (final) error.
My view is that the Saudi indictment (with 15 Saudis among the 19 fake hijakers, and the notorious 28 censored pages in the Commission Report), was a secondary false flag, meant to discipline Saudi Arabia and the Bush clan. It worked very well, given the warming relationship between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Allow me to quote myself from my book for more detail:
In his book Intelligence Matters: The CIA, the FBI, Saudi Arabia, and the Failure of America’s War on Terror (Random House, 2004), and in articles, conferences and interviews, Graham claims that the Commission was informed of evidence that members of the Saudi royal family financed Al-Qaeda, but that the government censorship of 28 pages of the Commission’s report dealing with this issue, because of “the special personal friendship between the [Saudi] royal family and the highest levels of our national government [meaning the President].”
Anyone who believes that the story of bin Laden’s responsibility in 9/11 is a lie must logically conclude that the story of the Sauds’ complicity with bin Laden is another lie —one lie inside another. Since the 9/11 Commission report is a scam, it doesn’t make any difference if the censored 28 pages — which Graham has never leaked anyway — do exist or not; they are part of the scam. Let us stress, however, that even within the theory of bin Laden’s responsibility, the Sauds’ complicity make no sense at all. The Sauds have stripped Osama bin Laden of his citizenship in April 1994, exasperated by his nagging accusations for their acceptance of US military presence on the holy ground of Islam. In a 1996 declaration, bin Laden called for the overthrow of the Saudi monarchy, and in 1998, he admitted his role in the November 13, 1995 attack against the National Guard headquarters in Riyadh. Osama bin Laden, anathematized by his own family, is the sworn enemy of the Sauds, who have put a price on his head. Why would the royal family help him strike their longtime US ally? “The answer I have come to”, writes Graham, “is survival—survival of the state and survival of the House of Saud.” What he means is that the Saudi princes were forced to help bin Laden strike the United States under “the threat of civil unrest against the monarchy, led by Al-Qaeda.” Anyone trying to convince people of such absurdity can only be a disinformation agent. Far from being the courageous whistleblower who refuses to play the part the government asked him to, Graham is playing exactly the role he was hired for. The question is: Who wrote his script? That is an easy question: Bob Graham is the brother-in-law of Katharine Graham, heir of her father Eugene Meyer’s Washington Post, a major Zionist propaganda machine in the US. By claiming on PBS in December 2002, that there is “evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States” , Graham is diverting suspicion away from the only “foreign government” whose links with the terrorist suspects of Hollywood, Florida, are out in the open: Israel (an enemy of Saudi Arabia, as it happens).
The indictment of Saudi Arabia is a phony dissension. The plan to accuse and threaten Saudi Arabia was clearly built in the 9/11 false flag scenario, by the decision to include 15 Saudis in the phony list of the 19 hijackers. Why such a choice, if not to make sure that the Sauds could be targeted as a prime suspect and therefore pressured and threatened? But why would the perpetrators target specially Saudi Arabia, the oldest and most loyal ally of the United States in the Middle East? Who is trying to damage that relationship by portraying the Sauds as traitors? That is, again, an easy question: just like the ludicrous idea of Saddam Hussein’s complicity in 9/11, the no less ludicrous idea of the Sauds’ complicity is a neoconservative invention. David Wurmser first opened fire in the Weekly Standard in October 2001 with an article titled “The Saudi Connection: Osama bin Laden’s a lot closer to the Saudi royal family than you think”, pretending that, ultimately, the Saudi royal family was behind the attack. Long before 9/11, the Hudson Institute, a bastion of neoconservative doctrine (co-founded by Max Singer, now at the Institute for Zionist Strategies in Jerusalem), had been involved in a campaign to demonize the Saudi dynasty. And on July 10th, 2002, longtime member Laurent Murawiec explained before Richard Perle’s Defense Policy Board that Saudi Arabia represented “the kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent”, recommended that the US army invade it, occupy it and dismember it. In their 2003 book, An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror, Richard Perle and David Frum (Bush’s speech-writer) write that “The Saudis qualify for their own membership in the axis of evil”, and ask President Bush to “tell the truth about Saudi Arabia”, meaning that Saudi princes finance Al Qaeda.
That not-so-subtle accusation against President Bush is proof enough that a media war is being waged between the neocons and the White House during the whole of Bush II’s term. By claiming that the Saudi trail has been covered up because of the Bushs’ friendship with the Sauds, Graham and the neocons are pushing the president into the defensive, under the threat of unleashing a major scandal. The business partnership forged by the Bushs with Saudi princes is notorious. It may go back to 1976, when CIA Director George H. W. Bush first traded with the bin Mahfouzs and the bin Ladens, but it was broadened during the Gulf War, when the elder President Bush was posing as protector of Saudi Arabia. Since that time, the Bushs are notoriously close to Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud (nicknamed Bandar Bush), a member of the royal family, ambassador in Washington from 1983 to 2005. The Carlyle Group, of which George H. W. Bush is a major shareholder, played a central role in the Bushs’ ties with the Sauds, including a nephew of King Fahd. A scandal broke out in March 2001, during one of Bush’s visits to Saudi Arabia, as acting head of the Carlyle Group. The nature of his meeting with King Fahd raised questions: was this a diplomatic meeting, private business travel, or both? On the same occasion, the former President also met the bin Laden family, in business with Carlyle since 1990.
etc..
Your so-called “actual facts” are instead based on
Or did you somehow miss those two critical words hiding as they were at the very beginning of the title of the work you cite?
You’ve done nothing to refute the results in the two scientific studies I cited other than to argue by assertion that they are misinformation. How so? Where’s your evidence to support this charge?
Modeling and simulation do not refute lab results obtained working with real nanothermites, even with lots of hand-waving, cheerleading, and strenuous assertion for the home team thermite.
To my knowledge — and ‘ve been looking — there is much theorizing and proselytizing for thermite, but I’ve seen no real-world demonstration of any high-explosive properties for any nanothermite, thermite, or thermate, nor has their ability to “move objects” ever been demonstrated scientifically.
Rather real-world experiments have verified low explosive velocity for nanothermite of less than 900 m/s, which is puny compared with 8750 m/s for RDX, or about 7500 m/s for TNT, both of which can indeed “move objects” and blow them to pieces because of their high explosive velocity.
You can do anything with models — even make jetliners seem to fly through buildings.
No, you revealing to everyone what a complete idiot you are does not hurt my feelings.
That’s what it means, genius. He flipped the image and added explosions. Because he knew stupid truthers would buy it. And of course you did.
Sure, something along those lines seems perfectly plausible. And just as you point out, in the aftermath of 9/11 the more “aggressive” Neocons were explicitly talking about attacking and overthrowing the Saudi government.
Remarkable! I’d never been aware of that connection. In fact, I was planning to correct your strange error, when I Googled around a little and discovered you were entirely correct…
David certainly had an up and down struggle with the forces of JDL, but it seemed that he remained true to being open about the events of the holocaust, which makes his latest writings all be more bizarre.
Looks like a collapsed building to me.
As for the elevator shafts, the building fell on them. I wouldn’t expect them to be standing.
And as for the buildings that didn’t fall: one was concrete (Madrid Windsor), another had excellent fireproofing, I don’t know about the third, though.
skrik, I don’t ignore “the Princeton paper”, I ignore trolls, that’s different. I know “the Princeton paper” and many other ones for years, including some you can’t get by googling from home but only by doing real work, i.e. going to a university library. That may sound strange to you but there are still places dedicated to real work.
So, let’s look at “the Princeton paper”. On page 35-36 the discussion about choosing the right depth of burial is not because of cavity radius but because of radioactive material venting.
I already mentioned here “The Constructive Uses of Nuclear Explosives” by Teller et al., McGraw-Hill 1968. Something you might find in a library but, to my knowledge, not freely available on the internet.
On page 137 there is table 4.1 “data from 15 underground detonations”. Blanca data are available. This was an explosion in tuff, depth of burial = 301 m (yes, real scientists use meters instead of feet), yield = 22 kt, cavity radius = 44 m, chimney height = 301 m (that is, chimney goes all the way from the cavity to the surface).
From this you learn:
1) that cavity radius is much smaller than chimney height
2) that if cavity radius scales as the cubic root of yield, then a 150 kt explosive in tuff should produce a cavity with a radius:
R = 44 (150/22)^(1/3) = 83 m
That’s for sure larger than the 50 m given by Khalezov but a) Twin Towers were not anchored in tuff and b) it’s still the same order of magnitude, and I never said Khalezov is as good a scientist as Teller was.
Now on page 136 of teller’s book you have also a scaling law for cavity radius as a function of yield Y and other variables such as depth of burial h (in m) and average overburden density rho (in g/cm^3). Here it is:
R = C Y^(1/3) (rho.h)^(-1/4) and C depends on the material (around 60 for granite, 50 for dolomite)
Applying this formula to a 150 kt explosive at 77 m depth in granite (rho = 2.7) you get a cavity radius of 84 m. Roughly the same because granite is harder than tuff but a shallower explosive gives a larger cavity.
That’s again larger than 50 m (and obviously too large since the cavity would then reach the atmosphere) but again, I don’t say Khalezov is right on everything, I just say he is right on the main idea, and has a decent knowledge of nuclear explosives which is consistent with what he says about him.
And as I said before he is wrong on the “glacial potholes” that he claims were the “molten rock” cavities left by the explosives: no, they were natural ones, “nuclear cavity” remains invisible and much deeper.
And yes, there has been some venting of radioactive material: never heard about the 10 000 cancers GZ responders got because of the “toxic dust” they were breathing?
Khalezov hasn’t understood the “chimney effect” of a nuclear explosive in hard rock, he believes the top of the cavity must reach the foundations in order to make the building collapse. That’s wrong. Only the broken rock chimney must reach the building, and obviously engineers who designed such a device wanted to produce as little nuclear material venting as possible, so they planted the explosive as deep as possible, and much deeper than Khalezov thinks.
But thank you skrik to point out Khalezov’s work, even if it’s imperfect. As it is clear for everyone here that your behaviour is that of a troll, and as the primary goal of a troll is to divert the attention from truth, it’s good that you insult him.
Please, go on.
And what is coming-out of the vent during explosion that causes the destruction of WTC tower? Could you walk us through it?
Actually radioactive material venting is only a side-effect (and an undesirable one) of the underground explosion.
As far as I can understand, there are 2 major effects:
1) almost immediately (within milliseconds) shockwave breaks rock and any material, including steel (but up to a certain distance from “point zero”); for steel it may be only weakened, or even unaffected especially at the top of very tall buildings (since point zero is “too far away”)
2) after a while (according to books I’ve read it can vary from seconds to hours…) the cavity roof collapses and a rubble chimney appears on top of it. It is this chimney that makes the building “sink” into the ground, if it goes all the way to the surface. It is where Khalezov is wrong, IMHO.
Note that point 1) can explain obvious differences between (WTC1 and WTC2) and WTC7, although other factors may be involved since the buildings structures are quite different.
From The Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1951:
kite, n., & v.i. & t.
1 [….] fly a ~, (fig.) make experiment to gauge public opinion etc.; (sl.) aeroplane;
ya know crimmy, what’s fun about the Unz?
is that unlike a Larry Silverstein press conference, the audience here isn’t peppered with hired goons to silence anyone asking inconvenient questions.
So pathetic losers like yourself, are reduced to the ignominy of running around wiping feces on the walls, and humiliating yourselves. It’s very amusing indeed!
If some other loser, edited a phylactery in the background of a video showing the OBVIOUS controlled demolition of building seven, it doesn’t change the obvious, dipshit.
And pretending like it does, only exacerbates their (your) humiliating plight.
What happened to building seven if proof that 9/11 was an inside job. Perpetrated by psychopathic Jewish supremacist scum, with the aid of an army of treasonous bastards in the ZUS deepstate.
Treasonous bastards that we all know are there by their handiwork vis-a-vis the USS Liberty. Another cowardly and treacherous act of war and crime against humanity.
So there is ample prescient for the atrocities of your cowardly and treasonous masters, both in the government and obviously in the controlled media.
And yet we all get to laugh as you twist in your bile, contorting the obvious with brazen strain and embarrassing inanities.
‘Look, look! Rurik posed a video with an imbedded phylactery!!!’
‘That means Osama and the Muslim terrorists did it!’
“We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.”
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
laughable really, if it wasn’t so damn pathetic.
Here’s something for you to suck on
https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/alaska-university-impossible-that-wtc-building-7-collapsed-by-small-fires-as-claimed-by-nist.html
The Who and Why are the most interesting and most important things to study about 911. Get a few of the “Whos” together and they will tell you “How” it was done. Here is Wolfowitz, a big “Who”, giving a commencement speech in June 2001 at West Point about what soon will happen on 9/11/2001.
Unfortunately, Egypt is beyond the capacity of Israel to destablise because Egypt is a real country, not one cobbled together by Western imperialists. The Islamic Brotherhood government in Egypt dismayed Israel and they were glad to see the army reverse the democratic verdict of the Egyptian people.
There are several thousand members of the Saudi royal family.
It seems clear to me that the Americans realised the Saudi family dictatorship was being discredited by the presence of US troops.
In the WEIRD, WEIRD West, where religion is a laughing stock, “who benefits” arguments have an inability to understand certain benefits, and see that Saudi hijackers would have triumphed, even in death.
Did you see any indication of ‘the building “sink” into the ground’ on videos of WTC1/2 buildings? Everybody seems to agree that the collapse was top down.
If I remember correctly, it was long time ago I watched Khalezov, he claimed that due to some process a molecular disintegration (dustification) occurs first and then the structure begins to collapse. What he was suggesting was that the structure we saw was still standing but had no longer solid integrity and then it began to crumble. All within few seconds. This all sounded far fetched and too fantastic to me.
If the shockwave and various types of radiation (neutron, gamma, IR) comes out from the chimney its effects would be strongest on the lower floors of the building and diminish on higher levers. Even if the shockwave was kind of collimated by the chimney some inverse square law must be working to reduce its strength further away.
Actually I have seen major polls to the effect that 15 % think it was the US government that did 9/11, and 7% think it was Israel. As many as a third think certain US officials had guilty knowledge before the fact. Griffin has done the Lion’s share of creating that distrust of the official version. He could have had an illness appropriate to his age without anyone blinking an eye when he started. Or he could have been framed for sexual harassment of students at his old university to discredit him. Child’s play for the people who did 9/11 and well worth it. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Maybe they are making Griffin doubt his own conclusions by not doing anything bad to him. It did not work with Mark Lane.
Rurik the super-smart Nazi knows an obvious inside job when he sees it–but somehow didn’t recognize an obviously faked video. I didn’t trick you in to posting that video, which you said was all the proof anyone needed. That was you.
Now, it doesn’t matter that the one piece of evidence you said proved everything was a fabrication? Sure.
No, the fact that you posted a fake video only proves that you’re an idiot.
LOL, now let’s compare the fires of WTC7 and other comparable skyscrapers that somehow did not collapse:
WTC7:
VS.
WTC5 & WTC6 (PARTIAL collapse):
https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/116b/snxw077jhtl67lazg.jpg?size_id=5
——————————————————————-
Television Cultural Center (TVCC) Beijing, China:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hSPFL2Zlpg&feature=youtu.be
——————————————————————-
Torre Windsor Madrid, Spain:
——————————————————————-
Dubai’s Torch Tower {Was the world’s tallest residential building at its opening in 2011} Dubai, UAE
——————————————————————-
Other high rise fires:
https://www.thehindu.com/migration_catalog/article11237196.ece/ALTERNATES/LANDSCAPE_615/mumvai
You seem to be fantasizing way too often about having 9/11 truthers killed.
You find it unfortunate that Egypt is beyond Israel ability to be destabilized.
You keep salivating at the thought of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians that you think and hope will be carried out in the fog of war once Trump is pushed to engage with Iran.
My #1830 comment was fro you.
All you have to do is look at their “holy Torah” (the Talmud is much worse but harder to verify for most folks, Jews like to keep it secret because, well, non-Jews tend to get indignant when they read the dreck the Jews believe) and the evil which is their Beast Yahweh (wrongly referred to as “God” in translations, it should be “Satan”, as in the “Synagogue of Satan”):
20 Deuteronomy 10-15: 10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
2 Deuteronomy 32-36: 32 When Sihon and all his army came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz, 33 the Lord our God delivered him over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole army. 34 At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed[c] them—men, women and children. We left no survivors. 35 But the livestock and the plunder from the towns we had captured we carried off for ourselves. 36 From Aroer on the rim of the Arnon Gorge, and from the town in the gorge, even as far as Gilead, not one town was too strong for us. The Lord our God gave us all of them.
3 Deuteronomy 3-7: 3 So the Lord our God delivered into our hands Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people: and we smote him until none was left to him remaining. 4 And we took all his cities at that time, there was not a city which we took not from them, threescore cities, all the region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. … 6 And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. 7 But all the cattle, and the spoil of the cities, we took for a prey to ourselves.
2 Joahua 10: For we have heard how the Lord dried up the water of the Red sea for you, when ye came out of Egypt; and what ye did unto the two kings of the Amorites, that were on the other side Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom ye utterly destroyed.
6 Joshua 20-21: 20 So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. 21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.
8 Joshua 18-28: 18 And the Lord said unto Joshua, Stretch out the spear that is in thy hand toward Ai; for I will give it into thine hand. And Joshua stretched out the spear that he had in his hand toward the city. 19 And the ambush arose quickly out of their place, and they ran as soon as he had stretched out his hand: and they entered into the city, and took it, and hasted and set the city on fire. … 21 And when Joshua and all Israel saw that the ambush had taken the city, and that the smoke of the city ascended, then they turned again, and slew the men of Ai. 22 And the other issued out of the city against them; so they were in the midst of Israel, some on this side, and some on that side: and they smote them, so that they let none of them remain or escape. … 25 And so it was, that all that fell that day, both of men and women, were twelve thousand, even all the men of Ai. 26 For Joshua drew not his hand back, wherewith he stretched out the spear, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai. 27 Only the cattle and the spoil of that city Israel took for a prey unto themselves, according unto the word of the Lord which he commanded Joshua. 28 And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it an heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day..
9 Joshua 27: [ referring to Joshua’s enslavement of several tribes that had surrendered to the Jews ] 27 And Joshua made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation, and for the altar of the Lord, even unto this day, in the place which he should choose.
10 Joahus 9-31: 9 Joshua therefore came unto them suddenly, and went up from Gilgal all night. 10 And the Lord discomfited [the five kings of the Amorites] before Israel, and slew them with a great slaughter at Gibeon, and chased them along the way that goeth up to Bethhoron, and smote them to Azekah, and unto Makkedah. 11 And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the Lord cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword. … 20 And it came to pass, when Joshua and the children of Israel had made an end of slaying them with a very great slaughter, till they were consumed, that the rest which remained of them entered into fenced cities. … 25 And Joshua said unto them, Fear not, nor be dismayed, be strong and of good courage: for thus shall the Lord do to all your enemies against whom ye fight. 26 And afterward Joshua smote [the five kings of the Amorites], and slew them, and hanged them on five trees: and they were hanging upon the trees until the evening. … 28 And that day Joshua took Makkedah, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof he utterly destroyed, them, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain: and he did to the king of Makkedah as he did unto the king of Jericho. 29 Then Joshua passed from Makkedah, and all Israel with him, unto Libnah, and fought against Libnah: 30 And the Lord delivered it also, and the king thereof, into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain in it; but did unto the king thereof as he did unto the king of Jericho. 31 And Joshua passed from Libnah, and all Israel with him, unto Lachish, and encamped against it, and fought against it: 32 And the Lord delivered Lachish into the hand of Israel, which took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein, according to all that he had done to Libnah. … 34 And from Lachish Joshua passed unto Eglon, and all Israel with him; and they encamped against it, and fought against it: 35 And they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein he utterly destroyed that day, according to all that he had done to Lachish. 36 And Joshua went up from Eglon, and all Israel with him, unto Hebron; and they fought against it: 37 And they took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof, and all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining, according to all that he had done to Eglon; but destroyed it utterly, and all the souls that were therein.
10 Joshua 33: Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he had left him none remaining.
10 Joshua 38-40: 38 And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to Debir; and fought against it: 39 And he took it, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining: as he had done to Hebron, so he did to Debir, and to the king thereof; as he had done also to Libnah, and to her king. 40 So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded.
11 Joshua 7-14: 7 So Joshua came, and all the people of war with him, against them by the waters of Merom suddenly; and they fell upon them. 8 And the Lord delivered them into the hand of Israel, who smote them, and chased them unto great Zidon, and unto Misrephothmaim, and unto the valley of Mizpeh eastward; and they smote them, until they left them none remaining. … 10 And Joshua at that time turned back, and took Hazor, and smote the king thereof with the sword: for Hazor beforetime was the head of all those kingdoms. 11 And they smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them: there was not any left to breathe: and he burnt Hazor with fire. 12 And all the cities of those kings, and all the kings of them, did Joshua take, and smote them with the edge of the sword, and he utterly destroyed them, as Moses the servant of the Lord commanded. … 14 And all the spoil of these cities, and the cattle, the children of Israel took for a prey unto themselves; but every man they smote with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them, neither left they any to breathe.
11 Joshua 17-22: 17 Even from the mount Halak, that goeth up to Seir, even unto Baalgad in the valley of Lebanon under mount Hermon: and all their kings he took, and smote them, and slew them. 18 Joshua made war a long time with all those kings. 19 There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, save the Hivites the inhabitants of Gibeon: all other they took in battle. 20 For it was of the Lord to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that they might have no favour, but that he might destroy them, as the Lord commanded Moses. 21 And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel: Joshua destroyed them utterly with their cities. 22 There was none of the Anakims left in the land of the children of Israel: only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod, there remained.
12 Joshua 7-24: 7 And these are the kings of the country which Joshua and the children of Israel smote on this side Jordan on the west, from Baalgad in the valley of Lebanon even unto the mount Halak, that goeth up to Seir; which Joshua gave unto the tribes of Israel for a possession according to their divisions; 8 In the mountains, and in the valleys, and in the plains, and in the springs, and in the wilderness, and in the south country; the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: 9 The king of Jericho, one; the king of Ai, which is beside Bethel, one; 10 The king of Jerusalem, one; the king of Hebron, one; 11 The king of Jarmuth, one; the king of Lachish, one; 12 The king of Eglon, one; the king of Gezer, one; 13 The king of Debir, one; the king of Geder, one; 14 The king of Hormah, one; the king of Arad, one; 15 The king of Libnah, one; the king of Adullam, one; 16 The king of Makkedah, one; the king of Bethel, one; 17 The king of Tappuah, one; the king of Hepher, one; 18 The king of Aphek, one; the king of Lasharon, one; 19 The king of Madon, one; the king of Hazor, one; 20 The king of Shimronmeron, one; the king of Achshaph, one; 21 The king of Taanach, one; the king of Megiddo, one; 22 The king of Kedesh, one; the king of Jokneam of Carmel, one; 23 The king of Dor in the coast of Dor, one; the king of the nations of Gilgal, one; 24 The king of Tirzah, one: all the kings thirty and one.
19 Joshua 47: And the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them: therefore the children of Dan went up to fight against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father.
Numbers 21:2-3: 2 And Israel vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities. 3 And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah.
Numbers 21:32-35: 32 And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there. 33 And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and og the king of bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at edrei. 34 And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. 35 So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.
1 Chronicles 4:39-43: 39 And they went to the entrance of Gedor, even unto the east side of the valley, to seek pasture for their flocks. 40 And they found fat pasture and good, and the land was wide, and quiet, and peaceable; for they of Ham had dwelt there of old. 41 And these written by name came in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and smote their tents, and the habitations that were found there, and destroyed them utterly unto this day, and dwelt in their rooms: because there was pasture there for their flocks. 42 And some of them, even of the sons of Simeon, five hundred men, went to mount Seir, having for their captains Pelatiah, and Neariah, and Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi. 43 And they smote the rest of the Amalekites that were escaped, and dwelt there unto this day.
1 Samuel 15:5-8: 5 And Saul came to a city of Amalek, and laid wait in the valley. … 7 And Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt. 8 And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.
You keep saying “comparable” and yet you keep showing concrete buildings. Hard to tell if you’re ignorant or dishonest or both.
Also, you show buildings that were designed after 2001. Yes, Architects and engineers actually learned how to build skyscrapers to better withstand fires.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/dubai-skyscraper-how-are-supertall-constructions-built-to-withstand-fires-10061204.html
The silmulation link to the video did not post somehow; so here it is:
Unfortunately, it doesn’t do a good job at addressing nuclear “bombs” at all. Quoting from http://www.radioactivity.eu.com/site/pages/Strontium_90.htm:
“Strontium-90 does not emit gamma rays. Owing to the absence of very characteristic energy rays which would sign its presence, strontium-90 presence is difficult to identify. This absence of gamma rays also means reduced external exposures. One can tread without excessive risks ground contaminated by strontium-90 …”
Even though some of Tahil’s analysis may be flawed (he found very little Cesium per the USGS element analysis, e.g.), a little chemistry may save him from the Cesium problem. Cesium has a very low boiling point (only Mercury ‘s is lower among the elements) and is highly reactive, including with water, and most of its salts are highly soluble in water. Its low boiling point could easily have let it be carried far from ground zero.
More significant is the seismic data at the time of 9/11. Lamont observatory talks about signals between 2.0 and 2.4 Richter at the times of collapses. If these numbers were correct, they would eliminate both Khalezov’s big underground nuke and mini-nukes other than those poorly coupled to the ground. Mini-nukes poorly coupled to the ground would be either those above ground which would be VERY NOTICEABLE in other ways or below ground in a parking structure where their damage would not be enough to topple a tower. Thus the Lamont data would appear to support only something like thermite/ate or fire-only.
Unfortunately for thermite/ate and fire-only, the Lamont data are completely flawed (bogus is a better word). Khalezov (p.430-431) quotes the testimony of about half a dozen NYC workers, mostly EMTs who testified as to the ground and/or the buildings shaking. Also see the Mineta Transportation Institute (San Jose State Univ) report and the sworn testimony of Lt. Smiouskas, both of which refer to doors swinging open, ground shaking, and other earthquake phenomena. If you compare these admittedly subjective but credible and consistent impressions of seismic activity when the towers collapse, you’ll arrive at an estimated 5.5 seismic event. That’s much too big for a mini-nuke (which will top out at about 4 Richter), but just about right for a 150 kton underground burst. The Mineta Report has a minor error in its description and that probably occurred in the process of getting the data into written form — it talks about the wrong tower and the wrong timing (using “minutes” when “seconds” would be correct).
If you want to believe the Lamont observatory, please be my guest. I’ve seen too much phony seismic data from Government-sponsored institutions (try the 9.0 quake preceding the Fukushima tsunami for example — but I don’t want to get off-topic). I’ll accept observatory data but only if they parallel human, anecdotal data or can be otherwise corroborated.
The witness testimony identified above is consistent with only one explanation for tower collapse, a large nuke underneath each tower. Other explosives, like thermite/ate or conventional TNT-like chemicals, may have played a role in 9/11, but the star of the show was the underground big nuke. That’s what gave 9/11 its Hollywood-like special effects, which is what it was all about: Make a huge impression on the general public.
You clearly see on WTC1 that the roof antenna “sinks” first; it’s connected to the central part of the building. If you remove what’s at the bottom, the top goes down… the “top-down collapse argument” means nothing to me, it’s just an illusion.
You remember correctly Khalezov, and that is what I was explaining with my 2 steps.
Don’t take the word “chimney” too literally, it’s not hollow. It’s just a quasi-cylinder zone where fractured rock has collapsed in the cavity, which consequently no longer exists. But you’re right pointing out that there’s a distance effect (although maybe not an inverse square law).
Most buildings are a mix of concrete and steel (the proportions is what makes them different).
Did you happen to glimpse at the plan of ‘Torre Windsor’ (IT’S PLAIN TO SEE: Construction 1974-1979. The first picture under the title) and this building (steel-framed with glass) is probably most comparable to WTC7 which was built in 1987.
WTC5 (steel-framed) built 1972-1973
WTC6 (steel-framed) built 1973
Now the point being WTC7 had an internal collapse (inner column perimeter) just before the exterior perimeter columns failed causing a symmetrical near free fall descent–exactly how controlled demolitions work. I produced a few videos and time frames previously to which you have still not responded, but what can you refute there?
Can you produce any collapse that followed this same PATTERN and that was due to fire?
Agreed. But as you say:
A possible explanation of why the Lamont-Doherty paper is bogus is the following:
Source:
https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news-events/seismology-911
(bottom of page)
You’re apparently too lazy to read or too stupid to understand the original paper.
See the image below:
Gray layer is aluminum. Red layer is Fe2O3.
Do you still think particle size matters? Or can you very clearly see now that what matters is INTERFACIAL AREA AND LAYER THICKNESS.
If you could stop being such a retard, we could move on to other things.
Sorry to get insulting, but you really are being dense.
Here is another link with side-by-side comparisons of WTC7 & NIST model along with other useful analysis. (This site also goes into WTC1 & WTC2 collapses for those interested:
http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=278&MMN_position=559:559
Home page:
http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/
What it mean and this is no illusion that there is destruction of building proceeding down from above. The building below the “front wave” of destruction/shredding is not moving and its outer walls are not sinking but is motionless awaiting the arrival of the shredding “front wave.” You can’t see any part of the building (in available videos) that is below the “front wave” to be sinking. Be honest and trust your own eyes instead of the process of rationalization of the theoretical scenario to which you are partial.
Let suppose that the shockwave is moving through the “chimney” up and through the building. The pressure of the shockwave will be decreasing as well as its temperature. The medium of the shockwave is hot air (possibly in plasma state) and vaporized material from the cavity. This pressure will be dropping with inverse square law. One would expect that the bottom of the building would be affected the most and breaking of building side walls would be observed. I haven’t seen anything like that.
Now the most controversial of Khalezov claims about radian that damages materials (steel and concrete). Neutron may cause some restructuring and disintegration of materials:
These effects are known and dealt with in reactors where materials of the containment vessels are subjected to neutrons over many years of reactor operation.
However I do not believe that anything like “dustification” of which Khalezov talked about can be achieved.
One could calculate how many neutron and of what energy could be released in, say, 10°x10° cone by the 150t charge. Roughly 10°x10° ≈ 0.03 steradian which is 0.0024 fraction of full sphere, i.e., 2/1000 of all neutrons released by the explosion. Find some expert to do calculations and see what intensity of neutrons was possible and what structural damage this intensity could do to steel and concrete.
I do not buy Khalezov claim of “dustification.”
I think we may be talking past each other a bit, as I don’t really disagree with you. Here’s my “bird’s eye view” of the last 20 yrs. Maybe it’s more like a satellite’s view, but I’ll keep it short.
Though there’s a lot of overlap between them, the “Imperialists” and the “Neocons” were/are not the same group. America was an Empire in all but name well before the Neocons became a factor. It was an Empire that dared not speak its name, calling itself “Leader of the Free World” and other such euphemisms as if it couldn’t admit, even to itself that it quacked and walked like an Empire – its American characteristics notwithstanding.
However, by the time the 20th was rolling into the 21st century, the writing was on the wall. Its enemies had disappeared, and in their place were China and Russia. Emerging from their cathartic 20th C socio-political revolutions intact, they were on their way to becoming “modern” states, and so the Empire’s role fell into doubt. They’re big states straddling Mackinder’s World Island, with all the geo-strategic implications that come with the territory. Their rise would inevitably lead to the Empire’s diminution and eventual regionalization.
The original version of Wolfowitz’s Doctrine was all about recognizing, halting, and reversing that historical trend using military power, but the Empire was not yet ready to speak its name. It hemmed and hawed, occasionally blowing up a country, without strategic commitment to any particular line of action. Meanwhile, the soft power legs that propped it in place were approaching their Sell By dates. Namely, challenges to the USD’s reserve status were gathering. The EURO was coming, to mention the most obviously immediate challenge, but there were others.
My working hypothesis is that 9/11 was all about the Neocon-ization, or hijacking, of the US’ Imperial apparatus, and thereby to prepare to meet its emerging challenges by turning it into an overt, unabashed Empire of Conquest. IOW, if the Americans couldn’t make the decision, the Israelis would make it for them. Israel’s interest was that it would hold a central place in Imperial designs going forward by virtue of the extent its agents had penetrated the Imperial apparatus. So, from TelAviv’s POV, 2 birds with 1 stone. The Empire endures, and so also would Israel.
To answer some of your questions:
Yes, if it became a client state a la KSA. Providing a military/political launch pad next door to Iran, and its oil reserves and politics under US control, Iraq would greatly enhance the likelihood of the Empire’s ability to endure past its Sell By date. Ditto Afghanistan.
Yes, so long as there’s no Palestinians there. As de-facto controllers of the New American Empire, they no doubt figured to be in a position to pull that off.
To be clear, Rurik, I recognize and am equally abhorred by the psychopathology of these people. I am even more abhorred that they’ve gripped the American nation by the hair and are now driving it to both its, and much of the world’s destruction. If they succeed in migrating their doctrine of the Samson Option and embedding it in the doctrines that drive the Empire’s policy, God help us all.
Still trying to argue that particle size has nothing to do with rate of propagation of combustion of thermite?
Unz.com
must have the dumbest trolls on the Internet.Processing and characterization of aluminum-based nanothermites
…Substantial size reduction of each reactant powder (e.g. from micro- to nano-size) leads to increase of reaction front propagation in some systems under unconfined conditions by approximately two to three order of magnitude.
The essential point is I do not posses the ability to: have such people tax audited (the first thing the government do, see Tea Party donors) , get members of their family sacked from their jobs, framed for accessing child pornography on their computer, or face a fabricated inappropriate behavior / sexual assault accusation (honeytrap or historical), or misappropriation of funds accusation, then given drugs to make them behave bizarrely, or to become seriously ill, ect ect.
Griffin has been extremely effective right from the begining and most of the others truthers have built on his arguments and analysis. Although none of the active truthers have Griffin’s credentials and no one could have replace him, any domestic American mass murdering conspiracy must have left Griffin alone to inform the public of the actual identities of the top conspirators (Bush and Cheney) while they were still in office with control over covert agencies such as the CIA, and sky high approval ratings. It would only have taken one phone call, and by the way the FBI and NSA would have known all about Griffin intentions before he even brought out his first book and if he had died in his early sixties of apparent natural causes (as many of the literally thousands of other 9/11 conspiracy authors must have done) you would never have heard of him. It all seems like a very slothful way of going about things.
Why would members of a 9/11 conspiracy who had been named and identified in Griffin’s book (like Bush and Cheney) not fear assassination from seriously convinced Truthers who saw culprits were not being brought to justice and decided to bring justice to them with an impromptu home delivery service ? Obviously a conspiracy with American’s who Griffin openly accuses of being in on 9/11 would have to be terrified for themselves and their families.
And in this connection, why do you feel secure here with only a pseudonym, for all you know this could be flypaper, a site NSA uses to identify who the most active internet truthers are. The information gathered then utilized by anonymously exposing them as Truthers to employers and getting them the sack, auditing their tax returns, getting their relatives dismissed from government service, ect ect. I think the most likely explanation for why neither you or Cheney are worried is that there is a lack, a complete absence, of true seriousness in the Truther movement
Rubbish.
Does that sound to you like “Gray layer is aluminum”? No, exactly.
Does that sound like red layer is pure Fe2O3? Obviously not.
So the red layer was made up of nano-scale particles, i.e., nano-thermite.
I guess it takes some kind of ability to be as wrong as you and other trolls here. Do you work for NIST?
I’m guessing that the Wiz has some other kind of blockages too since he’s so full of it.
What is proceeding down from above is gravity.
I’m not saying the building (at least the exterior part, the only visible one) is moving as a whole, but just that the bottom of it (and more specifically the inner core) is “sinkink” in the ground. Maybe the verb “to sink” is not the right one but it is obvious for me that if you remove the foundations beneath the building because of the collapse chimney then the whole building collapses.
Now if a shockwave has “destroyed” (vague on purpose) steel up to some altitude, then the upper part of the building can remain apparently solid just as Khalezov explains. But if the inner core begins to sink because of the collapse chimney then the whole building collapses, the upper part acting like a “hammer” on the weakened lower one which has been partially “dustified” by the shock wave.
Wrong. The medium of the shockwave is rock, steel and everything solid. Propagation through gases is negligible, the effect of this shock wave being purely mechanical. Shock wave propagates before cavity has reached its final size. Again, this is well explained in Teller et al. book “The Constructive Uses of Nuclear Explosives”.
Another point: LIDAR imaging has been performed at Ground Zero. Google it and you’ll find it easily. Any idea why?
You can’t refute the results of the two scientific studies I’ve cited, so typically you’ve resorted to mischaracterization (lying) and name calling, and that earns you a spot on my ‘ignore’ list. Well done.
Is this passage from the the doctored Scofield version of the Bible?
«Attention à la merde!»
1st you play, and then you put away
Almost everyone loves a conspiracy; here we have a micro-conspiracy within the great 9/11 inside-job conspiracy [~3000 ‘own’ murdered et seq.], a micro-conspiracy seemingly direct from Khalezov dis-info central. We can ‘coin’ a new term: D-IQ = dis-info quotient, whereby rational UR commenters may score the Khalezov-proponents’ [non-]achievement levels.
Here are the D-IQ ‘player’ entrants:
881.Contrarian III who started this round of Khalezov idiocy,
after a bit-part by 1442.Iris, came 1557.utu, who plays ‘fake’ interlocutor,
with 1677.Heinz completing the pro-Khalezov ‘tag-team.’
The [08:15 GMT] latest posts by each:
1839.Contrarian III (8th)
1842.Heinz (11th)
1845.utu (59th)
And now me, to put away:
1st rule: *No* ‘new’ physics, which means *no* ‘shockwave’ and/or ‘dustification,’ either from Khalezov’s nukes or Judy Wood’s DEW, say. And *no* nukes in general, including any/all alleged ‘mini-nukes.’
2nd rule: Occam’s razor + KISS; the 9/11 inside-job conspiracists presumably ‘tried their very best,’ here meaning least practical effort for maximum demolition effect, using PETN, det cord and/or nano-thermite OR whatever [we have little ‘real’ evidence outside videos, which may themselves be ‘fiddled’ with], but one thing here should be pretty clear, they used the best explosive for each demolition function [as before, *no* terminally risible, nonsensical nukes].
3rd. IMHO, the UR commenters have come to a general consensus on HOW [as above, 1 & 2, say], WHY [patsy Arab/Muslim hijackers to ‘justify’ a GWoT, Yinon plan + PNAC ‘leading’ US [= tail-wagged dog] to attack Israel’s ‘enemies’ in the ME (WC7in5), with the resulting carnage from “Shock’n whore”&Co], so now as recommended, concentration/effort should be switched to pursuing the WHO.
Part repeat: No “other” argument re Khalezov will be entered into by me; one cannot argue rationally based on irrational premises – like Khalezov’s, and the running-dog pro-Khalezov tag-teams’.
Recall also, that one should never wrestle with pigs; one only gets covered in shit, and the pigs love it.
FB is indeed a troll who mixes periods of sweet reasonableness with sudden, seemingly irrational outbursts and false claims of superior expertise (e.g. claiming to have been an airline pilot, cutting and pasting irrelevant government documents, etc.)
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2514772
I still see the human element in your scenario as being a greater problem by very many orders of magnitude than the very substantial technical one (that no one here can stop talking about). Americans dropped an atomic bomb on a helpless enemy city, but to get them to do the same to a city in their own country would be a 10 times greater (Machiavellian-manipulation) challenge that the (technical) Manhattan Project was. The human resources problem on the Manhattan Project was insurmountable because a non-trivial fraction of the scientists who were to only ones that could make an atomic bomb were ideologically opposed to the United States (they were spies or fellow Travelers).
To mount a false flag 9/11 it would be necessary to mobilise communication and command and control assets on a massive scale. There would need to be muscle in case things went wrong, so something like the Delta Force would be need to be on standby. And some of these people would realise what was going on ; afterwards they certainly all would know that they had been deceived after the event. These Delta force have guns and know how to use them, do I need to spell out exactly what would happen? The whole thing is too risky for anyone already in power to contemplate. A false flag 9/11 could not be done by a faction of the US government with any prospect of success, it would have to be a foreign power.
would could should
Me: Que Sera. We see what we see; repeat:
IF you don’t ‘like’ that [can’t abide it; Oh, no! *They* couldn’t do *that*!], THEN:
A proof, that only ill-minded people don’t/won’t ‘get:’
1) WTC7 free fall. Preceded by WTCs 1 & 2 almost free fall.
2) *Only* controlled demolition could/would that.
3) Pre-loading explosives required ‘internal security’ bypass/consent.
4) *Only* possible via some covert-component of the US(Z) rogue-regime = inside job.
Show some ‘fatal failure’ of that logic, or ‘get smart/lost,’ OK?
Okay.
Once you eliminate the jet fuel fires / thermite / nanothermite and any other chemical substance as the reason for the “impossible” temperatures attained at Ground Zero (not only molten steel but vaporized iron), the underground nuclear explosives, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Btw, thank you skrik for pointing so often to Khalezov’s work.
I‘ve been referring to the the House hearing from March of 2002 that shows the so-called investigations into the 9/11 WTC disaster were disorganized, hamstrung by lack of authority, impeded by lack of cooperation, and ultimately impotent.
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/07/nyregion/ground-zero-building-standards-mismanagement-muddled-collapse-inquiry-house.html
Oh, sure [2nd bite]. And 1) the entire US ‘intel’ apparatus [17 agencies and counting, plus FBI etc.] *totally* failed, then 2) no US ‘defence’/utility component [NORAD, military, FAA etc.] did any single effective thing, then 3) there came, within ~24hrs, a curiously, almost totally complete unanimity among the corrupt&venal MSM&PFBCs [= publicly financed broadcasters], then 4) a unanimous cover-up by all US authorities ensued, up to and including ‘the inquiry’ and the associated NIST ‘imbroglio?’
[Feel free to ‘correct anything ‘not quite factual’ in the above.]
Q: *Would* that be an appropriate response to some perceived alien attack? *Could* all those be sooo stupid? A: IMHO no, it was [tacitly] accepted that the absurd notion of alleged Arab/Muslim hijackers were all there was to it. More would/should; the ‘authorities’ had pre-knowledge of the fake patsies, proof = name-list + passport fluttering out of the fire-balls, Haw. And you dare talk about any of them ever ‘waking up?’
So that in turn means yours, Sean’s estimate that the entire US rogue regime = US-M/I/C/4a†-plex, with dog-wagging-tail, its illegitimate sprog the Zionist/Israeli rogue regime + Js = I/J/Z-plex, [the two -plexes are ‘joined at the hip’] – are soooo bloody incompetent that they could not find their way out of a wet paper bag? That they truly were ‘ignorant, innocent victims’ of ObL and his 19 patsy hijackers? That it? Haw.
My tip: It was, quite literally, ‘the greatest show on earth’ = a total, Hollywood-style fake, from arsehole to breakfast. Except, of course, for the ‘worth it’ cost of ~3000 ‘own people’ murdered, the asbestos-related disease, and the wicked “Shock’n whore” WC7in5 depredations.
Finally, like the illegitimate entity squatting in/on Palestine will be remembered, if at all, for its brutal, 70yrs and counting ethnic-cleansing by genocidal methods = lies, cheating, theft & murder, so the US rogue regime will be remembered for its truly ghastly ‘inside job.’ Prove me wrong – I bet you can’t.
Oh. Ooops? Do you mean “the illegitimate entity” as your “foreign power?”
(my bold)
Not so.
An underground explosion cannot explain what appeared to be a top-down demolition, so there must be some other better possibilities and more realistic explanations to fully account for the apparent manner of the towers’ demolition as seen on TV.
Thermite and Khalezov’s unworkable theory are hardly the only possibilities for the agents of destruction that brought down those massive structures, as I’ve already described above.
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2526647
(Expect now another round of Thermite! Khalezov! Thermite! Khalezov! Thermite!)
Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Anybody who knows anything at all about radioactivity and nuclear fission will see right away that CanSpeccy’s reference shows clearly that the nuclear bomb story is not supported by the available scientific evidence. On the other hand, while the use of nanothermite may or may not account for all the effects observed in the WTC destruction, it accounts for at least some of theme, and it is clearly documented.
As said before, the “top-down” effect is merely gravity acting on masses. Once you understand the differential destruction of the building explained by Khalezov (but which is confirmed by Teller et al.), that is, a top part nearly untouched by the shockwave and a lower part as weakened as a sand castle, you have no problem whatsoever understanding how removing support for the inner core (because of cavity / collapse chimney) triggers the collapse and makes the upper part look as if it was “crushing” the lower one – which it does to some extent, actually. But because the lower part was “pre-destroyed” by the shockwave.
See here.
Read. Understand. Conclude.
PS: never heard about aliasing?
Ever tried to make a difference between an aerial nuclear explosion and a deep underground nuclear explosion? For the latter, some scientists like Teller wrote in the 1960s’ that it was a near-perfect tool for civil engineering… and that radioactivity was a relatively minor problem that could be addressed quite easily.
However, 10,000 individuals have gotten cancer because of the “toxic 9/11 dust” of Ground Zero… it was only near-perfect and maybe a little overrated.
https://nypost.com/2018/08/11/nearly-10k-people-have-gotten-cancer-from-toxic-9-11-dust/
Quote: “No evidence exists that the WTC destruction and its aftermath resulted in elevated radiation levels consistent with nuclear blasts.”
Me: Oh, shock, horror! – Can this possibly be? But that would surely mean that Khalezov, plus his disciples, currently the most earnest of whom ‘in here’ are Contrarian III, Heinz & utu – are filthy, deliberate liars?!
Well; live and learn… thnx
What did she say @ 35 seconds? I couldn’t discern it.
I read the paper again and you’re right. It’s not alternating layers of aluminum and iron oxide like I assumed. Instead, the red one seems to be a mixture of aluminum and iron oxide nanoparticles in an organic binder. The gray one, I’m not so sure.
Point conceded. I apologize.
So you’re still trying to argue that particle size has nothing to do with rate of propagation of combustion of thermite, with a bit of hand waving about some papers you linked to but from which you cite no actual facts.
As I said, Unz.com must have the dumbest trolls on the Internet. Mr. Unz should change the name of his blog to Troll Town.
Somebody wrote:
Disclosure: The 1st of those posters was/still is *me* [September 17, 2018 at 8:28 pm GMT]. Further, I termed any/all in ‘support’ of Khalezov’s outright *impossible* theories, also “nutters.” CanSpeccy’s reference to an ae911truth .pdf precluding *any* nuke at/on 9/11 *must* be authoritative [otherwise the pro-K trolls would be having a ‘field day’]; but with such proof, we can go yet another ‘full circle;’ not only are Contrarian III, Heinz & utu [+ any et al.] filthy, deliberate liars – they are utter nutters to boot. Morons, in fact.
[Another disclosure: Yes, it *is* called Schadenfreude]. rgds
The golden days of atomic science!
It makes me wish they’d spent a bit longer on the drawing board before rushing it into mass production. I guess we have Einstein et al to thank for that.
Okay..
I don’t think anyone here pretends that we’ve got a smoking gun that links back to an individual like Rumsfeld that would get them into jail. At minimum we have overwhelming evidence that something far too complex for Osama Bin Laden was perpetrated by someone other than who we were told. These journalists and news network’s prior knowledge at least proves that the standard account is false and the the administration only reluctantly agreed to convene a 911 commission to investigate. That investigation was set up to fail (easy to prove)..
We’ll never get a conviction of course. Instead, what we should be interested in my view, is how did we get a government that is 1 part incompetent 1 part corrupt that cannot protect it’s citizens and instead leads us to fight wars. Who has an interest in our government acting this way. *Someone* was quite enough organized to get the US into war against all of Israel’s enemies. *Those* individuals were obviously quite competent and the US citizens themselves quite powerless. Those are the interesting questions.
The time may have passed were we could have effectively prosecuted someone. If we had not allowed Michael Chertoff to send those Mossad agents safely back to Israel we might have at least prosecuted them of something. But alas that ship sailed in 2001.
Steel-reinforced concrete buildings are much more resistant to fire. Why do you think steel framed buildings get fireproofing?
Again, it had a concrete frame.
You keep asking–why didn’t this building collapse? And the answer is always “because it was different.” The construction was different or the fire burned differently or the design was better. Your pictures are unconvincing to anyone who thinks about the issue for more than a second.
And, of course, we have steel buildings that have collapsed from fire. That should convince you, right? Something tells me that you will suddenly be very interested in the differences between those buildings and WTC7.
I’m pretty sure that if you start pressing charges against the periphery for neglect of duty etc, they’d start ratting out the big players. Where’s there’s a will, there’s a way.
Unfortunately there’s not enough will because there’s not yet enough awareness.
I missed this earlier:
It’s totally absurd to believe that an American airline lost someone’s luggage?
See how warped your minds get when you huff this truther bullshit?
Don’t you find it amazing then, that the “pre-destroyed” lower part continued to stand and remain visible in images of the demolitions, even as they progressed downward? That must have been some selective shockwave. Even after the pile driver top section was no longer visible in the images, the towers continued to peel themselves apart in a downward sequence.
I don’t dispute that the central cores were cut near ground level — and elsewhere — at some point during the demolitions, but FEMA’s Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT) never gained access to any of that steel from the core columns of WTC 1 & 2 for inspection before that material was shipped out or melted down by Giuliani’s NYC administration, which were illegal actions amounting to destruction of evidence, and also underline both failures of the responsible local, state, and federal authorities to prevent it, and to hold the former mayor accountable for his actions.
Khalezov’s other prominent theory is equally preposterous. He claims that the Pentagon was hit on 9/11 by a Granit missile that had been recovered from the sunken submarine Kursk.
http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com/2011/02/russian-whistleblower-dimitri-khalezov.html
I have seen no good evidence that any flying object hit the Pentagon on 9/11. The simplest explanation is that a bomb exploded.
In fact, there is no good, incontrovertible evidence of any Boeing airliner crash debris at any of the 4 sites where hijacked jetliners were alleged to have crashed on September 11, 2001. There are a number of obvious problems with the object found standing on end under scaffolding near the corner of Church and Murray.
The simplest explanation for the failure of the USAF to intercept any hijacked jetliners on Black Tuesday is that there were, in fact, no real hijacked 757s or 767s that day, but rather only a combination of electronic spoofing, airplane shell games, video fakery, among various types of jiggery pokery used to construct the narrative.
If that were indeed due to exposure to radioactivity on that day (or in those days and weeks), then the amount of radioactivity released should be very large, and thus also detectable directly. Unless you provide such direct evidence of large-scale radioactive contamination, the case is closed, as far as I am concerned.
Agreed, but there’s plenty of evidence that large underground explosions took place. Why? Assuming that the evidence for them is valid, and to all appearances it is, why were they employed?
They’re a well documented, devastating counterfactual undermining the “hijacked airliners” narrative. If they (obviously) weren’t part of the “show”, but were highly noticeable, what role did they play? Why have them at all? One can’t avoid the conclusion that they played a fundamental role in the demolitions.
A long time ago, I racked my brain for too many hours trying to figure out a workable demolition plan that accounted for ALL of the empirical evidence. I came up blank. The biggest impediment I found was the lack of reliable acoustic data. I could see stuff happen, but couldn’t know the acoustic spectrum it was generating which is where I believed the key to lay. Unless somebody does a deathbed confession, I’ll probably never know.
The demolition of the two towers really was both highly unorthodox, and extraordinarily well executed. Even the errors were caught and corrected in real time. 99% perfection, I suspect, is as good as it gets in that field. Whoever did it is damn good at what they do.
Agreed, Skirk. Don’t forget about the cover-up in which the Israeli firsters are once again over represented. The common thread in all aspects of (before, during, and after) is Israel and its agents (both sayanim and goy). Did you have a chance to read Victor Thorn’s ‘9/11 Made in Israel’? If not here is a link from where you can choose the format. You may also find some interesting article on this website related to 911.
Here is a excerpt from Thorn’s aforementioned work:
Judaic number games and religious connections to the wars in the middle east are all over the place.
Purim theme runs through a lot of the wars. Iraq 1991 war ended on Purim. Iraq 2003 war started on Purim. Libya 2011 war started on Purim.
The mantra of seven nations to destroy after the 911 false flag is a glaring Judaic concept. It comes from Deut. 7. 1-2 in Old testament.
“ 1“When the LORD your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you, 2and when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them. “
Yet, our “free’ press does not poke fun or criticize this concept of destroying seven nations. Silence is not golden, it destroying our planet.
The number combo of 9/11 also has deep connections to Judaic gematria, jewish mystical interpretation of numbers. What does eleven represent in Judaic gematria? The Kabbala’s Sefirot, Tree of Life, is a structure of ten Sefirot (emanations) from God that create and sustains the world. Eleven, represents destructive excess, human ego attempting to add one more emanation to the Divine system. It signifies evil and a curse. The Sefer Tetzirah, the Book of Creation, the earliest book of Jewish mysticism, talks about nine and eleven being evil numbers compared to ten – “ten and not eleven; ten and not nine”. The Judaic sages said “whoever adds or detracts” signifies evil and curse. 9/11 fits this to the tee. Ten signifies balance, order and the holy orders of numbers. Ten is missing in this 9/11 number game. This proves beyond doubt that there was Judaic gemetric thought in making this number combo to scare us.
Produce an example of a collapse due to fire in which the building outer frame collapses symmetrically near free fall velocity or you have no case. The preponderance of the evidence for controlled demolitions is best evidenced in WTC7.
Interesting to note the number of people who knew (or hinted at knowing BEFORE WTC7 collapse) that it would be coming down:
http://www.consensus911.org/point-wtc7-7/
Interesting to note that Larry Silverstein owned all three builindings and all three collapses at near free fall speed which made lucky Larry collect $4.6 billion:
The FBI got complaints about the blast from Jeff Coopers’s original 10mm round, and did careful ballistic tests to discover what the most effective pistol ammunition was. They discovered that the weight of the bullet was the most important factor.
Floors above the impact (15 for the North Tower, 22 in the case of the South tower) is the crucial factor. Floors above plane impact predict speed of the collapse (one WTC came down in 13 seconds the other took only 11 seconds). So one was quite a bit closer to free fall time coming down than the other one, and the one with the most floors above came down faster. It may not be a coincidence that the South Tower collapsed first though it was the second to be hit.
The premise of the explanation in the video you’ve linked is wrong (i.e. that the mass of the UPPER section of the towers destroyed the LOWER sections once the decent momentum begun WITHOUT DESTROYING ITSELF (the upper mass) IN THE PROCESS)!
Here:
So you are saying that the shock wave is an acoustic wave that travels through steel and concrete as its medium. You realize that any moment this shockwave breaks any steel or concrete element while traveling up it will not be able to travel beyond this breakage point. No more energy will be able to be transferred past this point.
So what is the nature of this shock wave? Are you going to postulate some ‘dustification’ process that is unknown to physics. That there is a pulse of some kind of energy traveling up in steel and concrete leaving that steel and concrete ‘dustified” behind yet having enough energy left to keep doing it repeatedly. You realize that a moment any region would get “dustified” the particles of this “dust” would begin to fall because gravity does not wait until the shock wave gets to the 60 or 90 floor.
Postulating unknown physics is no different than Juddy Wood postulating unknown energy from unknown source.
I think that Sparkon made good objection:
Khalezov’s scenario that you are advocating here is inconsistent with the appearance of the building on floors below the plane impact site. The building remains motionless. Windows are not exploded by any shock wave. The inner core can’t be falling w/o making an impact in the outer shell where windows are. If the core was falling we would see some bending and bucking of the outer shell. This has not been observed. The shockwave you postulate to account for building behavior would have to have nature and properties that are unknown to physics.
Nice, sweeping overview, and I can only take a minor issue when we get to this
I see the USD and the Euro as only marginally distinguished from each other. They’re both printed and manipulated by Rothschild, as near as I can glimmer.
If the decision is made to crush a currency, the Argentinian, Venezuelan, or Turkish, for instance, then these two sides of the same coin work in concert towards their same goal.
If it would harm Russia to lower the value of the Euro, in order to damper Russian exports in some sector, then even if it bolstered the dollar, then it’s something Rothschild would be willing to do, regardless of any blubbering from European interests.
The banks run things. They run Europe in near absolute terms. When Macron or May say they’re going to bomb Syria if it used chemical weapons, (even tho no one believes Assad uses these weapons), both ‘leaders’ of their respective nations will toe the Rothschild line.
Regardless of the costs to the European vassal states.
When Rothschild tells May and Macron and Merkel, that they’re slated to accept millions of African “refugees”, none of these leaders has a say, and certainly not their respective populations.
And Rothschild and his minions control both the Fed and the ECB.
That’s why you have the ‘dueling puppets’ in Australia and Canada reading from the exact same script on the ‘necessity of going to war with Iraq.
All the nations of the zio-west are completely controlled in this regard. That’s why- I suspect- they hate Trump so much. That’s why they just told Marine Le Pen she’s been ordered to undergo psychiatric counseling, because she isn’t with the (((program))).
I agree, there’s not too much sunlight between our respective perception of the situation.
Only that Israel already held the central place vis-à-vis the ZUS’s Imperial designs going back to at least WWI. Even before Israel was a fact on the ground.
The problem, as I see it, wasn’t that ((they)) didn’t yet exert total control over the apparatus of DC, (they did ; ) but that cud-chewing, Bovinus Americanus, was just too complacent eating his Big Macs and watching sports. He needed to be cattle-prodded into sending his offspring to die for Greater Israel. Something these goy anti-Semites weren’t willing to do, if you put it to them in those terms. So they did 9/11, and created the sense of outrage necessary to get Bubba off his couch, and waving the flag.
But the KSA has been thoroughly corrupt for generations, and the people aren’t prosperous, by any stretch.
But I agree, if they could have turned Iraq into a Saudi Arabia, with a super corrupt government and institutions all controlled out of Tel Aviv, I suppose that would have suited them just fine.
In a way, I suppose that’s what they actually have in Iraq right now, Shiite intrigues notwithstanding.
Well, the way I see it, is the (((Empire))) considers the ZUS as expendable. And just as the British empire was dashed on the rocks of Zio-ambitions, so too would they toss the USA under the bus in a New York second if they felt they’d profit somehow by doing so.
For now, the big, ZUSA stupid Master / Blaster bully is a perfect golem, crushing their enemies right and left, and printing untold trillions of Federal Reserve Notes to bring the planet to its knees under their domination.
But I suspect they’d like to one day return in full force to Germany, where their victims are so much more swank and the culture has panache. What fun is it shitting on Americana culture, with its boring fly-over red state rubes, when you can shit on an ancient and glorious culture and great heritage and people going back to Rome and before?
Germany is the economic and cultural center of Western/Central Europe, (which is why Perfidious Albion hated her so much). They’d no doubt like to return there so as to pump their spiritual and cultural sewage out right from the center of everything that they despise.
Walking the streets of Philly, gives them a quiet satisfaction seeing what they’ve wrought on the white rubes with their BLM orcs. But how can that compare to strolling the streets of Dresden!, and ruminating over what is was like in February, 14th, 1945, when the purest expression of their collective id was in full regalia, orgiastically manifesting on the streets… all their untold and pent up grievance – being relieved, just as it is relived, over and over in their fantasies and reveries.
Amen Erebus, amen to that.
This plot by Chandler seems to be the only solid evidence for controlled demolition on 9/11. A probability that a similar behavior of the WTC7 building could occur due to random fires is non zero though extremely low. Prof. Hulsey of UAF was supped to provide finite elements model to look into this issue. He hasn’t released his results yet.
I took David Chandler on face value as I have no means to repeat his calculations and getting data from video capture. Anybody else verified his result? Anybody has looked at WTC7 from another angles? How accurate is time scale derived from video used to calculate the velocities. Speeding up video or slowing it down will change the result.
How those finding by Chandler could be undermined? Very simple: The NYC officials should issue a statement that after the collapse of WTC1 and 2 and structural damage to WTC7 it was decided to facilitate demolition of WTC7 with explosives for the sake of safety as the unstable structure of WTC7 was threatening recovery and rescue operation in the WTC area.
The only Muslims involved in 9/11 were either: (a) coincidental; or (b) luckless decoys placed where they were to support the assertion that Muslims did it.
KSA? Lost track, there.
Produce another conspiracy in which a government used plane crashes and controlled demolition to destroy three of it’s own buildings or you have no case.
Now, do you see how stupid your logic is? Probably not.
If you read the opening chapters of Griffin’s “Debunking 9/11 Debunking ” book you cannot fail to be impressed at how quickly the civilian air traffic control armed forces liaison Scoggins reacted to inform the Air Force there was an air emergency (not a hijacking) and the paralysis of the Air Force imposed by their chain of command habit (Col. Marr at NEADS refused to exercise his right to launch in a exigent emergency without speaking to General Arnold at NORAD and Arnold’s adjutant would not disturb him immediately because he was in conference). The air force probably could have stopped some of the planes, but the sector commander did not make it clear on the phone it was an emergency and the gofers taking the call would not even disturb senior officers in conference. The official reports’ modification to the original reported timing timings claimed by the armed forces systematically exculpate them from the accusation that they were too slow to launch (the planes could have been called back because they have radio communications).
At the time of 9/11 the outgoing head of the Joint Chief, General Shelton thought that Rumsfeld was the devil in the form of a defense secretary. Shelton was on a plane and could not get back. The incoming head of the Joint Ceheif General Myers heard about the plane crashing into a WTC tower as he was going into a meeting with a senator about his upcoming confirmation hearing, which he decided it was too important to cancel! That has the ring of truth.
The chain of command would also work in the opposite direction. If Rumsfeld was involved in 9/11 in any way he would have had his approved chairman of the joint chiefs with him in the Pentagon in case anything went wrong and orders had to be issued to immobilise the unexpectedly efficient and swift FAA and then USAF stopping the attacks f(or example the FAA and sector commander had been quicker and/or a pilot had taken it upon himself as the man on the spot in an exigent emergency to fly to New York without authenticated orders from higher chain of command. Israel has the resources and inside information on US defenses, the remaining essential requirement for a false flag 9/11 is not help from the US government but operational security. Even if it worked, post 9/11 American defectors from the conspiracy, or people who realized their superiors had been in on it, would be a insurmountable obstacle .
Quite apart from the difficulty of getting Americans to murder other Americans, if a false flag 9/11 was to work for its intended purpose, anyone in on it had to stand up to investigation without issuing orders that got those who obeyed them being severely criticized. Subordinates would not carry the can they would point the finger.
Informing people in the American government, military or intelligence services would be violating the need to know principle and even if nobody inadvertently gave the game away, it would have altered their behaviour in ways that would be suspicious in a future enquiry. For example general Myers would have taken care to appear less concerned with the political facilitation of his career than defending the country and General Arnold would have been careful not to look like a marinet whose subordinates were afraid to knock on his door. The Clausewitzian friction and miscommunication about the 9/11 planes and the creation phantom ones was genuine in a way that shows they had no knowledge I think.
A single decision maker at the top of one country’s armed forces and intelligence services operating to stage a false flag attack on an unwitting America largely solves the problem of controlling possible defections from a international mixed allegiance 9/11 conspiracy A false flag 9/11 could only have been done by Israel–alone.
Vous êtes diabolique!
The French video you pointed me to was interesting, but I was able to understand only part of it. I know a respectable amount of French, but understanding spoken French is somewhat of a challenge. As a Francophone you must certainly be aware of the dreaded “La Dictée”. I downloaded the video so I can play it more in the future to see how much I can pick up in successive sessions.
Was someone crazy enough to construct a reservoir (for drinking water) by means of an underground nuke? The architect of that idea should get a lifetime supply of the water from it. I wasn’t aware that some countries provided sensitive locations of their own with mini-nukes for quick destruction.
Yes, it was important … THAT IT BE CONCEALED. Christine Todd Whitman, head of the EPA at the time of 9/11, went to great pains to have the ground zero area checked for harmful substances like asbestos and benzene (taking advantage of the fact that many people confuse benzene with benzine). The USGS did an element analysis (depended upon by Tahil) but never did the obvious followup of isotope analysis.
I haven’t checked the authenticity of the story but I understand that a blue searchlight was pointed skyward at ground zero for some time after 9/11. If true, the searchlight had only one credible purpose — to make less obvious the Cherenkov radiation coming from the pile. I’d love to know who ordered the searchlight and when.
Khalezov was more than slightly perturbed at Steven Jones. Jones is well-known as a nuclear physicist and he was puttering around looking for thermate in the 9/11 dust. Why didn’t he notice the obvious signs in his own field of expertise?
The thermite/ate mechanism preferred by A&E has only two things going for it — it’s relatively quiet (but wouldn’t be if it exploded) and allows acceptance of the convenient lies about 9/11 — like minimal seismic events. Please check my comment no. 1839 for human witnesses who felt underground shaking and other phenomena consistent with a non-minimal seismic event, like between 5 and 6 on the Richter scale.
Thermite/ate also doesn’t do a good job of breaking up just the 4 inch thick concrete floor at each story in the building or were the dust clouds that came from the towers as they collapsed only pixie dust? If it was thermite/ate that broke up the almost 1,000 sq meters of concrete on each floor, the thermite/ate starts to get noisy as well as giving off a real light show. [Note that I’m allowing for the (wrong) claim that the dust was almost all concrete dust.]
That said, A&E is doing some good work. They should get off the thermite/ate train and start looking at a mechanism that explains all or at least most apparent effects and does so without contradictions.
Not stupid. A government that tried to do that to its own people would feel so secure and in control before making the attempt, that it would no reason to actually do it. Unless it was just for kicks.
That is wrong, the North Tower took a full two seconds longer than the video says to fall. The North Tower had fewer floors above the impact that the South Tower. The North Tower having only 15 floors above impat as opposed to 22 for the South Tower, which collapsed first came down in 11 seconds. The weight of the 15 North Tower Floors above the impact was
This is a strange thing to say. NIST released their Final draft report in August of 2008. In this report they denied that WTC7 entered free-fall. In fact they stated it very clearly, “WTC7 did not enter free-fall.” David Chandler informed them that his measurements and calculations show that WTC7 did indeed collapse for 2.5 seconds at free-fall. NIST said that they would take a look at it. When they released their Final report in November of 2008 they did make a change from their draft report and stated that yes, WTC7 entered free-fall for 2.25 seconds. So it was inquiries from the 9/11 Truthers that forced NIST to change their report. It was NIST that changed their story when faced with inconvenient facts, not the Truthers.
This is not an invented argument, unless you consider the known laws of physics to be “invented arguments” as well. The issue is what known mechanism can cause a free-fall collapse of a steel-framed high-rise absent demolition? We do know that demolition could do this, but what else could? If someone suggests fire then they need to prove this experimentally.
I know you are a bit rusty on 9/11 related knowledge, but if you wish to continue to embarrass yourself, go right ahead.
I’d skipped over the mini nukes nonsense because the proponents seem like nuts. But you seem like a level headed fellow. What’s the main evidence for large underground explosions having occurred?
What does this mean? Was the collapse dynamically steered?
I don’t know why you think that is a premise. Anyone can see the North Towers above the impact had NOT ended up on ground zero intact on top of the pulverised remains of the floors below the impact. The fabric of the building was pulverized to dust but significantly slower than the 9.1 second free fall time. The answer is when the floors above the impact point got to the ground they did destroy themselves. Hence everything above and below was pulverised
A fire heating aluminium to far above its melting point after which it came into contact with water and caused a series of explosions (heard by over a hundred people on the scene) Weakened by the explosions and denuded of their fire protection the impact floor girders ceased to support the weight of the floors above it and the floors above the impact floor dropped on the floors below the impact floors pancaking all the way down until at the ground the floors above the impact floor themselves pancake and were destroyed . The free fall time for an object dropped from the height of the WTC is 9 seconds and the North Tower took 13 seconds.
http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf
Sure if you ignore all the other visual and physical evidence. Much of the physical evidence was destroyed or either not look at under the auspices of the official investigations. Appendix C of the FEMA report looked at one piece of steel recovered from WTC7. It was analyzed by scientists and fire engineers at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. They reported:
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.”
These are characteristics of an aluminothermic reaction as verified by Jon Cole in his own experiments.
https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-8452/403_apc.pdf
You should point out to M. Guyénot that his picture of Saudi involvement, which he holds up like a straw man, is radically incomplete. The Saudi royal family may be less fratricidal than North Korea’s ruling Kim family but it doesn’t make them monolithic or perfect in their solidarity. On the contrary there are very large numbers of very rich Saudi royals who could well have been enthusiasts for ObL’s adventures. Note that none of that denies any degree of Mossad involvement one might like to believe.
Thank you. I haven’t yet seen any convincing argument or evidence that that account is wrong. But do you know enough about the design and construction of the towers to explain how the central core collapsed so quickly?
If I followed the manners and customs of too many UR commenters I would have to call you a liar. But maybe inadvertence or carelessness explains why the linked report, which I have taken the trouble to read doesn’t in any way bear out your claim in te words immediately preceding it. I dounle checked with searches for therm, alumin nd nano…..
See my reply to tanabear.
In case you misded it I have pointed out that tanabear’s link is at best a mistake.
Who cut the external steel supporting columns? If the floors detached and went their own way, the external shell should still be intact. How did it cut itself up into neat little pieces?
Most hasbara trolls here simply do not have a basic concept of physics and as such simply care less about embarrassing themselves with non-sequitur/straw-men arguments, appeals to impossible confirmation basis, or just simple diversion tactics.
Those who hold a semblance of critical thought, basic understanding of physics, a truly objective perspective curiosity can explore an exemplary site of information of 9/11(explore the entire site, but I simply pose a few pages for the inquisitive mind–which I’ve mentioned here in an earlier post):
homepage: http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/
WTC1: http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=280&MMN_position=620:620
WTC2: http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=287&MMN_position=621:621
WTC7: http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=293&MMN_position=622:622
explosive forces lateral ejections of parts of exoskeleton (rendered by squibs ejecting on successive floors): http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=294&MMN_position=662:662
The methodology of Chandler in case of WTC7 is sound providing there are no timing issues. Nobody complained about the timing issue, even NIST thus I accept that Chandler is correct.
A constant acceleration, 1% within g for over 2 sec for whole roof of the building proves beyond reasonable doubt that the fall was aided with the explosives.
Since you posses a modicum of a sense of etiquette, thus far in my limited observations, I simply tell you that you and the explanation you’ve linked is impossible in every sense of the word. The upper mass, in it’s proverbial descent at a varying velocity (approaching free fall at times), would be long destroyed before its reach to to the bottom floors (especially in a tube-frame design whereby separate set of load bearing structures would twist their way (whether by heat-transfer or lack thereof, melting, or some other phenomenon) into a state of equilibrium thereby halting the collapse.
Are you joking? Ever had a basic course in physics? Of course breaking a material does NOT mean for the wave that it can’t travel further, it ONLY means that it loses energy IF breaking the material requires energy. Now for a brittle fracture which is the case for rock (and even for steel in the case of extremely high frequencies) energy consumed is minimal. Go fetch a physics textbook, please.
No, I’m going to postulate physics is unknown to you.
See above. Brittle fracture does not imply any energy loss, and anyway a nuclear explosive shockwave has plenty of energy to use.
No I don’t. Rock turned into sand by the shockwave of a nuclear explosion is standard knowledge based on numerous underground nuclear tests and this “sand” (or coarse rubble depending on the distance from point zero) has no reason to fall unless there is a void below and a low enough pressure in this void… which is precisely what I explained with the “collapse chimney” formation when the pressure inside the cavity lowers because of heat transfer. In the case of the building obviously it’s not turned into dust completely but heavily weakened and “prepared” for the final collapse.
Once again, this is well-known experimental physics, but you have to know some physics to understand it.
And here is the consequence of the collapse chimney formation, as seen from ground level:
OK, I’ve been nice and afforded you with some level of benefit-of-doubt. However, your lack of understanding the simple concepts of physics, along with your shameless sense of making IDIOTIC assertions in almost all of your posts, all the while with absolutely minimal hasbara recommended rebuttals, and made absent any sense of reality, equates to something like this:
here and now–like many posters here–you’ve been relegated to the low-depths of inconsequence and made a primordial symbol of pure IDIOTICY. YOU’RE AND IDIOT WITH NO SENSE AND NO SHAME. Therefore, you shall not take anymore of my effort nor time to presented in an alternative explanation.
You are clearly and imbecile, low-IQ, a pathetic no-brain IDIOT–a clear provocateur (along with your Israeli firster mannequins on this website).
IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOUR GRASP????
Apparently embedding a video does not work when I use the embedding code so here is the YouTube link:
“It’s a frame.”
Yes Wizard, utu is perfectly correct in this:
“A constant acceleration, 1% within g for over 2 sec for whole roof of the building proves beyond reasonable doubt that the fall was aided with the explosives.”
Mass falling one floor gains kinetic energy. If it has to break structures, some part p of its kinetic energy is used for breaking structures. Only the remaining part can accelerate the mass. Therefore it will fall with acceleration (1-p)g where g=9.81 m/s2 is the acceleration of free-fall. For breaking structures of WTC1 calculations give p as about 1/4. For WTC7 the figure would be similar.
Over a hundred firemen and other witnessed heard explosions. But lots of things can explode. Flour can be explosive under the right circumstances . The same is true of aluminium.
Have you ever knocked something relatively small off of the kitchen work top and been surprised at how hard it hit your foot? Momentum destroyed the girders against each other. They only found 300 intact bodies, the rest were minced into a hundred pieces
The 9/11 planes were made of aluminium and carrying jet fuel that certainly burns at a high enough temperature to melt aluminium . An aluminothermic reaction took out the pillars? Pretty obvious what happened then, isn’t it.
The north Tower took 13 seconds to collapse, a full 4 seconds slower than free fall.
“For WTC7 the figure would be similar.”
Just adding what should be the acceleration of WTC7 if it collapsed from gravitation. Greening calculated for WTC1 that 15 floors falling one floor level have 2.1 GJ of energy, so one floor gains 0.14GJ of kinetic energy by falling one floor level. Greening also calculated that 0.603 GJ is needed to break the structures of WTC1 in one floor. Assuming that WTC7 was similarly built than WTC1 in strength sense, 47 falling floors got kinetic energy and 0.603/(47*0.14)=0.0908 of it was needed to break the structures. Thus, the acceleration would have been (1-0.0908)*9.81=8.91 m/s2. Chandler measured 9.8, not 8.9, so the fall could not be by gravitation.
“An aluminothermic reaction took out the pillars? Pretty obvious what happened then, isn’t it.”
This theory by Christian Simensen is easily shown wrong by the following simple reasoning:
First I give credit to Simensen: liquid aluminium steals hydrogen from water and hydrogen-air mixture explodes and it could theoretically blow off columns, the same as fire could weaken columns and initiate a collapse. Simensen has found a new proposal how the collapse could be initiated, but as there already was one possible way, he did nothing remarkable.
The problem is here: we assume the collapse is started in some way. There are the air puffs seen in videos several floors below the destruction level. There are only two explanations for these air puffs: either collapsing floors have reached that level and push air out, or they are explosions. Unfortunately for Simensen, liquid aluminium would have stayed in one floor, it cannot be the reason for the air puffs, unless we assume that floors have fallen on that lower level. It is seen that even with Simensen’s theory, we have to assume that floors get separated from external walls and fall faster than the walls get destroyed. That is, unless there were explosives, floors pancaked. Pancaking floors took the liquid aluminium with them.
So, how did the external walls get destroyed? Aluminium has fallen down with the floors. The only thing to destroy these walls is the upper floors, but as they destroy the lower floors, they get destroyed, the lowest floor of the upper floors falls to the abyss and floors of the lower part are gone. This happens in each fall of one floor level. Each time the upper part loses one floor. It was 15 floors originally, after 15 floors of breaking structures the upper part is no more. Nothing can destroy the external walls of the lower part. We can even see how these walls should look like: we see the air puffs, that is where the floors have dropped, then there is perfectly good walls all the way to the destruction level. That is, falling floors did no harm to the walls. They should have stayed up. Some 30+ floors of the walls should be destroyed, the rest should say, but the walls collapsed.
“Pretty obvious what happened then, isn’t it.”
No, it is not obvious. Think a bit.
G’day.
Thorn [via tac] says:
Sean says:
I have always maintained
Now tac says:
OK. Recalling actions on the day, ‘the big story’ [what became ‘the standard *lying* narrative’] was ‘hijacked planes cause WTCs 1 & 2 to collapse!’ Part repeat; it wasn’t too long before the corrupt&venal MSM were all singing from the same song-sheet, with fulminating politicians firmly in the lead, all screeching ‘Terr’ist attack on America!’ That was only the 1st part of ‘the cover-up;’ then came the criminal destruction of evidence and the ‘faked’ inquiries. In the ‘background’ on ‘the day’ were a) ATC [= air traffic control] and b) the military; almost no action resulted [we later heard of some planes being sent on a ‘reciprocal course’ = totally false direction with of course, no result]. ATC/military inaction *could* be explained by a ‘parallel’ military exercise simulating exactly what was alleged to be taking place in the ‘perceived/reported’ reality = ‘Terr’ist hijacking.’ Up until the 1st WTC explosion, all may have appeared ‘in the green.’ If ATC had noticed ‘funny’ tracks on their radars before that point, they could have contacted the military who could assure ATC that what they were noticing were traces synthetically ‘injected’ by the military exercise.
The 1st explosion suddenly changed the whole world into a ‘real’ [alleged] hijack scenario. Both ATC and the military may have been confounded – but ‘struck dumb’ = still no action [apart, perhaps from a covert ‘shoot-down’ of UA93]. So things got worse, possibly ‘totally out of hand’ with reports of Pentagon and Shanksville ‘crashes.’ Now the Terr’ist hijacking narrative had taken full flight.
But just when the situation seemed to be stabilising,’ WTC7 free fall collapsed. It was a total ‘black swan’ event, which was attemptedly ‘covered’ with the ‘collapse due to fire’ bullshit. The Terr’ist hijacking narrative was still hanging on, but now only by its rhetorical fingernails. Sometime along the line, it would have been noticed within the US rogue regime, that free fall collapses have only one possible causation = controlled-demolition. Err, say what?!
Consider a 1st putative case, wherein the US rogue regime effectively knew nothing. The ‘new Pearl Harbor’ was there; they quickly ‘offed’ Afghanistan, Iraq was next as the 1st of the WC7in5.
But with the [belated?] WTC7 realisation, they suddenly knew that the Terr’ist hijacking was a complete sham, since *somebody* [absolutely not Arab/Muslim hijackers] had ‘sneakily’ pre-loaded 7 [and not just BTW, also 1 & 2] with explosives.
Bloody hell; who? And speaking of bloody hell, would that not *now* break out within the US rogue regime?
Aside: I do not for the smallest part of a pico-sec deny Z-involvement, possibly all the way ‘up’ to Zs having done the pre-loading. But I do see a *vast* difference between the US regime knowing beforehand = complicit OR being nastily surprised = outrageously violated.
But nothing ever appeared to happen, which gives rise to a 2nd putative case, wherein [some significant, controlling faction within] the US rogue regime knew *all*. The standard *lying* narrative continues to roll merrily and unruffled along – exactly what we see. WTC7? Pretend it never happened; move on.
Sooo; big Q: 1st or 2nd scenario? rgds
For drinking water, certainly not. But for agriculture, definitely yes. And the soviet propaganda of that time did present the “nuclear lake” as safe for swimming (at the end of the video):
I don’t understand Russian but it’s quite obvious that the comment is telling us “everything is under control, don’t worry folks!”.
Now you should not imagine that only those “crazy soviets” were doing such dangerous things with nuclear bombs at that time. Here is an example of a human experiment some volunteers accepted to do in the USA, on July 19, 1957 (from atomcentral YouTube channel):
Interesting isn’t it?
Agreed.
Me: Correct! You/Khalezov postulate physics totally unknown in the entire universe. Troll. But not ‘just’ any troll, a filthily lying little troll. Khalezov has been looong debunked, and you’ve been informed – but you don’t stop lying; you just can’t help yourself – unlikely anyone, anywhere, anytime ever could.
No nukes, no dustify, no sense, no feeling.
I**3 = identify, inform, ignore.
“That is wrong, the North Tower took a full two seconds longer than the video says to fall. The North Tower had fewer floors above the impact that the South Tower. The North Tower having only 15 floors above impat as opposed to 22 for the South Tower, which collapsed first came down in 11 seconds. The weight of the 15 North Tower Floors above the impact was ”
Chandler measured the acceleration of the North Tower (WTC1) as 6.3 m/s2. If we look at Greening’s calculations, breaking the structures of one floor took 603 MJ and a floor gained 140 MJ by falling one floor level. From these figures follows that 15 floors gain the kinetic energy 2.1 GJ falling one floor level, while 22 floors gain the kinetic energy 3.08 GJ by falling a floor level.
Assuming the buildings fell by gravitation and there was no external energy to break the structures we get: For WTC1 breaking structures took 0.603/2.1=0.287 of the kinetic energy implying acceleration 7 m/s2, while for WTC2 breaking structures took 0.603/3.08=0.196 of the kinetic energy implying acceleration 7.9 m/s2.
So it should be, but how it was? The buildings had 146 floors, each floor 3.7 m. WTC1 fell 130 floors, 481 m, while WTC2 fell 124 floors, 459 m. But the collapse created a pile of rubble. NIST measured 11 s for WTC1 and 9 s for WTC2. From the collapse time of WTC1 and acceleration of 7 m/s2 we can calculate that WTC1 fell 424 m, it gives 11 s. If so, the pile was about 57 m and WTC2 fell 402 m. The collapse time for WTC2 should have been 10 s. Fall time 9 s for 402 m for WTC2 gives acceleration 9.9 m/s2, it is free-fall.
Result: WTC2 collapse time does not well agree with a gravitational collapse.
If a free fall (of a complex structure like WTC buildings) then it must be a controlled demolition. The free fall must occur for the whole building horizontal cross-section and for sufficiently long time exceeding the travel over several floors.
These conditions were met for WTC7 and thus it was proven that WTC7 was destroyed by controlled demolition. So the case for WTC7 is closed. WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition.
On the other hand controlled demolition does not have to proceed at free fall. We were lucky that the perpetrators made a mistake and went overkill in the demolition of the WTC7 and achieved the maximum possible acceleration (a=g). Thus the controlled demolition of WTC7 was proven beyond a reasonable doubt with mathertical precision of argument based on a basic law of physics only. No complex analysis by a finite elements method of the whole building structure is necessary.
WTC1 and WTC2 experienced accelerated falls at ≈6 m/s^2 which are lower than free fall. There are other arguments not so clear cut as in the case of WTC7 that can prove that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition which are also based on basic laws of physics. A fairly elegant and simple argument is based on estimates of the total energy released. The total potential energy of buildings and even with the total energy of jet fuel cannot account for (1) remaining temperatures of the pile and (2) amount of dust. Then there are many other anomalies.
But even w/o looking at WTC1 and WTC2 the fact (YES, IT IS A FACT) that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition explodes/implodes the whole official narrative. From this point everything can be questioned and doubted and it shifts the burden of proof on the promoters of the official narrative. It is them who must prove now that WTC1 and WTC2 were not brought down by controlled demolition. It is them who must account for all anomalies like temperature, dust, flying degree at high horizontal velocities, iron micro spheres in the dust. And it is them who must prove that natural fall at acceleration of ≈6m/s^2 is even possible. And finally it is them who must come up with a plausible scenario that the controlled demolition of WTC7 was not related to 9/11 but whatever the scenario they will come up with it won’t be plausible enough for anybody.
WTC1 and 2 fall times
“That is wrong, the North Tower took a full two seconds longer than the video says to fall. The North Tower had fewer floors above the impact that the South Tower. The North Tower having only 15 floors above impat as opposed to 22 for the South Tower, which collapsed first came down in 11 seconds. The weight of the 15 North Tower Floors above the impact was ”
Chandler measured the acceleration of the North Tower (WTC1) as 6.3 m/s2. If we look at Greening’s calculations
http://www.911myths.com/WTCONC1.pdf
, breaking the structures of one floor took 603 MJ and a floor gained 140 MJ by falling one floor level. From these figures follows that 15 floors gain the kinetic energy 2.1 GJ falling one floor level, while 22 floors gain the kinetic energy 3.08 GJ by falling a floor level.
Assuming the buildings fell by gravitation and there was no external energy to break the structures we get: For WTC1 breaking structures took 0.603/2.1=0.287 of the kinetic energy implying acceleration 7 m/s2, while for WTC2 breaking structures took 0.603/3.08=0.196 of the kinetic energy implying acceleration 7.9 m/s2.
Or so it should be, but was it so? The buildings had 146 floors, each floor 3.7 m. WTC1 fell 130 floors, 481 m, while WTC2 fell 124 floors, 459 m. But the collapse created a pile of rubble. NIST measured 11 s for WTC1 and 9 s for WTC2. From the collapse time of WTC1 and acceleration 6.3 m/s2 measured by Chandler we can calculate that WTC1 fell 381 m, it gives 11 s.
If so, the pile was about 100 m high (!) and WTC2 fell 359 m. The collapse time for WTC2 was 9 s. It gives the acceleration 8.7 m/s2, it is not free-fall but also does not fully agree with 7.9 m/s2. We should expect that the fall time would be 9.5 s if the acceleration was 7.9 m/s2 and a bit more if WTC2 also had a bit smaller acceleration than Greening calculated, as was the case for WTC1.
Fine, but the pile was most probably not 100 m high. If it was 57 m high and WTC1 fell in 11 s, then the acceleration was 7 m/s2, like Greening’s calculations give. If so, then WTC2 fell 402 m in 9 s. That gives acceleration 9.9 m/s2, free-fall.
The collapse times of the twin towers more or less agree with a gravitational collapse, but not necessarily. If may be WTC2 fell in free-fall. Anyway, fall times of the twin towers is not a main argument to show a controlled demolition. The fall time is used with WTC7.
Let us establish your claim. An acoustic wave caused by nuclear explosion somewhere below the tower begins to propagate through the central core of the tower causing its destruction. The nature of this destruction is not clear. You talk about cracks but also about sand or some form of ‘dustification’ of materials of the center core which are steel and concrete. The shock wave suppose to propagate through this steel and concrete.
And let’s make it clear that you are not talking about gamma or neutrons. The half thickness of steel for 4MeV neutrons is 5 cm. This means that 10 meters of steal can stop all the neutron that exist in universe.
You will agree that this hypothetical wave loses its intensity as it travels. So it is reasonable to conclude that the damage of the steel and concrete of the center core will be greater at the bottom of the building than at higher levels like at 60 or 80 floor. This means that the center core is weaker at the bottom than at say 60 floor because of the damage by this shock wave. You will agree that the load carried by the center core is higher at the bottom than at the, say, 60 floor. So combining the effect of strength and the effect of the load we may conclude that collapse at floor, say 40 should precede the collapse at floor 50, right And so you can carry out this reasoning down to the floor 1. Yet not collapse was observed at lower floors. The destruction and collapse began at 60 or 80 in two buildings, respectively.
Furthermore, the passage of this hypothetical wave did not leave any damage in the outer shell of the building. No window were imploded. And this outer shell remained motionless as the front of destruction began to move from 60 or 80 floor down.
This Khalezov scenario reminds me of Willie E Coyote physics.
You have a tower that is pulverized by this hypothetical acoustic wave and the tower keeps standing as long as it does not look down. The top of the tower apparently looked down and began to fall but the parts of the tower below are oblivious to the fact that they suppose to be falling (gravity is working, right?) and are waiting until told by the floors above that they should begin to fall.
Were you very impressionable as a child? Did you believe that Willie E Coyote or Bugs Bunny behave according to laws of physics? What makes you so credulous that you are willing to believe in non physical nonsense from Khalezov. The mechanism he describes and you parrot is not physical and more importantly is not consistent with the evidence that ETC towers underwent in the top down destruction while Khalezov mechanism, if such existed, would imply collapse beginning at the bottom.
I think that the idea of nuclear explosion is so horrific and unthinkable that it makes people shut down their critical thinking which in turn opens them to fraudulent suggestions of nonsensical Bugs Bunny physics.
Take your meds or your mom will have to cut you off from the computer.
Thank you for taking the trouble to check the point. As some folks used to say in England, you are a gentleman and a scholar (unless you’re a women, but in any case the same sentiment applies).
In fact, from the description of the material reported on by Harrit et al., the unreacted thermite found in the WTC dust was of such a highly advanced form that it’s presence leaves virtually no room to doubt the controlled demolition theory. Moreover, any who seek to refute the controlled demolition theory would need refute the claim that the WTC dust samples contains the material Harrit et al. describe: something that neither NIST nor any other branch of the US Government has done, or is ever likely to do.
Oh, yeah? What page is that quote from?
You seem to be confused. The NIST calculated the collapse time and the hypothetical free fall collapse time and showed that WTC did not fall at free fall speed. Truthers then changed their argument and said that WTC fell at free fall during part of the collapse. The NIST agreed. Now you are trying to say that the NIST changed their story? Nonsense.
WTC7 was a steel tube design. The interior collapsed first, then the tube collapsed. The exterior supports buckled because they were no longer braced by the floors and there was a great amount of force. Once the exterior columns fail, there will always be free fall until the building hits the rubble pile. This has been explained to truthers over and over.
Haw; “Cherenkov radiation” = you must be Joe King, eh? And Khalezov was not merely “slightly” perturbed, the perturbation is a) ‘the whole hog’ plus permanent, b) 100% contagious, but thankfully c) only to Khal-believers, like Contrarian III, Heinz & utu [+ any et al.]
You and utu now get the same ‘remedial’ as Heinz:
No nukes, no dustify, no sense, no feeling.
I**3 = identify, inform, ignore.
Not that I recall….
What momentum? You’re saying only the floors were pancaking, but the external supports weren’t involved in the collapse. They were just kind of standing there wondering wtf is going on.
Steel isn’t brittle. It’s bendy and springy. It doesn’t snap, it bends. I’ve never seen any pictures of bent and twisted steel from the wreckage, only pictures of perfectly cut segments of pristine steel beam.
If not cutting charges, then how?
Note: I did not say that the FEMA report mentioned aluminothermic reactions only that the steel sample had characteristics that some researchers believe to have been cause by thermite.
Appendix C of the FEMA report was a look into a piece of steel recovered from World Trade Tower 7. The sample was analyzed by Jonathan Barnett, Ronald Biederman and R. D. Sisson of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute. They recommended further research into the matter:
‘The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown…. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.”
The New York Times reporters James Glanz and Eric Lipton also commented on this steel in their article, A Search for Clues In Towers’ Collapse:
“Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected from the trade towers and from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story high rise that also collapsed for unknown reasons. The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.”
So according to the researchers at WPI and the NYT this piece of steel and its characteristics are a mystery and they advised more people to look into it. Some members of the 9/11 Truth community(Steven Jones) hypothesized that it is a characteristic of an aluminothermic reaction. While on the other hand, some of the debunkers said that the sulfur could have come from the gypsum wallboard and this phenomena was the product of a long interaction between the steel and gypsum. However, gypsum is not elemental sulfur and it takes a rather involved chemical process to extract sulfur from gypsum.
Nevertheless, 9/11 researcher Jon Cole did a few experiments to see which scenario would more closely match the steel sample from WTC7.
DNP – ooops; dear mods, the above post [timestamp: September 22, 2018 at 3:40 pm GMT] is an accidental, unwanted ‘duplicate,’ please delete, thanks in advance.
See in the NIST report
https://www.nist.gov/publications/final-report-collapse-world-trade-center-building-7-federal-building-and-fire-safety-0
In the period from 1.75 sec to 4 sec they do a linear fit to the measured velocity v(t) and they obtain an equation of the linear fit: v(t)=-44.773+32.196t [ft/s].
Note that g=32.174 ft/s^2. This means that their measured acceleration which is the slope of the fitted straight line in the interval of 2.25 sec long is 0.07% larger than the acceleration of the free fall.
Yes, they do not dwell on it but they clearly obtained the same result as David Chandler. It is a free fall! What else do you want, you pathetic little troll?
Of course it doesn’t. The deceleration is just not detectable at the video frame rate.
“WTC7 was a steel tube design. The interior collapsed first, then the tube collapsed. The exterior supports buckled because they were no longer braced by the floors and there was a great amount of force. Once the exterior columns fail, there will always be free fall until the building hits the rubble pile.”
In order to buckle a steel pillar you have to apply great force. This force must do work in order to buckle a column. Work in a given time is energy. When some of the potential energy the mass releases when falling is used for breaking structures, there is less potential energy left to turn to kinetic energy, i.e. accelerating the mass, therefore it will fall with acceleration less than 9.81 m/s2. Concerning WTC7, if the collapse occurred without external energy, the highest acceleration would be if the columns of the ground floor all failed at the same time. Then the acceleration would be 8.9 m/s2, if failures were on higher floors, the acceleration is smaller.
“Once the exterior columns fail, there will always be free fall until the building hits the rubble pile.”
If all columns on all floors fail at the same, then the building will fall on free-fall, but if columns fail on one floor at the time because being hit by the upper floors, then the building will never fall on free-fall.
“This has been explained to truthers over and over.”
You could guess that something must be wrong with your explanation if nobody believes it.
Strictly speaking a shockwave is NOT an acoustic wave but let’s suppose you don’t know this and call “acoustic wave” a mechanical (or pressure) wave: correct.
Yes it is: if pressure exceeds ultimate tensile strength then material is broken. Pretty robust physics.
Yes, sand is made of tiny pieces of rock. Never noticed that? And the sand-like nature of the rock in the vicinity of an underground nuclear explosion is something very well known since the first underground nuclear tests. The shockwave is not “supposed to” propagate, it does, since it is a mechanical wave and since the material has some stiffness (Young’s modulus, in physics language).
Correct. Of course they are produced, but they should be more or less inexistent at ground level.
Correct.
NOT correct. The shockwave itself does NOT produce ANY collapse, but a weakening of the structure. ONLY because of the “subsidence crater” (see video on message #1911) does the building collapse, and more precisely because the inner core is pulled downwards as a whole.
Window implosion/explosion occurs in case of a pressure difference between interior and exterior. No such a thing here. However I would not ascertain no glass window was damaged.
Why should it move? Destruction occurs because inner core is pulling downwards on the rather untouched upper part of the building, which consequently “crushes” everything under it.
Please try to get some real knowledge about phenomena involved in underground nuclear explosions instead of writing nonsensical arguments. The tower is NOT “pulverized” by this non-hypothetical non-acoustic wave, the destruction process involves TWO steps: shockwave AND subsidence crater formation.
Yes I was. But it’s a loooong time I’m not a child any more, unfortunately.
Agreed.
I agree. Such fine technology cannot arise by accident. As far as I can see, the only way this evidence of controlled demolition could be invalidated would be if there was shown to be deliberate fraud. Either the sample collectors worked together to procure and submit nanothermite from another source or the academic himself was making the whole thing up. Both seem extremely unlikely.
Your facts and conclusion are correct. And from your conclusion necessarily follows the further inference that no government can be allowed to emerge that would question the official narrative about 9/11 or other government-instigated charades, for otherwise important people would have to be hanged or gassed or whatever the US would do with those who commit mass murder of their own citizens for political purposes.
From that, it follows in turn, that there can be no government that is not a reliable keeper of the secret of 9/11. That is as true of the Trump administration as of any other. We can conclude, therefore, that the Trump administration is as much rooted in the so-called Deep State as were the Bush and Obama administrations, the difference between the Trump Administration and its predecessors being that it is of a different faction.
It must be concluded, therefore, that the US is now a post-democratic oligarchy where advanced technology is deployed, often with purposefully lethal consequences, to control the perception of the masses who are thereby induced to participate docilely in rigged elections and to accept with indifference their country’s instigation of criminal wars of aggression.
This is how I picture all the shills here who have not been able to refute Ron’s proofs and keep on repeating the same tired old establishment bullshit!
Crimson2 in athe holocaust thread told us that Jews are flammable, and when they catch fire they can melt other Jews into ashes.
I’m pretty sure that the disintegration of the WTC1&2 towers were caused by Jews being lit on fire by kerosene, and then the high tempurature that must occur when Jews burn (because they can reduce Jew teeth into ashes) resulted in the building disintegrating.
Mind you, Crimson2 also claimed the mean, wicked Nazis had mechanical Jew dryers, so I’m not sure if this plays into the equation on 911. Maybe un-dried Jews are more explosive?
I don’t think underground explosions are at all inconsistent with the general idea of controlled demolitions at WTC 1 & 2, which plausibly included prep work for the take downs. We don’t know how the perpetrators pulled it off, but in my view it appears to have been a multi-phase operation with critically timed sequences.
It is reasonable to think that these massive structures, which were entirely unnecessary when built, were constructed with some method and provisions for their eventual demolition incorporated into the original design.
In fact, that may have been their real purpose, after all, symbolic pillars to be destroyed in some cataclysmic event with occult significance, little hints of which began appearing in the popular media almost from the time these completely unnecessary, widely reviled, and almost universally hated behemoths were built.
https://www.scoopwhoop.com/Signs-In-Popular-Culture-That-Predicted-The-911-Attacks-Before-It-Actually-Happened/#.dxgupihjn
If you’re going to be an asshole, you should check your facts carefully.
Look, you pathetic fucking moron, tanabear claimed that the NIST said “WTC7 did not enter free-fall” in their August 2008 report. I don’t see that quote in the August 2008 draft report. And you come along and link to the November 2008 final draft. Maybe your Nazi armband is too tight. Loosen that shit and try to keep up with the conversation.
Maybe that’s why I wrote:
So what the hell are you whining about?
It’s not Chandler’s calculation that anyone has a problem with. It’s the boneheaded conclusion.
NIST(The National Institute of Standards and Technology) removed their original WTC7 FAQ with the release of their Final report in December 2008. This is from their original FAQ released in August 2008.
In videos, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?
WTC 7 did not enter free fall. According to NIST analysis of WTC 7 video, the building collapsed 18 stories in 5.3 seconds. If the building exhibited free fall, this process would have taken just 3.9 seconds. The actual collapse time exceeded the free fall time by 40 percent.
But is was not just David Chandler, but physicist Steven Jones who questioned some of the conclusions from NIST. He wrote in their technical briefing:
“NIST discusses the fall time for WTC 7 on page 40 of the summary report, where it’s stated, ‘assuming that the descent speed was approximately constant.’ However observations by others of the descent speed show that the building is accelerating rather than being at constant speed. Why did NIST assume that the descent speed was approximately constant?”
This question was “answered” by John Gross during the briefing. Another NIST researcher had to step in and say, “I think it is something we need to clarify and correct in the final version of the report.”
They corrected this in their final report in released in December. This is where they came up with the 3 stages of collapse model. In their final report they write, “A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found 3 stages.” It is the 2nd stage where NIST admitted to a 2.25 second free-fall collapse.
So in their August 2008 release NIST denied that any free-fall had occurred. It was only pressure and questions from the 9/11 Truth community that forced NIST to change their report.
“Of course it doesn’t. The deceleration is just not detectable at the video frame rate.”
If the difference between the acceleration of the building and g is too small to be detected from the video, then there had to be explosives.
The highest acceleration you obtain if the ground floor pillars all fail. Then whole 47 floors fall down. You get about 8.9 m/s2, still detectable from g=9.81 m/s2. But the fire was in maybe 8th or 10th floor. Let us select for instance 8th floor. Then there were 39 floors above it. In this case the acceleration would be about 8.7 m/s2. Clearly detectable difference.
Yes but the explosions were also described by the firemen as being sequential, and firing in a fast sequence as they travelled down the building. In the video one of the NYFD men uses his hand to demonstrate how the sequence of explosions went, “Bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam like that. Clearly these were not random explosions as your comment appears to suggest. In many videos it is possible to see the sacks of flour, I mean explosives going off and discharging debris outside the building.
Personally, I think that office workers should be banned from hoarding large sacks of flour at their desks, don’t you?
The hopelessness of the situation that you describe must have dawned on the Truth Movement at some point and it seems as if they lost momentum. The search for the truth is academic. The truth will not promulgate any change because the truth will be marginalized, ridiculed and locked up on the reservation with there rest of conspiracy theories.
As there were no molten aluminium-water explosions, the passengers must have been allowed to take barrels of mercury on board, which turned the aluminium plane structure inert.
“The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals.” Aldous Huxley, Foreword to Brave New World
I think that tanabear got it right:
The “boneheaded conclusion” is correct. During the period of 2.25 sec the entire roof of WTC7 experiences a free fall. This means that during this time interval there were not structural forces opposing the force of gravity acting on the entire roof of the building WTC7. As the roof of the WTC7 travels approximately the distance of 8 floors with acceleration a=g:
Has your boss ever told you that he wants you to do a task his way, not yours (because he has the big picture) ? For such a risky gambit as a false flag 9/11, an order would be given to come up with a plan to achieve a certain political result. Totally bringing the buildings down would be nice; good as a means to the end of the political result, but whoever gave the order would not be fixated in an end-gaining way on the buildings being totally destroyed. If it was putting the attainment of the ultimate objective in jeopardy the demolishing of the buildings would be seen as a luxury.
The buildings were advertised as being built to withstand a jet airliner impact, therefore any plan to bring the buildings down would have entailed the use of explosives, if Larry Silverstein was thought to be telling the truth. It does not seem to me that an explosive demolition of the WTC Towers with dozens of cameras on it is a good solution to staging a false flag, and I doubt such an operational plan would be approved. However, if the planners of 9/11 knew that Silverstein’s statements were inaccurate and a jetliner impact to each would take the Twin Towers buildings down, then it seems far more likely the attack would go ahead.
The fee-fall of real importance is the precipitous decline in influence of non-Jewish foreign policy advisers.
Ron himself did not see the 9/11 attacks as mandating an invasion of Iraq. The political relegation of the traditional American foreign policy elite, not the demolition of the WTC towers, was causal for the attack on Iraq.
Correction: “A jetliner impact to the first two and none to the third would take the THREE buildings down, the third being the most successfully and properly destroyed as in a typical controlled demolition…”
Listen (at 26:45):
That’s a great quote, thanks!
Yes, there was a time that the USSR’s message was attractive and it saw considerable success propagating that message across the 3rd World (before “3rd World” became a synonym for “backward”).
I travelled a little behind the Iron Curtain in the mid ’80s, and couldn’t escape the cognitive dissonance between the narrative I had fully internalized, and real experience. It followed me throughout, and onwards until the USSR dissolved.
Rubbish.
Full demolitions was needed to remove the asbestos problem and collect full insurance payouts.
More rubbish.
If, prior to the event, there was even a hint that the towers could collapse due to jet liner impacts, we could expect the NIST report to describe the mechanism in great detail. Their failure to do so proves that even after the event with full hindsight, it’s impossible to give a convincing reason for the collapse without involving a controlled demolition.
Also you dodged my question. How did the steel cut itself into neat little pieces, instead of bending and buckling in all directions?
Yes, I would have responded by way of the “agree” button but for some reason it doesn’t work for me.
But to be more positive, the shysters responsible appear to be worried about how many people understand the truth, or how else account for the number of idiot Truth Denier trolls on this thread.
So let me see if I get what you and Khalezov claim. The underground nuclear explosion:
(1) Creates a cavity and a chimney under WTC tower by means of a shockwave. It is a well know phenomenon and well described by simulation fitted to empirical data from many nuclear tests.
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/03/018/3018308.pdf
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.832.8823&rep=rep1&type=pdf
If nothing else would have happened the tower would begin to sink through the chimney into the cavity. The sinking would be very orderly if the chimney was wider than the footprint of the tower. We would see tower floors vanishing underground and people in the towers would be experiencing weightlessness. We did not observe it.
If the chimney was wide enough for the inner core only the core would begin to sink but slower because it would be pulling the external shell of the buildings. External shell of the building would be pulled toward the core and we would see some concave buckling of the external shell including breakage and popping windows. We did not observe it. We would not see pieces of external shell flying horizontally away from the tower.
(2) The shockwave creating cavity is supposed to be somehow coupled to the center core of the tower and causes damage to concrete and steel of the center core along its length. You and Khalezov are vague about the intensity and the nature of this damage. You talked about cracks but also about sand. Sandification? But you agree that the damage would be progressively lower with height but you are unable to quantify it. Where the “sandification” zone would terminate? Could you stick a finger into the center core steel column at the 10th floor? Or is it too high?
The problem with the shock wave is its coupling to the center core. The origin of the shockwave is pressure of vaporized rocks in the cavity. The whole cross section of the center core is not solid. Let say it is 50/50 solid and hollow where are conduits and elevator shafts. The pressure from the bottom can’t discriminate between the hollow and the solid part of the center core. Which means that lots of hot expanding gas would fill up the hollow part of the center core possibly causing breaking the walls and and elevator doors. The pressure would be the highest on lower floors so any visible damage should be larger on lower floors and should happen before manifestation on higher floors. During the collapse the so-called squibs, their locations and timings are not in agreement with the scenario of the gases traveling up the shafts.
You argument really amount to lots of handwaving. It is not quantitative. It has problems with the chain of cause and effect. The effect that are more likely to appear on the bottom of the building are not observed but are observed on the top of the building. I admit I do not know enough about various mechanism during nuclear explosions but the scenario presented by you and Khalezov does not make sense. You seem very confident that you are correct. Providing that you are not a troll but a true believer I would suspect that you must be the case of when a little bit of knowledge is more dangerous than absolute ignorance.
Well, you have go around quite a few corners (and down a few rabbit holes) to follow that hypothesis, but it’s intriguing. I’ll grant you that. 🙂
As for…
… that’s exactly what I was saying.
I simply pointed out the difficulty of coming up with a demolition strategy that includes both a top-down sequence of coordinated blowouts and subterranean explosions (of whatever type) for the two towers.
I found the gaping hole in WTC6 particularly weird. There were lots of detailed interior photos available at the time, and the most striking thing about them was the lack of tower debris inside the hole. Nowhere near enough to create the visible effect.
I came up with 2 possible explanations:
– The underground explosions were actually aimed at the other buildings in the complex rather than the towers, and simply failed to do their job.
Or,
– It may be as simple as clearing the tower basements out for everything to fall neatly into, but that seemed too superfluous to the main task to be worth the effort & risk.
Or both.
This is timely…
https://www.globalresearch.ca/911-unmasked-an-international-review-panel-investigation/5654848
Yes very unlikely. One of the Harrit paper co-authors is Steven E. Jones who was compelled by Brigham Young University to give up a successful academic career or abandon his independent research on 9/11. He chose to continue his research into the events of 9/11.
At that time, Jones was a research contractor with the US Department of Energy investigating various forms of cold fusion. His work had been published in Nature, the world’s foremost scientific journal. Based on his theoretical expertise, he was among the first to reject the cold-fusion claims of Pons and Fleischmann, a judgement that has withstood the test of time.
It seems most improbable, therefore, that Jones’s would have pursued investigation of 9/11 for reasons other than sincere conviction and moral compulsion.
Definitely not. One can imagine that Silverstein would be allowed to derive financial benefits from an operation that was needed to save Israel, but he would not be permitted to place operational security at risk simply for his personal aggrandizement as an insurance claimant. They would kill him if he became involved and then tried anything like that.
Why are grains of sand onthe top of a beach all the same size? I thought it was obvious that bodies are smaller than girders and the girders’ length meant they were even more chopped up by the force of the building coming down than the victims’ bodies were. As I understand it the argument against gravity bringing the towers down is it was too fast in view of the gravitational energy energy being dissipated by the destruction of the fabric of the building during the pancaking. The free fall time for a droped object from the height of the towers is just over 9 seconds. The north tower took 11 seconds and the south tower took 13.
The testimony of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta clearly implicates Cheney in the plot. Mineta recalled that a plane heading towards Washington was observed on radar. An aide repeatedly came in stating the distance to Washington and requested information on what to do about it. Cheney kept telling him to ignore it. The plane later crashed into the Pentagon. The testimony of the aide was later suppressed completely for presumably reasons of national security.
I don’t find any extraordinary logical contortions are required to ask the obvious question: If NYC didn’t need all that superfluous office space in the proposed WTC, why was it built?
Why New Yorkers Couldn’t Stand The Twin Towers
I imagine it was just this kind of shrewd business strategy that made the Rockefellers such rich men to begin with – just add office space where it isn’t needed, and the next thing you know, the money’s rolling in.
♫ If I never had a cent I’d be rich as Rockefeller
The gold dust at my feet on the sunny side of the street.♫
–McHugh & Fields
Preliminary remark: I will stop answering people who pretend to expose physics arguments without having a minimum knowledge in physics, and who pretend answering to arguments they don’t read. But let’s begin with a quote:
That’s exactly the kind of sentence which perfectly suits to you, utu. If you try to elaborate from things you don’t understand at the simplest level, then you end up believing Bazant’s “mathematical proofs” or Purdue University’s “computer simulations”. Most, if not all of, 9/11 cover-up is based on this.
NO. The underground explosion creates a shockwave AND a cavity. No shockwave can create a cavity.
So let’s recall the basics: a nuclear explosion is a huge amount of energy liberated in a extremely short time and a very small volume. This simple fact explains why it produces extreme pressures and extreme temperatures (orders of magnitude larger than with any chemical explosive). Extreme pressures create a tremendous shockwave while extreme temperatures transform everything into a plasma (“fireball” for aerial explosions), thus creating a cavity in the rock in the case of underground explosions.
Nonsense. You persist in believing that the “chimney” is a kind of hollow tube when I already said it was not. If you can’t get “The Constructive Uses of Nuclear Explosives” which is by far the best source I’ve found to understand underground nuclear explosions effects, then read for instance “The Effects of Nuclear Weapons” that you can find on several places on the internet, for instance here:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/effects/
You only need to concentrate on chapter 6 which deals with underground bursts, and even a small part of it. There is a convenient fig. 6.06 on p.234 which depicts correctly the “cavity + chimney” case (last drawing, f): note that there is no more cavity after the chimney (which is full of fractured rock) has formed.
All of your following arguments are of the same nonsensical type, like this:
Which is entirely false: pressure is the origin, NOT the cavity itself (which is of course at a very high pressure, slowly decreasing after the explosion).
Don’t try to produce elaborate arguments when you don’t understand the basics. I won’t repeat it.
Subsidence crater formation is what triggers the destruction of the 3 buildings. It also creates a flow of hot gases (although filtered by a large amount of broken rock) since cavity roof has collapsed. This is exactly what we’ve seen, people in the street testifying that the “dust cloud” was very hot, and even of “pyroclastic” type since it rose at high altitude like it is the case for… volcanoes.
All 3 buildings had the same “thermal footprint” according to IR thermal imaging, although WTC7 experienced something very different compared to WTC1 and WTC2, and was also of much smaller size.
Etc., etc.
If this nookular thing is true, shouldn’t there be some detectable radioactivity? I’ll grant you the xenon and iodine would be long gone, but the cesium and strontium should still be ticking away nicely.
In the absence of any verifiable readings, I’d consign this theory to the trash bin along with Alan Reid’s U238 tuned mass dampener theory and his RDX-in-the-floors theory.
You’re speculating well beyond your post.
Statistical distribution resulting from a sustained process over a very long period of time.
Nothing similar happened to the towers.
Bodies are somewhat softer than steel girders.
Another flaw in your reasoning is that you’re counting pulverized bodies by the number missing minus the number found. This is erroneous, as the number missing could be massively inflated for political reasons.
Gravity did bring the towers down. Nobody is disputing this. The question is about how the supporting structure stopped supporting. To this end, controlled demolition seems a perfect explanation while all the other theories I’ve heard to date seem very contrived.
Oh dear [more in sorrow than in anger]; recall that when you point a finger at someone, three fingers are pointing back at yourself. Your own, non-prompted statement nails you to the troll-tree; one may now picture *you* as the pimply teenager in your mom’s basement. I addressed Heinz, but you had to stick your bib in; tut,tut. I did warn you
Now, after ‘chatting’ at length re Khalezov’s totally *incomprehensible* rubbish, thus prompting the trolls to ever further pollute UR, you dare to write this:
Me: I put up the Princeton Khalezov ‘stopper’ but the troll-cabal ‘cleverly’ countered by violating the Khalezov ‘bible’ itself, by moving their risible alleged nukes lower down below the towers – how stupid then, for *anyone* to have kept the charade going after that bit of total idiocy. Then this little humdinger:
Me: Haw. Yeah, that’d be ‘it:’ A true believer in utter trash. I also warned:
Not so BTW; D-IQ is pronounced ‘dick’ as in ‘dickhead.’ To end, another part repeat:
You’re talking about fission by-products. It’s quite obvious that in order to minimize radioactive issues engineers chose the fusion option. Of course there’s a small fission part in a fusion device (maybe today some pure fusion devices exist, I don’t know, but the “classical” H-bomb is not purely fusion).
So if you’ve got all the accreditations and permissions to drill a borehole under Ground Zero, get the financement for the analysis and the autorization to publish, that’s certainly a good idea to look for xenon and iodine, go ahead!
But keep in mind that there are a LOT of inconsistent data that have been published in order to “prove” that the standard conspiracy theory is true…
Have you ever put a bar of chocolate in your pocket and found it was easier to deform when it had heated up a little, even though it was not at all melted, You apparently think that girders retain all of their strength at temperatures below melting point, and a fire reaching 1000 degrees would not affect the load bearing capabilities of girders. At very low temperatures steel can snap, and at very high temperatures it becomes less rigid and slightly bendy under loads it could normally support. Core girders in the fire began to give, putting those unaffected by fire under tremendous push or pull stress. And a floor collapsed with the weight of the Titanic from the intact floors above it. The juggernaut kept going though every floor below, which were piledrivered by this unimaginably large force that grew greater as it progressed. What’s to be puzzled about?
As for the pile of pulverised debris having no intact full length girders: you seem to be suggesting that the girders were chopped up, not by the impact of a dozens of Titanics falling from a quarter of a mile in the sky, but each girder being cut by thermite /explosive. You cannot possibly be serious.
When they test an H bomb inside a mountain the mountain changes colour when the nuke explodes. I think there would have been quite a sight to see.
It’s not small. It’s a full scale fission weapon. It just looks small by comparison to the rest of the fusion/secondary fission assembly.
There’s no getting around the issue of critical mass, and this means lots of detectable radionucleotides.
Like I said previously, the xenon and iodine is gone already. You really don’t know much about this, do you?
So what? You’re saying because the establishment is peddling bullshit, it’s ok for you to do the same?
Are you the same person as Alan Reid?
Musing: There are ‘truth seekers’ and others, some diminutive part of whom are ‘attempted truth confounders.’ Disclosure: I am myself a truth seeker, adhering to the formula: Truth + Justice = Peace.
But what of ‘confounders?’
I mention a growing consensus, see above big Q: “1st or 2nd scenario?” – wherein the ‘inside job’ is being examined; Sean says: “A false flag 9/11 could only have been done by Israel–alone” but I have always maintained: “some covert cabal within the US/Z rogue-regimes = inside job.”
IF it were ‘only/solely’ conventional explosives THEN the Q may still be posed: Pre-loaded by whom? A1: Domestic operators OR A2: Foreign. [Foreigners disguised as ‘maintenance workers’ with a moving company as cover, say, or a few scruffy ‘art students,’ exploiting ‘special’ access to the twin towers, whatever.] But IF the 3 WTC collapses could possibly have been due to nukes THEN it would seem to have been a totally ‘domestic’ operation, just as Khalezov asserts; nukes long ago ‘built-in’ as a last option salvage-demolition function.
Aside but not at all unimportant: Khalezov is a nutter and his ‘theories’ not ‘merely’ impossible but utterly outrageous, and any/all ‘players’ discussing Khalezov [except to denigrate] are also total nutters.
Lemma: At any crime-scene, one must consider means, motive and opportunity, but a more complete list includes premeditation, presence, any modus operandi and cui bono?
This time around, let’s just look at cui bono?
By ‘pushing’ the unrelieved Khalezov bullshit, the Contrarian III, Heinz & utu cabal are a) distracting from, derailing of and destroying productive discussion. But worse, b) they are attempting to draw attention away from any ‘foreign’ component, eh?
I call hasbarats and/or gentile traitors.
I think maybe Mr. Unz should commission a screenplay for a movie on 9/11 truth. The authors could use the “best of” evidence to put forward the most plausible story line. Like Oliver Stone did with JFK.
Maybe he could crowd source some of the funding and get Sean Stone to make the movie.
Now you are comparing steel to chocolate bars?
And yes, the girders were nicely cut up into little pieces.
This is the most common error that the “debunkers” always make. They keep confusing the temperatures of the fire with the temperature of the steel. It is the latter that matters. According to NIST:
“Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250ºC[482F]… Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. … Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600ºC[1112F]”
(NIST, 2005, pp. 176-177)
This is not the conclusion that NIST came too. They determined that collapse initiation was cause by the inward bowing of the perimeter columns due to the caternary action of the sagging floor trusses. In other words it was column failure, not truss failure.
This is the crush-down, crush up theory of Zdenek Bazant. If this force grew as it progressed why is it not observable on any of the videos? Why can’t we see this large upper intact block smashing through the lower block? If the upper block is crushing the lower block then why isn’t the lower block at the same time crushing the upper block? And if this upper block is indestructible as it smashes its way through 1,000s of tons of steel and concrete why did it not continue to plow through the lower levels of the building into the basement and keep going?
Hi Contrarian;
Thanks for the great comments: I learnt a lot from your reading posts.
The video in French broadly covers the 9/11 events, but also entirely backs up the thesis you detailed. The speaker, Francois Roby, is a Physics PHD from a first-class academic institution (INSA); the most important points he raised are:
1) For the 15th commemoration of 9/11, the foremost European Physics Review (Europhysics News 47/4, Sep 2016) issued a ground-breaking article, entitled: “15 Years later ; On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses”. This article concluded:
“It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11.
Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities. “
Considering that Europhysics is a peer-reviewed publication, and that no physicist has so far refuted this conclusion in a publication of the same calibre, this pretty much settles up the matter.
https://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/EPN_47-4-911-2.pdf
2) Another relevant article F. Roby mentions was also published in a peer-reviewed publication (International Journal of Protective Structures, Vol4, Nr2, June 2013). It stated:
” From an engineering viewpoint the event had many fascinating aspects. Not the least of them was “the aircraft flying into the building” mentioned above. This means the aircraft structure cut the building structure on its way. The aircraft was built of an aluminum shell on the order of 2 mm thickness, which was additionally stiffened by longitudinal and lateral elements. [..] . Yet, the thin aluminum wings cut through the much thicker steel. ”
In other terms, these structural experts are telling us that aluminium planes (which wings are so fragile that it is not allowed to walk on them) diving into the WTC and cutting the steel structure is a cock-and-bull story. And that the Progressive Column Failure (PCF) mode described in the official version could not have caused the collapse.
http://911speakout.org/wp-content/uploads/Some-Misunderstandings-Related-to-WTC-Collapse-Analysis.pdf
3) Finally, the speaker reminds that firefighters have had to extinguish fires for over 100 days after the towers collapsed, and ask : Where did the heat come from? This is a tremendous amount of energy, for a place that had been flattened, with all the water channelled easily towards the fires by gravity.
A nuclear explosion indeed seems the only physical possibility.
Anyway… Mille merci !!! Thanks ever so much for sharing your knowledge. All the best.
LOL. Nothing will fizz on the 19 hijackers, or the Israelis did it crowds: they are evidence comprehension incapable.
Hey, Utu, that sure put you in your place. A person who pretends “to expose physics arguments without having a minimum knowledge in physics.” LOL. Serves you right for messing with trolls.
No. A long and ‘entertaining’ post, almost rescuing your somewhat tarnished reputation, ended by that piece of stupid imbecility.
Try looking up my Princeton citation: Containment of Underground Nuclear Explosions.
All together now: No nukes, no dustify, no sense, no feeling.
Your post is very puzzling; I hope you are all right.
Best wishes.
‘Scuse, pliz?
Which part of
do you not understand?
Totally wrong. The only optical change for the mountain comes from dust which kicks up because of the local earthquake.
I totally agree with that. Small was relative to yield.
Sorry, I messed up and I didn’t check which elements should be predominant now. No, I’m not a nuclear scientist so it is not obvious to me but I have a good background in physics.
Not at all. I’m saying that IF there has been some radioactivity detected somewhere, you should NOT hope reading it anywhere unless you were the person who performed the measurements!
I don’t know Alan Reid.
Please don’t post drawings of your masturbatory fantasies on this thread. It’s off topic.
Be careful: Europhysics News is not to be confused with Europhysics Letters which is a “classical” peer-reviewed scientific journal from the same editor. Europhysics News is more, as its title says, a journal giving a broad picture of physics news for physicists but without going too much into technical details.
Although papers need to be accepted by an editors board before being published, I would not say it is “peer-reviewed” in the usual meaning of this expression since people who review a paper are not necessarily specialists from the same field but “mere” physicists.
However, it is worth noting that this paper was “invited”, purposely for the 15th anniversary. That means some “officials” wanted to make a very clear and bold statement about 9/11… and it was not to express their agreement with “standard” views of the event!
Aw, ha-ha-haw! This must be from the BBC – Bullshit ohne Borders Cabal! – Err, ooops – Kabbalah.
I’m not sure why you think this is a win. The FAQ is responding to someone who asked “In videos, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall.” The NIST did the calculations and showed that the collapse took longer than freefall. That answers the question posed: “The actual collapse time exceeded the free fall time by 40 percent.”
So truthers changed their story. Now they wanted to know if WTC7 was falling at free fall at any time during the collapse. That’s a different question. The NIST said they would clarify it and they did.
NIST answered the original question. Truthers then asked a different question. NIST answered that question. I guess pretending that this is some kind of victory feels good or something?
Yes (although “the entire roof” is wrong).
This is obvious nonsense. The interior of the building had already collapsed when the north face started to fall. The exterior columns were then without any internal support, so they were prone to buckling.
Just as I said:
Now for the following sentence:
There must be a mistake in the report or a very special design of the devices since, obviously, the very purpose of an underground nuclear explosion is to have it contained. No “radioactive nuclear forces” can reach the surface, only venting of gases (or dust) can occur, which is generally unwanted. Colour change of the rock is something very well known in the vicinity of the explosion (but you need to go underground for that, months later), NOT at “ground zero”, that is, “the point on the surface of the earth directly below, directly above, or at which a nuclear bomb explodes”.
As for underground nuclear explosives which are also shape-changing, yes it is possible, but it’s made on purpose:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan_Crater
Thanks for the precision.
European News is the magazine of the European Society of Physics: the editorial committee are physicists, not journalists. The articles published in the magazine are reviewed by this committee, and are about subjects that are more established and proven that the more fundamental research published in Europhysics Letters.
The 9/11 article is based on arguments that anybody with a BSc/MSc/Engineering degree can understand very easily. PHD’s in the editorial committee would have been amply competent to “peer-review” this article. Some of the objections are simply based on Newton’s Law of motion that were formulated a few centuries ago. Not rocket science. All the best to you.
He is correct. I do not know much about it. But he does not get irritated with me because my questions are inept and awkward but because they still demand answers with some some detail and specificity. Detail and specificity is what he is does not want to get into. So he dismisses me on account of my ignorance. The N-demolition guys think if they mention the nuclear device, explosion and shock wave everything takes care of itself. The mental and psychological connection is that everybody knows that nuclear bomb cause destruction. Everybody saw the destruction at WTC so to connect it to a nuclear bomb is easy. It was boom and the building went down. Easy, right? But this is a Disney cartoon level of physics where actual physical mechanisms are cartoonish. What energy was transferred and how and to which parts of the building and if this energy was transferred to the building core why we did not see it here or there. If the shockwave destroyed the core beginning in the bottom why we see the demolition starting at the top and the bottom of the building remaining undamaged and somehow unperturbed by what was happening above? The 20th floor which must have been damaged by the shockwave before and more than the 60th floor patiently awaits until the 60th floor comes to it.
Be specific. The had waving is over.
How big was the N device? How deep was it buried?
The building core consisted of steel box columns that were anchored in bed rock. The column elements were welded with each other, I think, every three floors. The welds were on the outside seams which means that the interface between one column and the next one that stood on it was not continuous and amounted to a crack.
(1) In which damage zone was the bed rock in which column were anchored?
(2) Once the shock wave reached where the columns were anchored what happened to the columns?
Did the shockwave continue to travel in steel elements of the columns?
Did the shockwave travel also through the outer shell of the building?
(3) What damage to the steel columns this shockwave caused? Describe the damage. How this damage depended on elevation?
(4) Are there any publication of shockwave damage in the steel? Doe steel crack, gets brittle…?
(5) In the debris pile can we find any steel elements that have damage that would be specific to the shockwave damage?
Eye witnesses saw molten steel pouring from the tower:
9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate
Proof that the official story is bunk.
Also, thermite is used to break into safes:
The Israelis did it. No question.
Funny!
You would think that to take buildings like that down by controlled demolition, it had to be done in a way that was not conventional. He very likely would not recognize the technique.
More footage that contradicts the official narrative!
NIST stated very clearly, “WTC7 did not enter free-fall.” Shyman Sunder made the same point in the technical briefing Q&A saying that there was structural resistance provided and free-fall did not occur. In fact, NIST even states that “assuming that the descent speed was approximately constant.” You would not even expect acceleration to be constant much less velocity. NIST had to go back and do real calculations instead of just looking at starting point and an end point. The Final Draft report released in August 2008 was still a complete embarrassment. The 9/11 truth community nailed NIST on point after point. But it didn’t stop there, their final report released in November 2008 was complete garbage as well; one scientific fraud after another.
Jon Cole did make some great videos on topics pertaining to the evidentiary basis for the collapse of the twin towers and World Trade Tower 7. It is interesting to note that the 9/11 Truthers will do real world experiments to test their theories. NIST and the “debunkers” will never do any real world experiment to prove any aspect of the government’s theory. This suggest to me that they really don’t believe all the BS they are expounding. The “debunkers” are nothing more than SJWs. They’ll call you bad names if you disagree with them. This is the extent of the intellectual abilities.
Reference please! You are reasoning. I would prefer a more reliable authority and will leave others to decide what my quoted links mean. I believe it is a well known phenomenon attested to by Western scientists for the mountain to change colour, and the Pakis had been told about it by French scientists. A nuke at 9/11 would have produced quite a show.
While it is counter-intuitive that steel girders would be chopped up like that, steel is only very strong and not indestructible against other steel, If you smash steel girders together with enough force they will break each other.
What you really need is the ratio chimney height / cavity radius. Go fetch it and perform the calculations by yourself, I’m not your assistant. Khalezov is probably right on the yield and wrong on the depth (it should have been even deeper).
And it’s enough to know that dust was NOT mainly concrete dust but also steel dust (look at the big falling columns in the videos…) to acknowledge no classical explosive could do that.
I’m quoting books I’ve read, and that you never read. Go get a decent knowledge first (I already mentioned the best source available).
PS: using reason is part of the standard job for a scientist.
Your argument is bizarre. The NIST clearly states what they are doing:
And they did that. Their calculations are correct. No one disputes that the descent time was longer than free fall.
David Chandler and other truthers wanted a more detailed explanation and the NIST gave it to them.
Starting point and end point are real calculations. Dumb truthers claimed the building collapsed at free fall speed. They STIL claim this. It didn’t, as the NIST calcs showed.
The August 2008 report wasn’t the final draft. It was the”draft for public comment.”
lol. Okay, bud.
Keep it up. More and more you are revealing yourself. Apparently you can’t answer any specific questions. I gave you a chance to demonstrate that you can walk your talk. But so far all you have demonstrated is that you are full of himself pompous ass. You are doing a terrific job for the nuclear demolition hypothesis, Heinz.
Have you ever seen a corner man apply an iron implement to make a boxer’s facial swelling go down, or seen a what a baking tray is made of? Steel conducts heat and as the temperatures in the Towers reached 1000 degrees the bare metal would reach that same temperature after a while . Actually, if steel is all right in a fire why was there fireproof cladding around the steel girders, eh? . A conspiracy could take the cladding off beforehand, but it could work at the critical point by crashing a jetliner into the buiding
You are right, and I suppose they are too, more or less
There can be no question that the perimeter columns were damaged on the floors of the plane impact and the firecladding on other girders ((floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) was too–in the very place where the fire reached 100o degrees and the steel became bendy at well below that temperature.
The upper block was completely destroyed and about 50 stories of the core were left standing for approximately 20 second after to the collapse .
To the extent that happened it was because the energy expended in mutual crushing was overwhelmed by the increasing downward mass gaining momentum. But as already mentioned, about 40 stories of the cores of both towers remained standing for 20 seconds after the free fall collapse. So the buildings took 30 seconds each to completely come down. The most plausible explanation for the counter intuitive events is the WTC Tower buildings were a lot more vulnerable than they looked, than anyone knew.
I have cited and linked to Pakistani news sources , and Indian ones, which you said was a mistake on their part. Here is the Pakistani military official video of the event. There is no mistake.
So from this simple video you con conclude that what we see is:
Wow. This is science.
And if you believe that, you’ll believe anything.
Look, you seem sincere but I honestly feel your theory is so far out it’s false by default.
If your theory is true, there will be lots of residual radioactivity. If this could be proven, the theory could be considered. Until then, better not to take it any further.
“Lots of”… how much? During how many days? weeks? years?
All these questions have been assessed in the 1960s’ by men who promoted a “constructive use of nuclear explosives” (see the book by Teller et al. I already mentioned). They concluded it was feasible. Do you challenge them?
Nevada desert has dozens of nuclear holes in it. Do you think it’s still severely radioactive today? Well, actually it’s probably not the safest place on earth, but much more because of the atmospheric tests of the 1950s’.
By the way, we have already 10,000 cancer cases among Ground Zero workers… doesn’t that say something?
It wouldn’t take you long to read up on fission products and their respective half lives. I suggest you do so, as it’s integral to your theory.
Irrelevant.
Their views are concerned with safety, not detectability. Safety to 1960’s standards, no less.
Again, the issue is detectability not safety.
Background radiation levels are so low in most places that any artificial additions are very easily detected. If nukes were really used, you’d have no trouble finding residual radioactivity.
Already explained by asbestos.
Assuming that it was an attempt at a false flag and not done to humiliate (‘ha ha we did it and there is nothing you can do’) the whole thing would depend on it being convincing so using something as well understood and familiar as controlled explosive demolition seems very odd way of fooling America that Al Qaeda were responsible.
The real experts in controlled demolition are civilians, not special forces and army and many of them would instantly know for sure. To those who had seen controlled explosive demolition on TV the similarities would be forcefully apparent even it they were not entirely sure
I suppose a nonconventional method to simulate an aiurcraft and would be different enough that hardly anyone people watching the collapse (even demolition experts) could not see through it. Nevertheless, however well the sectet secret weapons special forces understand their unconventional means, or got help from civilian demolition experts who work with conventional explosives, nobody has expertise in neatly demolishing very high buildings by unconventional means.
Just as you do not want a surgeon to use the common or conventional technique not a very unusual method of performing a dangerous operation, a military operation would Keep It Simple Stupid. Unconventional demolition technology just introduces an element of uncertainty into achieving the objective of a false flag , which was to mount a devastating terrorist attack and blame in on Bin Laden. You want to be using proven technology in a similar way to it has been used before. There is only one run at the attack and the means must be reliable as the plan is only as strong as its weakest link.
Israeli or American operations such as Entebbe or the attempt to rescue the Iranian embassy hostages seem modest in relation to taking down colossal buildings like the WTC while making it look like a collapse as a result of damage and fire from an airliner crashing into them. The port authority said the buildings’ structure was proof against jumbo jet crashes, so a collapse (which would be recorded from every angle and pored over) would have to be extra convincing. Yet we are told the towers came down in a way that made it obvious there had been a controlled explosive demolition.
The course of events suggest a lucky bulls-eye by the acolytes of civil engineering graduate Bin Laden, who did not actually have a well-founded belief. He just had faith.
A vast collection of unconnected individual steel beams would be not be broken into pieces by any fall However, we are not talking about loose girders falling from a quarter of mile in the shy, but a structure that was fixed in a framework with a vast weight of concrete falling a quarter of a mile. And in both towers cases, the bottom 50 stories of the core girder structure survived standing for at least 20 seconds after the so called free fall collapse before coming down. How could that steelwork skeleton which can be seen standing on the films of the collapse it have survived explosive demolition by cutting of the girder structure into pieces, especially from below?
Engaging India: Diplomacy, Democracy, and the Bomb by Strobe Talbot- Page 71
Satan At The Wailing Wall
Brother Nathaniel explains why jews are so obsessed about humping the wailing wall. It turns out they are really humping Satan in a kabbalistic ritual. Just like on 9/11.
Nathaniel further explains how even decent US politicians, like Rand Paul in this case, are forced to commune with Satan in an oath to the jews.
Pure nonsense… when a nuclear bomb (or even 5) detonates in a tunnel (not 2m below the surface, of course…), NO radiation can hit the surface. But radioactive gases can of course vent depending on the rock structure (and because rock is fractured by the explosives). That’s totally different but maybe the reporter doesn’t know the difference between irradiation and contamination!
And in the case of Ground Zero there were radioactive vapors and dust, which caused cancers, especially among the first responders – including dogs. Asbestos does not lead to cancers so quickly, neither of the same type. See my message #1954 and listen to the alarm…
Heinz presented his strongest evidence for radiation in his #1954 comment. Apparently something was beeping in the video.
Series of detonations during towers collapse
Cameras everywhere. Explosions everywhere. Yet no cameras manage to capture any explosions. Hm.
“Yet we are told the towers came down in a way that made it obvious there had been a controlled explosive demolition.”
Let us assume it was the same group who claimed that 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust and that JFK was shot by a lone shooter Oswald. These certainly were not fully convincing cases, but as they had the media and academia control, they could convince most people and shout down those who did not believe.
After all, the 6 million disagrees with the figures of the World Almanac that puts the death toll to 4.4 million, Auschwitz death toll 1-1.5 million can be seen as false by anybody who counts how many Jews could have been in Western Poland, how many died elsewhere and how many survived. Still, these people have the power to keep most of the world population believing in their numbers.
And the JFK case has been solved and the official theory shot full of holes for decades by now, yet these people manage to get most of the population believing in the fairy tales.
No, they do not care to make things look exactly correct. It is enough that they look correct enough. WTC1 fell with the acceleration 6-7 m/s2, like in a gravitational collapse, and there were no loud bangs from cut charges, and there were fires. That is enough for their experts to declare that the towers fell because of fire, and people will believe what the experts say. But as it is, there are enough of those who do not believe, not all so stupid either.
” Already explained by asbestos.”
Haven’t much time for the rest, but you are completely, utterly wrong about that one.
Asbestos causes lung cancer and mesothelioma (cancer of the pleura and peritoneum). And that’s almost it.
(Some links have been made with cancer of the larynx and of the ovaries, without certainty).
Quoting you:
Tahil’s book has been previously cited by me. I actually read the book (it’s under 200 pages) then looked at his sources. The primary source of these data are the Element Analysis done by the USGS. See:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/index.html
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/WTCchemistrytable.html and
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/sample.location.html
A 2-person USGS crew took samples from 35 places within a 0.5-1 km circle centered on WTC on 9/17/2001 and 9/18/2001. To within my patience in checking every last datum, Tahil accurately quotes the USGS analysis.
I read the A&E statement in their FAQ #15 and to say that it’s disingenuous would be an understatement. Many of the fission products of an underground nuclear event would remain underground and I assume that A&E should know this. A&E’s FAQ does do a good job of eliminating above-ground mini-nukes, a conclusion which I agree with for other reasons as well. Neutron-activated steel would be all but not existent for an underground nuke except to the extent there was any steel in the immediate vicinity of the zero-box and that steel would have been vaporized at detonation. I would agree with A&E about gamma, but there was plenty of alpha and beta rising from the pile and carried home by the first responders in their throats, lungs, etc. which is why so many of them got cancers explicable only by radiation exposure. Blaming one type of first-responder cancer on benzene is actually ludicrous (A&E doesn’t do this; other apologists have). Benzene is not a common chemical in general use and would not be found in office environments. In industrial environments, that’s not true. And please, benzene is an aromatic compound; benzine is aliphatic.
If you check either Tahil’s book or the USGS report he’s quoting from you will learn exactly where the high proportions of Strontium, Barium, and some of the extremely rare elements found in the USGS samples were. See Tables 1 and 2 of Tahil’s book for concentrations on a site-by-site basis and see Table 3 for a statistical summary of these data, taken over all collection sites. The tables start on page 15.
The biggest mystery, from a radiological point of view, is the relative absence of Cesium, but I tried to address that in a prior post. Also, as I pointed out previously, sensing the radioactivity of Strontium is not easy. What’s really startling about Tahil’s results is the strong correlation between Barium and Strontium concentrations at each collection site. In a prior post, I also quoted Tahil’s summary comment, so I won’t repeat that here. Uranium and Thorium should never be found in an urban setting – handling nuclear materials excepted.
Residual radioactivity at Ground Zero is a non-problem. If you read the USGS report, you’ll learn that they had to select collection samples with care because of the ongoing cleanup activity. Jones had the same problem with his thermate samples. Finding any radioactive material in lower Manhattan six months after 9/11 would be difficult if not impossible. NYC street sweepers may not be the best in the world, but they’re not that bad.
No, I’m not a “Crass Bumsteins agent”. I’m just a guy who believes in doing his homework and reading the actual books written by Tahil and Khalezov, e.g., not a Cliff’s Notes version, as some of the posters herein choose instead. Both books have errors, but they’re not fatal except that Tahil infers a detonation of underground nuclear reactors — an outcome inconsistent with nuclear physics.
What is the pattern of the alleged 10k cancers? Do they match (well established) patterns of fallout exposure?
I seriously think this guy is the same as Alan Reid.
There is simply no evidence for this. If the steel actually got this hot NIST would have found this on the steel samples they tested. It is unlikely the fires would have been that hot even for a few seconds, which in no way would have been long enough to hear the steel to that temperature. Fires will burn out in a given area once all the combustibles are consumed. As the fire moves some of the steel will actually be cooling. And to suggest that burning office equipment reached these temperatures is nonsense.
A pulverized mass will not impact with the same force as an intact structure. Take a bag of sand and let someone pour all the grains on top of you versus dropping a whole bag of sand on you. The latter will impact with more force. It has to do with the interval over time as the sand being poured will impact over a longer time period than the sandbag.
Yes, no one on the outside knew that they had been wired for demolition.
Thank you for the links to the USGS data. The mean concentration of strontium in the samples analyzed was 726 ppm not 3000. Those numbers are not much higher than concentrations reported in New England Soil samples, which range up to 1000 ppm. The higher concentration in dust at the WTC has been attributed to strontium in the phosphor lining fluorescent tubes.
The critical question is what isotope of strontium was present. Do you have any evidence that it was the radioactive Sr90? If not, it is most likely that the information is of no significance to an understanding of the collapse of the towers.
May I say that for someone who claims to have done their homework, your understanding of the data seems rather superficial.
Great post! Thanks for your post and the partial translation (gist) of Roby’s talk. The only point (your #2) where I would beg to differ is about the aluminum plane breaking steel upon impact (not that I believe there were any planes). A large balloon, filled with the mass of the fuel borne by the supposed planes fired at 550 mph into the side of a building like the towers would damage the towers. The energy and the momentum have to go someplace and breaking bolts, joints, etc is the obvious place for the balloon’s contents to do their dirty work. This is more like a push than a cut. The contents could be just plain old water and the result would be the same.
The damage done by my hypothetical balloon would be substantial, but the cookie-cutter silhouettes cut in the towers are ridiculous. It’s an open question in my mind how much damage would be done to the core columns by my balloon. The impact with the exterior would do a good job of spreading the balloon contents so the momentum & energy impinging upon any particular core column is correspondingly reduced. My guess is that the core columns would survive just fine, but that’s just a guess. Core damage, if any, would be the result of the engines’ impacts.
Khalezov makes the same error. What is absolutely wrong are the videos showing the “planes” slicing into the towers as though the planes were hot knives going through soft butter. Moreover, my balloon would probably not even enter a tower; its torn remains would fall more or less to the ground outside the tower. A real airplane crashing into a tower would behave the same except for the engines. They’re strong enough and heavy enough to continue moving ahead. Most of the rest of the wings and most of the fuselage would collapse outside. Ever see a picture of such remains on 9/11? There were none, of course.
To put my objection in perspective, remember that the total fuel in these supposed airplanes was about that of an 11 foot cube (call it 3 or 3.5 meters). That’s really not a lot.
If JFK’s death was orchestrated by Israel in a pre planned conspiracy intended to get LBJ into the Presidency, then it was the most incompetent Jewish one of all time because the majority of people do not think JFK was shot by a lone shooter Oswald, and very many people immediately suspected LBJ. Trump, who is good at picking up the public’s gut feelings, said Ted Cruz’s father was in on it. But maybe Israel had partners in that operation, and Trump said if he was elected
Assuming the story of Holocaust was faked, it was after the facts of WW2 and not pre planned by organised Jewry any more that Hitler coming to power was. It just worked out really well for Zionism because they had the PR people to influence perceptions and the Arabs were backward.
A false flag 9/11 would be playing for the ultimate stakes and be as correct to the last detail as the Manhattan Project, with nothing left to chance. A crucial consideration would be the way it appeared to the American public. Any plan for the WTC Towers to be brought down by controlled explosives and visibly as if by explosive demolition would defeat the whole purpose of the operation, and thus be atrocious planning. It is inconceivable that a government department would ever have approved a plan for a false flag that intended to bring down the WTC Towers by explosives and in a way that a way looked like an explosive demolition.
It may have escaped your attention, but the experts were all in favour of immigration and Jeb Bush. The people have a vote: Donald Trump on 9/11: “You Will Find Out Who Really Knocked Down The World Trade Center. Experts are no way to control the gut feeling of the people that they are being lied to and things are not as they seemed. And the people will elect the devil if they feel they have been lied to.
Very well, it appeared to be a controlled demolition involving massive use of explosives (as contemporaneously said on live TV by an eyewitness news reporter and later by Trump) and the laws of physics prove it was a controlled demolition.
If you think it was that blatantly and certainly a controlled demolition then you cannot believe it was a false flag at all. Logically, you must stop saying it was intended to really fool anyone, and find another purpose that it served.
If I remember correctly Khalezov does not really make “the same error” since he does not claim that a plane would make no damage at all to the tower but simply, as you say, that “the cookie-cutter silhouettes cut in the towers are ridiculous”.
He does make an error though, when he considers the steel thickness: he takes the thickness at ground level, which is of course much larger than where the planes were supposed to “crash”. But even with the real value the “cookie-cutter silhouettes” are still ridiculous.
I agree totally with your arguments.
????!!!!
Have you lost any sense of logic? You mean that assign responsibility to Arab hijackers when there were none is NOT a false flag? That “demonstrating” buildings collapsed because of fires instead of controlled demolition was NOT intended to fool anyone?
But it did fool practically everyone.
The details of 9/11 aren’t really that important. What country did the hijackers come from; who funded them; which buildings were hit; how did the buildings collapse; what happened at the Pentagon etc…? If you ask the average American they will probably know next to nothing on any of these subjects. All they know is we got attacked so now we need to strike back. The deception is not from the event itself but the narrative the media creates after the fact. This is what people understand. This is why on the eve of the Iraq attack roughly half of all Americans believed that most or some of the hijackers were from Iraq. Some 3/4ths of our soldiers who fought in Iraq believed that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in 9/11. It is media narratives that determine peoples understanding of events, not the events themselves.
The only people that really understand 9/11 are the Truthers.
If one accepts that it has been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that the hijack was nothing to do with the Arabs and laws of physics prove the WTC towers’ collapse was clearly a controlled demolition, then it is very difficult to see 9/11 as a pre planned false flag operation. You cannot argue that Israel/US came up with something so obviously faked that everyone immediately said explosives were used, and that it was intended to be a false flag that would stand up under scrutiny and the gut feeling of hundreds of millions who watched it happen. You can not have it both ways.
Trump’s structural engineeer worked on the WTC construction and with the benefite of this inside information and a trip to the site, Trump said says an airliner could not have gone through the rows of box pillars around the periphery. In the video above he says explosives were used. It was a funny old false flag that everyone, public and engineers, immediately thought impossible.
Yes we can!
The best lies are the boldest ones… It’s precisely because most people can’t even imagine they were fooled to such an extent that it works.
Try to do a poll among well-educated people, engineers, scientists etc.: how many of them do believe in the canonic fable? How many still believe that airliners’ wings can cut into strong steel columns like a hot knife in butter? How many simply ignore that a third building went down exactly like in a controlled demolition process, without having hit by any plane (even if they believe real planes were there, they should know they only hit the Twin Towers)?
The whole story was precisely designed to make people surrender their reason to their emotions. In a typical Hollywood style.
Late final extra!
Prologue: A complaint. My ‘vision’ of how an internet forum should work is not being well-realised in this article’s comments. I *expect* ‘discussion evolution’ to converge on a ‘most likely’ scenario, but in this case we see some ‘ideological holdouts.’ On the one extreme people who cannot accept the observable fact that the so-called ‘leadership’ of the ‘West’ in general but US/Z rogue regimes in particular, are *not* acting honestly, and certainly *not* in we the sheople’s interests. A summary of this attitude: “Oh! They wouldn’t do that!” – referring here to controlled demolition. On another extreme, a small group of rogue posters are pushing the preposterous thesis that nukes were pre-positioned under WTCs 1, 2 & 7, resulting in ‘new’ physics = ‘dustification.’ That *may* be OK [i.e. all candidate scenarios could be examined], except that that particular thesis is so ‘off the planet’ that it should be and I do dismiss it outright, and have tried [but failed, via providing the ‘Princeton dis-proof’ which promptly ‘sank out of sight’ = was largely ignored] to dissuade more rational posters from encouraging the idiot-thesis pushers. I feel a great sadness, that the UR forum has been so compromised. OR, perhaps ‘excellence is not expected?’
Scenario summary:
1) 19 alleged Arab/Muslim hijackers + ‘their’ 4 planes; all ‘downstream’ 9/11 events follow directly and only from the ObL-led 19 [patsies?!] and those 4 planes.
2) Controlled demolition [conventional] = inside job; the Q becomes a) A [= US] alone or b) Z alone or c) some mix of A & Z, all covert.
3) DEW via Judy Wood; possibly ‘aliens did it.’ Haw.
4) Controlled demolition [nukular] = inside job presumed A only. Grrr.
I favour 2c; other commenters are free to differ. Next haw.
How: Pre-planted conventional explosives; could be PETN, ditto ‘det cord’ and/or some form of thermate/thermite *but* whatever really does not matter; assume best material/methodology for specific demolition functions – like a) cutting various support columns, b) rotating vertical support columns to horizontal and c) exploding floor-panels to create pyroclastic clouds of concrete dust heavily laced with asbestos.
Re [allegedly hijacked] planes; they also really do not matter; they were ‘required’ for the standard [lying] narrative, specifically to ‘justify’ the coming, pre-planned GWoT.
Why: The GWoT was/is the villains’ ‘solution’ of how to implement the Yinon & PNAC fantasies, *by* US&Co *for* Zs&Co = ‘Greater Israel’ fantasy.
Who; repeat 2c: Some covert mix from the US/Z rogue regimes. rgds
PS Evidence: We all should have reviewed most/all offered videos and text, but for completeness, here some repeats:
Chandler Physics Of WTC1 [.pdf]
Chandler WTC1 [y/t]
Chandler WTC7 [y/t]
And a summary text on WTC7 [.htm]
“If JFK’s death was orchestrated by Israel in a pre planned conspiracy intended to get LBJ into the Presidency, then it was the most incompetent Jewish one of all time”
I do not share your admiration to Jewish intelligence. I see them doing stupid things all the time, and the average IQ of Jews in Israel is indeed 95. You should not expect anything clever from them, and the best proof of their intelligence level are the H-trolls in this Unz site. Just believe me, they are genetically below Europeans, not above them, as a mixture of Europeans and Middle Easteners. Emigration selection got some smarter ones to the USA, but you can expect as stupid things from them as you can imagine. They make disinformation, they have no real knowledge of anything. Their arguments, as I read them, are all wrong.
Wtf. You’ve lost so badly you’re trying to do a little logical dance to tie people up in riddles.
It’s ok, I don’t think many people are stupid enough to fall for it.
Nobody was fooled. Everyone (including Trump) assumed explosives had been used. How anyone can think this was a pre planned false flag with the future of Israel at stake is beyond me.
That is the how, but what the planners were trying to achieve seems unfathomable. Unless it was something like this
No one who knew physics, engineering or special operations, or even ad just seen controlled explosive demolitions on TV would be fooled by the false flag aspect of 9/11. But the Israeli leadership went ahead with a plan for the explosive demolition in the full glare of publicity anyway in the expectation that they could bluff it out . The aforementioned would be one possible scenario– yet even for a Hollywood film it sounds much more than like lazy screenwriting than plausible decision making by a powerful cabal with much to lose.
If you had read Khalezov you would know that he explains exactly the opposite. He claims the Mossad did it and, thanks to a couple of traitors among US government (but NOT the US government itself) all the officials were forced into supporting a completely crazy official version of the events. It’s a kind of very sophisticated blackmailing which is much too long to explain here.
Nuclear destruction was decided by some US officials, NOT to kill people but to prevent a much greater disaster (obliteration of NYC by an aerial nuclear explosion). Once it was done, the absurdity of such a decision appeared clearly, but it was too late and the executives had to support the “crazy story” that had been made for them in order to appear as innocent.
I don’t know if Khalezov’s version is the true one regarding this blackmailing aspect but at least it’s logical and consistent with physics laws.
They did bluff it out. They started bluffing it out even before the towers collapsed. It was a media blitzkrieg, and they took Paris before anyone had even realized a war was on.
Laws of physics, mathematics, etc. don’t matter to most people because if the party says that 2+2=5 then they know better than to think otherwise. Logic be damned, this is self preservation instinct at work.
I have already flagged this Heinz [hereafter, ‘ditto’] as a troll, quote:
I will make a one-time exception to I**3; ditto says:
Me: No. 1st, “blackmailing” should read “bullshitting.” Then 2nd, this *whopper*:
No, it is not; never and no way. The ‘supreme’ example is the asserted ‘dustification’ = a total fiction. ‘Normal’ people simply cannot lie like that [so see “The Big Lie”. And note specifically, “unqualified capacity for falsehood”]. Almost all ditto writes is unsubstantiated ‘hand-waving’ which, whenever [often!] ditto is challenged, ‘it’ [trolls are by definition sexless], it changes its ‘rules,’ or otherwise adds complicating [non-]detail, following the ditto hoped for effect: Bullshit baffles brains; the ‘targets’ often being sincere but non-technically qualified], otherwise honest ‘victims.’
An example of ditto’s modus operandi may be seen here, when I posted my ‘Princeton stopper’, ditto instantly contradicted his own *primary* source, saying that source ‘must have got it wrong.’ Haw. Ditto’s exact quote:
Ditto cannot have it both ways. Either ditto’s guru is ‘correct’ about the depth of his nukes AND that is strictly contradicted by the Princeton stopper OR ditto’s guru is ‘wrong’ about the depth – and all else goes into the ‘one lie kills all credibility’ rubbish bin.
More? It would seem, that other posters ‘in here’ have extended ditto some benefit of the doubt. Too bad, and since I did try to warn, their own fault in falling foul of this ditto-troll’s subterfuges, evasions and outright lies. Here, I’m in *no* doubt; either ditto is an ignorant fool following an even more ignorant guru [unlikely], OR [most likely], ditto is a dirty little charlatan intent on damaging ‘the decent, truth-seeking’ faction.
Unz’s post had the thesis of Sharon having ordered 9/11 as a false flag to get the US to Invade Iraq for the ultimate purpose of halting Palestinian suicide bombings. I argued above that the invasion of Iraq had no tight connection to the official 9/11 narrative and so a false flag 9/11 was a very tangential method in intended for attaining the putative aim of halting the suicide massacres. Sharon was a bulldozer, not a roundabout type of fellow. When he had a problem with Arabs he dispossessed then, poisoned their wells, armed thugs as rulers of their villages or …
Sharon ‘s chance came after previous Prime Minister Ehud Barak tried to reach a final settlement with Arafat under Bill Clinton’s auspices, but failed. Clearly the Palestinians thought they would end up with more if they waited. Sharon started the second Intafada and then as PM Sharon largely solved the suicide bomber problem by building a wall to keep the Palestinian terrorists out. (Here).
Following the smashing of Iraq, the only problem left for Israel is what has been the whole of the real problem all along. Namely, the presence of Palestinians in occupied territories that Israel clearly does not have any intention of ever withdrawing from.
Ehud Barak last month:-
The destruction of Iraq solved nothing for Israel and if you believe that their Lobby did terrible things on 9/11, you can be certain that even worse things will befall the West as Israel implodes once ceases to exist as a democratic or Jewish state: “The general dismantling of the culture of the West and eventually its demise as anything resembling an ethnic entity will occur as a result of a moral onslaught triggering a paroxysm of altruistic punishment”.
America is emulated Israel by building a wall, but to be free of the Jewish moral onslaught America needs Israel to come out the closet and admit the obvious that it will never withdraw from the West Bank (and with the recent settlement and infrastructure there is nothing left for a meaningful Palestinian state)., and the Palestinians are going to have to leave. Iran is the last deterrent,
Well, that may have been as an ‘ambit claim’ = gambit, expecting such to be discussed.
Your post is suspiciously over-long; attempted obfuscation?
I speak of ‘discussion evolution’ to converge on a ‘most likely’ scenario; IMHO 9/11 was [another part-repeat:] Executed by some covert faction drawn from the US/Z rogue-regimes, as a ‘direct enabler’ for the pre-planned GWoT, in turn as the villains’ ‘solution’ of how to implement the Yinon & PNAC fantasies, via WC7in5, say *by* the US&Co *for* the Zs&Co = ‘Greater Israel’ fantasy.
IF I could paraphrase: The Jews want it all and do not care one fig who gets killed, from latest ’47+ into the ‘current moment’ murdering, genocidal ethnic cleansing in Palestine, USS Liberty, then via ~3000 murdered occupants of the WTC towers and associated ‘hijacked’ airplanes, to “Shock’n whore” of Iraq, Libya, Syria etc..
Seems to me, everyone has this choice: “Are you with ’em, or agin’ ’em?”
“Unz’s post had the thesis of Sharon having ordered 9/11 as a false flag to get the US to Invade Iraq for the ultimate purpose of halting Palestinian suicide bombings.”
That was concocted by Ron Unz, not by me. Having studied the old Judeo-Masonic conspiracy for several years some time ago, I have come to think that behind these events is not Israel and any current political needs of a country or a person, but a group that has been arranging many things since early 19th century because of very long term ideological reasons. They infiltrated Freemasonry and used it as a tool up to fairly recent times. In the old days one could name the Jewish bankers in it, but not today. Nor are Masons used any more, but the group still exists. This group existed long before Israel, it created Israel, and it has a special and quite messianic interest in Israel and Jews, but it is not Israel or Jews, or Sharon for that matter. If I have to call them something, I call them friends of Israel, as that’s one thing they surely are. But Israel has also other friends, better ones. In the old times this group created wars for changing the world to its liking, and for money and power. It likes the one-world model, much like in Lennon’s Imagine but in a hidden totalitarian version. The war against terror was seen useful for some goal, as was an attack to Afghanistan and Iraq. I cannot possibly guess what they wanted to achieve with it. Maybe Talibans should not have messed with their opium trade, maybe they feared that they will run out of oil and have to get some from Iraq, cracking was not yet developed. There is little sense in trying to rationalize messianic behavior. Such behavior is by its very nature megalomaniacal and insane.
Your interpretation of Khalezov’s “blackmail” of US officials is spot on — based upon my own reading. I think Khalezov is letting some “US rogues” get off much too lightly, however. To justify my opinion, I would have to go through a very long story, but let me summarize it, at the expense of not being able to prove any of it.
It all has to do with the submarine Kursk and its loss of almost its entire complement of Granit missiles, complete with 1/2 megaton warheads. One of those missiles was found in the Pentagon on 9/11 complete with a live, functional warhead, but “malfunctioned”, i.e., it was not set to detonate. (Please forget the nonsense about Bout selling one to some terrorists as one poster here has suggested.) Khalezov explains in a fairly decent number of pages the coverup the Russians went through about the loss of these Granits (Putin had been in office about 100 days at the time the Kursk sank).
Physically, how do you steal missiles stowed in the hatches of a disabled submarine sitting on the sea floor over 100 meters below sea level in the Barents Sea? The answer, touched upon very briefly in Khalezov, is you use one or two submarines (two in this case, per the Khalezov hint) to “anchor” next to the Kursk and use divers, aided by the winches etc. subs carry, to relieve the Kursk of its burden.
The most obvious explanation of which submarines did the stealing is the Memphis and the Toledo. The Memphis was close enough to feel the explosion that occurred inside the Kursk. It wouldn’t take long for the Toledo to get into place once notified by the Memphis. Once the Granits were tied in a nice bundle, the two subs left the area towing the Granits. At least one of them (the Memphis, probably) headed for Norway to hand the Granits over to a surface warship which could then stow its cargo out of sight.
If my analysis of the Kursk is correct, the command in the two subs had orders to carry on this mission and therefore they, or their superiors, knew of the plan to sabotage the Kursk. Where the warship went after it left Norway is anyone’s guess, but my guess is that ultimately the missiles wound up in the hands of Mossad. A year later, one of the Granits was fired at the Pentagon from a surface ship and the rest is history.
What’s important about this summary is that it explains the provenance of the Pentagon’s Granit and it shows the depth of American involvement in this year-earlier phase of the 9/11 production.
Needless to say, the no-Khalezov trolls on this site will scream about yet one more mention of the Russian devil’s accursed name.
Your quote:
I have no idea who Joe King is and I couldn’t tell from your post whether you were ridiculing Cherenkov radiation or ridiculing my asking the question about where I might have come across a reference to NYC lights intended to camouflage Cherenkov radiation from the pile after 9/11.
Subsequently, my memory clicked in and I checked Tahil’s book to see if the reference to NYC lights was there. It was; moreover the name he gave to the lights was close enough to being correct that it allowed me to Google it and find the correct name. For your information, Wikipedia says the correct name for the display (situated about 6 blocks south of the WTC) is “Tribute In Light” and that it began operating on March 11, 2002 and stayed on for over a month thereafter and then gives a whole lot of additional information about subsequent operation of the twin searchlights.
What I find most fascinating about these lights is that they were colored blue which of course is the color of the radiation named after Cherenkov who won a Nobel Prize for his discovery. They would therefore do a fine job of camouflaging the Cherenkov radiation which would become noticeable after most of the debris was removed from the 9/11 tower “piles”. In one of those curious coincidences, the idea of such lights was first proposed by an Israeli sculptor in 1997, a time which puts it squarely within the planning for the “big show” in 2001. The artist’s idea was to put the lights atop the twin towers but by Sept 12, 2001 that was no longer a viable option.
Thank you for your kindness in assisting me in solving this mini-mystery.
Nice summary, Contrarian III!
Quoting you:
May I congratulate you on finding the Khalezov error here (or should I congratulate Simon Shack?) where Khalezov uses someone’s graphic of the North Tower and failed to verify the authenticity of the graphic — which was one of the many composites available on the internet. (Major blunder?) I’m sure Khalezov knows there were approximately 60 beams in the façade of a twin tower since he defends his physics (quite successfully — with one exception) against a physicist, Jan Zeman, who argued specifically about whether the correct number was 59 or 60. The answer, by the way, depends upon how you define the façade of this building which though usually considered square is really octagonal (just shows how nit-picky people can get). The total number of beams (above the lowest floors) is 240; 59 each on the long sides of the octagon and 3 each on the short sides. (Eight of these beams get counted twice.)
Apart from Khalezov’s sloppiness in using this bad graphic (which is one of maybe 500 graphics in a thousand page book), do you have any other basis for calling him “discredited”. If so, please describe the basis. I’ve been involved in the production of books ranging up to thousands of pages and I wouldn’t discredit an author for one poorly chosen graphic.
You said:
There are at least two claims I’ve seen from Skrik: One is the above and the other is about the Princeton paper (PP).
Addressing these in order, would you please be kind enough to cite where and when Khalezov has been debunked. I hope you’re not referring to typos or inconsequential errors in his 1000+ page book. I would assume you’re referring to a debunking either with regard to his former Soviet credentials or a significant error about the mechanics of building takedown using underground nukes. Heinz has previously made comments about the depth of the zero box, so I assume you’re not referring to that issue.
Second, I’ve read the PP and read Heinz’s excerpts from Teller’s book. Would it asking too much for you, quoting the Princeton paper, to cite chapter and verse in a syllogism which negates the Khalezov explanation? I can’t find it, so please help this challenged person to see the light. What I do see is that PP does not deal with the issues (cited by Heinz) that Teller has already addressed adroitly in his older, but still classical, book.
I’m sure that knowledge of the physics of atomic explosions was slim to non-existent prior to about 1940.
This isn’t even part of the official story.
A controlled demolition process with no visible or audible explosions?
So not exactly like a controlled demo process at all.
In what medium the Cherenkov radiation was supposed to be created at WTC site? It is virtually impossible for Cherenkov radiation in air as the speed of light in air is only 0.03% slower than in vacuum. Electrons and positrons from isotope decays do not have enough energy to get to velocity above 99.97% of c and thus the condition for Cherenkov radiation is not met.
One can imagine Cherenkov radiation in solids but most solids on the site were rocks, dirt, metal that are not transparent and even if some light was generated by Cherenkov process within them the light would be attenuated and absorbed within it. So no light would come out.
Cherenkov radiation can be observed in water and transparent liquids because light speed in water is 40% slower than in vacuum and thus energy of electrons and positrons from isotope decay may have enough energy (velocity) to meet the condition for Cherenkov radiation.
There is also a possibility of ionized-air glow which supposedly was observed during some nuclear tests but these effects last very briefly.
The bottom line Cherenkov radiation could form and be visible if isotopes were coved by clear water.
All this talk about Cherenkov radiation at WTC site is another example of the phenomena where the excitation exceeds the ability of moderation. Too excitable people whose excitation is not moderated by elements of a basic knowledge end up in convincing themselves on the basis of vague plausibility only. People like that have a tendency for a rapid belief forming, in particular the beliefs that confirm the matrix of larger belief system that is already held.
The ultimate problem for Israel is the moral strength of the Palestinian case. Sharon created this problem and then adopted the technique of sticking his head in the sand. As Ehud Barak explained, the West Bank Palestinians cannot be given full rights, nor can they be kept as second class citizens. But the cure (withdrawal from the West Bank and handing it over for a Palestinian state) is now considered worse than the disease by Israeli voters. Palestinian terrorism was Israel’s secret weapon against Western demands for the Palestinians to be given a just settlement. Sharon’s Wall and other measures along the same lines defeated terrorism, so now Israel will face unbearable political and diplomatic pressure.
The decimation of Iraq and the forthcoming military action against Iran cannot save Israel from the political problem posed by the Palestinians. As they become powerless to use violence, the Palestinian appeal to the Western conscience will become immensely politically powerful, thereby putting Israel on the horns of a insoluble dilemma.
Ron Unz is the one who wants it all. He wants to reduce the disproportionate Jewish influence in America, thereby leaving Israel’s Lobby unable to stop a final M.E. settlement acceptable to the Palestinians. Yet bipartisan policy in America is for a settlement in which Palestinians will get their state and now the Palestinians are no longer able to stupidly resort to terrorism, the justice of their cause will become salient. Hence all the Palestinians have to do is sit tight and Israel will be forced to withdraw from the West Bank. That will bring about the collapse of belief in Israel, the young Jews will begin to leave en mass.
Unfortunately the collapse of Israel will be disastrous for America/ the West, because Jews will be will be apoplectic at the way Israel has been picked on and turn on America with furious anti-racist arguments including some currently undreamt of. The moral structure of America is held together by Jewish writers, movie-makers, news editors, and political consultants. With then actively destroying its cohesion, America will be destablised and collapse. America is like a giant steel framed building that cannot collapse just because it fails at a few anchor points up on an elite level? Don’t you believe it.
Not really since that would imply a 1.667 refractive index.
However, good question; I let Contrarian III answer it but I haven’t read him (or her) use that as a “proof” of an underground nuclear explosion, rather as a possibility some people designed this “light tribute” to mask possible effects of it.
I personnally agree with the need of some free water to produce visible Cherenkov radiation. But there are so many symbolic aspects in the 9/11 “concept” that I don’t exclude some “art” being made on purpose just to “look” nuclear without any need to hide anything, just the opposite…
Again, this is no proof, just trying to think in the same perverse way as the perpetrators.
I keep catching a hint of the same thing. 9/11 was not just Israelis, because stateside involvement was needed, and it wasn’t just the Jews because many gentiles were involved too. I’m not even sure if the Jew/Gentile divide is particularly important at the top of the pyramid. Perhaps the Jews are also just victims whose psychopathic trails are deliberately exacerbated so that they may form a separate caste, acting as enforcers to the real power.
Could you share more info on what this group is? I’d appreciate if you could give some pointers to further reading. Sorry to ask of your time but you seem to have a shortcut to a higher level of understanding.
‘Scuse, pliz?
All you or anyone else ‘in here’ had to do, was 1) pay attention to my fully informed ripostes to the Khalezov clique [heinz, Contrarian III, Iris et al.], OR 2) do a search like this: {how to debunk Khalezov} – without the {}s. A: “About 6.880 results,” then read a few of them, OR 3) you could have simply asked yourself ‘are posited nukes under 3 WTCs at all *credible*?’
My Princeton citation [discovered by my own research] worked perfectly well – elsewhere, containing far more ‘dumbed down’ participants than here. Bah!
But *no*, I was ignored, as you and others ‘explored’ the Khalezov idiocy, ‘enabling’ the clique to continue making one unsubstantiated, *stupid* assertion after another. Fail, both you and UR comments section.
Here’s a quote:
Feel free to argue, as pointlessly as you have recently demonstrated.
One last repeat [for now]: No nukes, no dustify, no sense, no feeling.
Tip: Cooperation trumps confrontation.
Yes, it should be 25% not 40% for water.
Blue light for “art” display could have been decided because of Rayleigh and aerosol scattering coefficients which are the largest for blue in the visible region. Green or red colors possibly would be less pronounced in clear sky night with low turbidity.
When it comes to symbolism red or green have undesirable connotation with Xmas and its tacky aspects while soft blue color is more soothing and elegant and for many has a positive connotation to Hanukkah and Judaism.
‘symbolic aspects in the 9/11 “concept”’ – If one has to go to the semiotic level of discourse it usually means he is lacking solid actionable arguments and he is way too far gone in his belief system. A typical search for confirmation belief by a goner who crossed the line from skepticism where still recognized his convictions as beliefs to the state of unwarranted knowing.
Oh, dear. Do you know, by any chance, of a fellow called Herzl? You know, the one who decided/was persuaded [by mainly European descendants of self-converted Turco-Finns] to ‘go for Palestine?’ [Quote: “Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the [natives]…“] I can agree that “the moral strength of the Palestinian” should be decisive, and all they really have to do is wait, repeating something like this [my reformulation of UNGA194]:
OK, you might say, but don’t we have to be ‘pragmatic,’ and the Ps have to make compromises? Me: No, then a Q: Why? One proposed ‘A;’ Ben-Gurion(1936-39):
I can agree, that all the US/Z machinations are basically symptoms of panic; the Jews are in the wrong, but worse, they *know* they’re in the wrong. Of course, they could always just ‘give up’ and do a ‘Samson Option.’ How to win friends…
My tip: Keep showing the Jews up, for what they really are [you can add your own ‘take’ on their reputation here], and reminding them that IF they ever would feel like ‘re-joining’ the human race, THEN they have to learn to conduct themselves like ‘decent’ humans, and not as psychopathic murderers for soil for one, and corrupting the [otherwise?] fine US/West for another – say. One for all and all for one! rgds
#Could you share more info on what this group is?#
Thanks but some other time. Off the topic. Too long. No pointers I would like to recommend. No higher level of understanding. Only history you know as well as I.
The problem for Israel left by Sharon is the Arabs in the West Bank.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barack:-
The problem for the West is not Israel, it’s the Titan of soft power represented by the Jewish Diaspora in the West. They will destroy us if Israel is forced to give up the West Bank ( it will).
Your way can help the Palestinians, but it will mean accepting the ideological and demographic capitulation of the West under an unbearable culture of critique. Get this into your head: I do not care about the Palestinians . Even if they cared about us I would not care about them enough to sacrifice my country for them. As it happens, they don’t care about us or for us. But you go right ahead with supporting the Palestinians if you want to end up like them.
Your favorite citation (actually, the only one) is number 28 on the “Notes and references list” at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_nuclear_weapons_testing#Notes_and_references
If this is what you mean by “own research”… you might be underestimating what a researcher’s daily work is.
Especially if you keep claiming that your “Princeton paper” contradicts others, which is not the case. It’s just less sophisticated than, for example, Teller’s book that you still haven’t read “by your own research“.
Please see links below.
It’s not just his unworkable underground nukes scheme that discredits Khalezov, but rather the sum of his own preposterous claims:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brQqRLCxJew&feature=player_embedded#at=33
Who else discredits Dimitri Khalezov?
¹ The Dimitri Khalezov “WTC was nuked” hoax
9/11 Scholars Forum: Khalezov is disinfo meant to discredit nuclear demolition
The Latest 9/11 Nonsense From The Intel Agencies/Secret Societies—Agent Khalezov’s Nuclear (Non-)Theory
Reddit: Debunking Dimitri Khalezov’s disinformation campaign
Sparkon, any physics argument? All you provide is psychological considerations; it “seems” to you that Khalezov’s claims are “unworkable”, but you still don’t explain why.
I’m not talking about the Granit missile which hit the Pentagon according to Khalezov (something I haven’t investigated), but about built-in nuclear demolition devices in the Twin Towers and WTC7.
So far, this is the only explanation compatible with physics laws, even if Khalezov makes some errors (depth of the zero box).
What are your arguments against it? I mean, serious ones?
You said:
Trying to put myself into a March, 2002 perspective, I would guess that any color except blue would be a good tribute. Red in particular for the 3,000 who shed blood. Christmas is so far away that tackiness would not be a consideration. Blue would look like a pandering to Jews, very few of whom died on 9/11, but were well represented in the NYC demographic.
That leaves me with the thought that the blue light was either camouflage or a deliberate false clue. But if I were the perp would I leave a deliberate false clue that pointed toward the truth? Clearly, NO. So the most likely reason is camouflage.
As to the source of the medium, water is the most likely. Copious amounts of water had to be used to cool the pile, NYC is not exactly a dry place, and March/April is not the dry season.
Would I consider that as proof of a nuclear event? No, but I would consider it as confirming evidence. Better evidence, in the proof category, is the Element Analysis, the cancer incidence, the presence of Dr. Geyh and her dosimeters, and most important, the collapse visuals themselves (thermite, TNT, mini-nukes, etc just don’t explain it — go back to that Sherlock Holmes quotation). Other confirming evidence would be the whole action at the Pentagon and everything, e.g. Kursk, that led to it, and the fact that the USA was in a Nuclear Alert status on that day (there are plenty of details about this in Khalezov).
As to blue lights coming from the ground, if I were walking in a field and saw a blue light shining from a hole in the ground, I would NOT stick my nose in the hole. I’d call the cops and tell them to bring the radiation people with them.
I‘ve already made simple, easy to understand physical arguments in my #1875
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2538688
The image falsifies Khalezov’s theory and verifies what most of us know instinctively: a top down demolition could not be accomplished by an explosion in the basement that did not disturb any of the intervening lower floors.
and also in my #1861
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2529525
where I closed by predicting another round of Khalezov vs. Thermite. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
And here you are again asking me to do what I’ve already done, and meanwhile forget all about the entirely ludicrous nature of Khalezov’s theories.
Cui Bono? The wars after 9/11, were all wars that helped Israel and not the US or any other nation. “Seven Nations to destroy” for the 9/11 false flag theme comes the Old Testament. In Deuteronomy 7. 1-2., it states that the Israelites must destroy and clear seven nations for Yahweh’s Israel. The Western/Israel mania to get Syria and Iran in the bag is based on these 500 BC primitive writings. Whichever way the towers came down, they were for Israel firster’s dream of the US fighting endless wars for Israel uber alles. This is where we should focus, end the Israel firster’s wars in the middle east. We are in the 21st century and not in 500 BC.
Getting rid of Palestinians is recurring theme in your writing. You will justify anything to make the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians possible. You will use however twisted arguments to make your point that Palestinians must go.
You use an argument that the only way we (I do not who who we are in your writing) can protect ourselves from the power of the Jews is to let Jews eat up the Palestinians because if we do not then we will end up like them. God forbid we do not give Jews want because they may got angry with us.
Apart form the moral issue which seem to be foreign to you did you consider a practical possibility that the Jewish Beast may no be satiated by eating Palestinians and will still be hungry or even hungrier?
If you read my post with a little care, you would have noted that I said (quoting Tahil):
“When we find Barium and Strontium present, in absolutely astronomical concentrations of over 400ppm to over 3000ppm, varying from place to place but varying in lockstep and according to known nuclear relationships – the implications are of the utmost seriousness.”
I think the plain meaning of Tahil’s words is that Strontium readings as high as 3000+ ppm were found, This to me means maximum, not mean. This datum was actually 3130 ppm and occurred at USGS sample site WTC01-16 (see Tahil, p.16). That type of misquotation would have gotten you thrown off my high school debating team.
The most important part of that quotation, however, is not the 3000 number, but the statement about varying from place to place but varying in lockstep. Look at Tahil’s analysis to verify that the bolded part is accurate. He not only provides the USGS data, but he took the next step by doing the correlation of correlated fission products.
I agree that the most important question about the Strontium (apart from the lockstep relationship, which is CRITICAL) is “what isotope?”. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the USGS scientists either did not do an isotope analysis or didn’t report it if they did. They could have even done a molecular weight analysis chemically to get at least a crude idea of isotope distribution, but there’s no mention of that either.
Whoever decided that the high levels of strontium were due to fluorescent tubes is the one who did superficial analysis, not you or me. I don’t think (but have not checked) that Barium is found in fluorescent tubes. N.B. The Barium concentration at WTC01-16 was also very high.
What are Khalezov’s claims? What was the mode of destruction proposed by Khalezov? It seems that he claims that the shock wave that was responsible for the crush zone somehow propagated within the building and caused pulverization of steel columns:
Shockwave propates through solid (like rocks) but when it encounters solid/air interface it is reflected back. So Kalezov must believe that the WTC building was coupled to the crushed zone that permitted the shock wave to propage up within the buildin, specifically within steel columns of the building.
For the shock wave to propagate through the center core of the building the core must be imbedded in the crush zone. What kind of damage one may expect through the crushed zone. First of all calculate the radius of the crushed zone form 150kt device: 159-212m. Keep in mind that towers were over 400m tall, so even if it was possible that the shock wave could travel along the tower height it could not reach higher than its middle. But obviously the nuclear device had to be deeper below the surface (say 100 m) so the crushed zone could not rich higher than 100 m within the building which is quarter of its height. Khalezov believes that the damage (pulverization) went all the way up.
What kind of damage one can expect in the crushed zone? This was studied when nuclear explosives were considered to be used to produce aggregates. See:
In Table I they present fragment-size distribution from underground explosions in hard rock based on size distribution data obtained by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers from the Danny Boy and Pre-Schooner experiments in basalt on Buckboard Mesa, and on Lawrence Radiation Laboratory data from the Hardhat experiment in granite.
Fragments size of lower than 3/8 inch constitute only 9% of the volume. Fragments less than 1 inch constitute less than 14% of the volume.
Further away from the epicenter the distribution will be coarser until the crushed zone transit into the cracked zone where the only damage will be cracks. So even if steel could behave in the crushed zone as granite or basalt only small fraction (9%) of it could be turned in fragments smaller than 3/8 inch pieces. Further away form the epicenter this fraction will be smaller and smaller.
But what about steel? Would steel not be crushed in similar manner as granite or basalt? Everything that is known about differences between material properties of steel and granite indicates that steel will not be broken into the fragments in similar manner as granite. In fact steel will most likely will not be broken into fragments because the shock wave that is inelastic in granite may still be elastic in steel.
Is there any evidence of pulverized steel? No, the claim Khalezov makes is subjective based on the color of dust that he states must be steel because it is darker than color of concrete dust.
Have we seen any steel columns that were partially pulverized? No.
Have we seen columns that remained intact? Yes. Quite a few. Do some googling. In May 2002 tha last standing base column was removed. You can find pict of it still standing prior to removal because they had a ceremony on the site. Later this column was incorporated into a memorial.
Also a good argument against Khlaezov mode of destruction is that if pulverization occurred along the height of the building the collapse of the building would began simultaneously everywhere along the height. The lower floors of the building would not wait in the expectation until the upper collapsing floors reach them but they would be falling on their own the moment they got pulverized. Gravity does not wait. The Disney physics for Wile E. Coyote does work here.
Pulverization is nonsense!
Khlalezov is a kook!
Khlalezov is a deeply disturbed person as his muscle flexing and delusion of grandeur prose of his commentary to the discussion with Jan Zeman clearly demonstrate.
If you make a class of people angry and resentful they cohesively mobilise and become politically dangerous, as with those classes who were the basis for Trump’s hostile takeover of an establishment that seemed untouchable. American Jews are not asking for the Palestinians to be transferred across the Jordan river and probably would express strong opposition, but they would go along with it out of deference to Israel.
Israel has decided to keep the status of the Palestinians of the West Bank as it is for the foreseeable future. The Palestinians have decided to hold out for more that Israel is willing to give. The Jews of the Diaspora are the danger, not Israel. You can neutralise Israel as a Jewish state by doing justice to the Palestinians, but that will coalesce the Western Diaspora into a ravening ‘Beast’ that will destroy Western countries with an unprecedentedly intense culture of critique.
In the Table I the fragment-size distribution is more likely by weight not by volume.
Well, at least you try to make your arguments look serious so I will answer them.
Yes, high-rise buildings like the Twin Towers are always anchored in the bedrock. Don’t you know that?
Here you take the values given by this paper:
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/552775
which is quoted by Wikipedia. The 159-212m range is correct but we must keep in mind that, as authors say, “the scaled ranges of these regimes are highly dependent on the test media structure and lithology” so I would rather only give an order of magnitude value such as 200m rather than accurate values.
Here you make an assumption that is not valid: you consider that a shockwave will travel in the building’s steel columns as it travels in the rock. This is obviously not the case for 2 reasons:
– steel is very different from rock, and more homogeneous, which favors wave propagation
– steel columns are obviously not isotropic, in other words, they can be seen as good waveguides.
So even though I am not able to tell precisely the difference between rock and steel columns for shockwave propagation, I’m pretty sure the wave goes much further in the steel.
No he doesn’t. He even explains the difference between Twin Towers and WTC7 collapses precisely because of height difference (and also because of some architectural differences).
Thank you for the paper. However, as I said before don’t expect to extrapolate these results to steel columns.
This may be valid for “ordinary” shockwaves produced by chemical explosives, but not for extremely powerful ones produced by nuclear explosives. Not only the pressure level is much higher, but also the wave front is much steeper, almost discontinuous which in technical terms will be described as having much higher frequencies. Materials do not behave the same when they are subjected to very high frequencies, and they can undergo a ductile-brittle transition. You use “elastic” and “inelastic”, this is not correct so I assume you lack some knowledge in materials science.
Yes we have: just look at the videos and try to explain why big falling facade parts have a large trail of dust behind them. Certainly not concrete dust that was previously sticking to them… And the dust colour is a good hint too.
I do not dispute that but I don’t think Khalezov does either. His “style” is often a little bit “oversimplifying” but he never claimed
was turned into dust.
You still haven’t made the minimum intellectual effort to understand the mechanism I already explained here, and especially that it’s the core columns “sinkink” in the subsidence crater that triggers the collapse, not any kind of “general dustification”. Khalezov oversimplifies, yes. He makes errors, yes (steel thickness, zero box depth). But the overall picture is good and there’s no other one.
As this is clearly unscientific I don’t need to comment it.
The Mafiosos thug WTC fireproofing contractor being murdered in the WTC might have suggested to some people that the WTC fireproofing might not be all it should have been, but apparently not.
Remplissage like that, serves no purpose whatsoever: it just makes everything else look like you’re reaching.
Any rescue dog that worked on the site would have been at least 3 years old in 2001. In 2018 they would be 20 years old.
The life expectancy of a well-looked-after mid-sized dog is ~10-13 years. Hence, it would be expected that they would all be d-dot well before 2015… i.e., off the twig; ex-dogs, if you will.
I would that it were otherwise: our Shepherd-Labrador cross, the beloved and sorely-missed beautiful blond boy Buddy, lived to 17½ – vastly outdistancing expectations, as befits the greatest pooch who ever lived.
Bud-bud may have been the most worthy dog who has ever existed (and a happier, sillier face you would never see), but l think even he would have voluntarily called it quits before he turned 20.
Listen up, *punk*, [part repeat:]
Specifically, this diagram:
IF a thesis is contradicted on one single, even tiny point [like princeton does to Khalezov; depth is a *critical* point], THEN that thesis [here Khalezov’s] is *junk*. Neither *you* nor anyone may ‘revise’ Khalezov’s ‘bible’ [like you try to, with your ‘hand-waving’ = unsubstantiated ‘deeper placement’ assertions: “even if Khalezov makes some errors (depth of the zero box)“]. *You* make this wild assertion, it is incumbent on *you* to prove = substantiate it and the wilder the assertion, the more comprehensive the proof required. Q: Do you really think that you are smarter than Khalezov? Note also, that Khalezov is risibly wrong on many other points, like his Kursk fantasy, haw.
On the other hand, others have addressed this topic:
Quotes: “1.Observation of tritium (an important component of hydrogen-bomb fuel) at WTC sites at the few nano-curie level only. This is strong evidence against the mini-nuke hypothesis.
2.The fact that radioactive iodine concentrations were actually lower in the upper/WTC debris-filled layers.
…
4.Lioy et al. report that radioactivity from thorium, uranium, actinium series and other radionuclides is at or near the background level for WTC dust.”
Note, no Mini-Nukes = no nukes at all; the repudiation ‘commutes’.
Richard Feynman said [paraphrased]: The task for scientists is to *disprove* theses, the faster the better.
No need to read either Teller’s or Khalezov’s book, since nobody needs to know about nukes at the WTCs; in the face of no substantiated ‘revisionist’ proof [= impossible], “no nukes” IS A FACT, dumbo, and no [more] ‘arguments’ will be entered into.
Now kindly stop pushing your stupid lies via UR comments.
No nukes, no dustify, no sense, no feeling.
” . . . I will discuss the
11:26 impact dynamics later but there prove
11:29 that we are not looking at a 767 plane”
” . . . 767s cannot travel over 500 miles per
23:57 hour at low altitude ”
Me: Haw. Israel is *unwilling* to give anything except ever more lying, cheating and murdering theft. Palestinian demands are a) simple and b) just; [my reformulation of UNGA194]:
Sean says:
Me: Haw again.
Q: How many are they? A: ~15mio out of 7.5bio = 0.2%?
Dr. Alan Sabrosky:
Me: IF that were to happen, THEN all Jews everywhere would instantly attempt to return whence they came = to the steppes somewhere north of the Caucasus – or to anywhere else they thought they could hide their miserable ‘souls’ away. Haw + rgds
G’day. I don’t know if you realise it, but you achieved ‘internet immortality’ [latest before 25Oct’14] with your concept:
I don’t recall what the “?” symbols may have been, but I really, really appreciate your insight. thnx – or in the vernacular:
Bewdy mate! A real ripper!
Haw
or no protection at all, *especially* against pre-loaded PETN, say? Or ‘det cord?’ Or thermate/mite? Or even phantom alleged hijacked planes?
WTF?! Talk about off-topic, red herrings = Sean kills any/all credibility s/he may ever have claimed the most tenuous, faintest possession of. Haw indeed!
Ma-a-ate: Phantom alleged hijackers were *required* for the GWoT plot. The GWoT plot was *required* by Zs. Any FBI, CIA, NSA, even Mossad et al. ‘operator’ who interfered in the ‘alleged hijackers ‘ imbroglio would have his sorry arse in a sling, pronto. OR his body on the bottom the Hudson, say, wearing concrete booties. thnx for the laugh.
Now: *Dis-prove* controlled demolition. Bet you can’t – nobody can.
Unfortunately, I cannot hold you to to account and the fire with your quirky theories, but here are some people who, unlike you have what one might call skin in the game for their narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Manning#Surviving_9/11_attacks_(2001)
She was standing near elevators in the North Tower ground floor lobby and when the planes hit suffered burns on over 80% of her body with 75 percent of those burns third degree. Yes the aviation fuel (so prone to explode that it has special additives added by the way) that made up half of the weight of the plane went right down elevator shafts and ignited, burning to death several people waiting in the grand floor lobby in front of the doors to take the elevator to their jobs, blowing the heavy lobby windows out and damaging the marble walls. Many early responded firefighters and those French filmakers on entering remember seeing two people withing in their death throes (which lasted for several minutes) right beside the door. One was a woman with her clothes completely burnt off whose eyes and mouth were sealed by her injuries, another was a man burnt black with his clothes still on fire. Survivors in the lobby remember hear the noise of the plain and impact then the elevator doors cracking open and an inferno of burning fuels gushing out. The smell of kerosene was overwhelming.The fuel went right down shaft into the basement where were also explosions, on blew a maintenance worker 30 feet. Other people were less lucky, an African American worker ran about the basement with his skin completely burnt off and exposing raw flesh.
Now you meet my challenge. Get a candle and light it then stick your hands that you write these comments with in the flame for a fraction of a second. Skin in the game.
This is an excellent 3D analysis by Richard Hall of UA175’s flight path within his 3D model of NYC showing that the flight paths of the apparent 767 in the video clips he analyzed aligned well with the flight path he reconstructed from radar data provided in the NTSB report authored by Dr. Bower.
I agree completely with Hall’s argument that the relatively fragile aluminum-skinned wings of a 767 — or any other known airplane — could never slice through the steel box columns on the exterior of the WTC, and the videos showing that feat must be, therefore, some kind of illusion.
But how was it done?
Among “53 pieces of publicly-known video showing the event” Hall analyzed 26 videos and concluded that with so many videos showing a 767 flying across the sky before striking WTC 2, there must have been something flying across the sky that attracted the attention of so many photographers.
As I see it at this point, either we can accept that there was some secret cloaking technology available in 2001 that enabled the perpetrators to make a missile- or something– look like a 767 on video tapes, and that something attracted the attention of at least 53 photographers around NYC that day who managed to get that something/airplane in their viewfinders even as it flew in over the Statue of Liberty, where by contrast AA11, also a 767, was able to approach WTC 1 at over 450 mph over the entire length of Manhattan, fly right past the Empire State Building (and Shouting Thomas in Chelsea) in midtown, before completing its spectacular NYC air show by smashing into WTC 1 without attracting the attention of any tourists, sightseers, or camera men — save the Naudet brothers– who might have been out and about on a bright early Fall morning in NYC with a video camera. In fact, the Naudet brothers seem to have recorded AA11’s apparent approach and impact entirely by accident.
Or we must at least consider the possibility that all those videos were in fact doctored, edited and/or processed by CGI software that definitely was available in 2001 — and for several years before that date — that allowed the creation of fake images, including “planes crashing,” which in the words of one TV network exec looked “too real.”
Hall didn’t specify the source for the videos he considered. In 2010 NIST released an enormous cache of data including video tapes after a successful FOI lawsuit:
NIST had all that material for up to nine years, a period of time entirely adequate to edit and/or create as many fake videos as wanted of UA175’s remarkable apparent encounter with WTC 2.
Of course, the perpetrators of 9/11 who destroyed the WTC would never stoop to the tedious task of faking a few dozen videos to cover their tracks.
Unlikely perhaps, but not impossible.
Good video [fails on Judy Woods]. Nice image analysis; *seems* to prove that ‘something’ flew into the towers [1st ‘impact’ has little imagery, 2nd has lots – but we can ‘generalise’ here.] Judy Woods [not alone] says ‘the wing-tips couldn’t cut steel’ – which is correct, but the wing-tips *could* have cut the external aluminium cladding – just what we see. But one ‘impact’ was ‘straight on,’ meaning any/all ‘massive’ bits ‘disappearing’ into the building would have hit – and been stopped by/at the even more massive steel core. Q: Why no engines or wing carry-through boxes ‘publicly’ recovered? *Most likely* whatever it was that was filmed, we’ll never be ‘allowed’ to know, and that the ‘cartoon cut-outs’ were produced by ‘Hollywood-style’ special effects.
Coming back to the ‘main theme,’ I have a ‘prejudice’ [= ‘in principle allergy’] against any/all ‘new’ physics, which here rules out Judy Woods [DEW = ‘directed energy weapons’ then ‘dustify’] and Khalezov’ [via buried nukes then ‘dustify’]. Any/all claiming ‘dustify’ *must* produce visible, reputable, checkable evidence – so far, of course, *none* – and none ever expected. I base my allergy to no ‘new’ physics on – ta ra! The conservation ‘laws,’ usually of mass/energy but also angular momentum, say – but here, on the conservation of ‘material properties’ [assuming there is such a thing], but namely, that steel/concrete/glass/furniture/people cannot be ‘magically’ turned into ‘pixie-dust’ [= dustified], then blown away on the four winds, based on some screwy, half-backed fantasy; the destruction we see in the videos, what was exported for scrap, otherwise buried at ‘Fish Kills’ or landed as dust all over the place [and into peoples’ lungs] requires *known* = recognised power = here, conventional explosives.
So back to the video: 9/10. thnx & rgds
PS And not so BTW, no nukes, no dustify, no sense, no feeling.
clothes completely burnt off whose eyes and mouth were sealed by her injuries
Atrocity propaganda; most likely corrupt&venal MSM bullshit, grievously *further* injuring any surviving relatives.
Be ashamed. Kindly cease polluting UR comments.
That lady was one of the two people referred lying to the right at this point in the documentary as the firemen were entering the building through the ground floor lobby with the French filmmakers only minutes after the plane hit the building. Everyone said there was a strong smell of kerosene at this point. One can see the blown out windows and the damaged marble facings on the ground floor lobby from the inferno-like blast that had come out of the elevator doors several minutes before this was filmed. The woman with her mouth and eyes burnt shut was still alive at this point I think, but people just walked past her because she was as good as dead. You can here screams at the sight of her though.
Anyway my main point was about the woman who survived burns in the grownd floor lobby moments after the airplane impacted (proving there was a series of thermobaric-like fireballs travelling down the elevator and other shafts throughout the building) and the one who was engulfed by a fireball that came down the an 80th floor stairwell. Those women can be seen to have been extremely badly burnt, and if you want to avoid that fate I suggest you stop tempting it. Bad Karma and all that.
Are you safe from being burnt with napalm in a tank ? No.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-02-23/news/1991054018_1_napalm-harriers-iraqi-tanks
Which would not be some sort of ‘Hollywood’ style, ‘special-effects’ fantasy? IF they could pre-load 3 towers with explosives, murdering ~3000 ‘own people’ [= only possible scenario] THEN would any such ‘phantasmagoria’ be beyond ‘them’ = ‘Jew-dominated’ Hollywood?
Will you [can you] kindly stop being silly?
Tee hee. I see at least two problems, a) that the ‘standard [lying!] narrative’ is not ‘travelling too well,’ and b) ‘truthers’ such as myself, are a) not giving up and b) continue to dig down beneath the bullshit lies. We do know, that the US/Z rogue regimes a) seem always to ‘double-down’ and b) print $s, so no project/subterfuge is ever ‘too expensive.’ But as we ‘gently down the stream,’ the scenery gets ever uglier. Too bad, the world really *could* be such a nice place.
The point of this post is this: Alleged hijacked planes crashing into WTCs, Pentagon and stony fields near Shanksville are *required* for the ‘standard [lying!] narrative’ [plus dependent GWoT] and so anything/everything that ‘supports’ hijacked planes needs to be very closely examined. If CGI anywhere, why not everywhere? rgds
Pre-placed explosives? Quite possibly. Pre placed explosives with extremely fine tuned and precise detonation software for floor by floor demolition in a sequence chosen to make it look like the collapse was starting at from whatever floor that aircraft impact was on ? I suppose that might be necessary. But, the idea that there was all this highly sophisticated explosives and detonation equipment pre set and they then also accepted the risks of had massive amounts of jet fuel sloshing ove over the building causing fireball- explosions all over the buildings right down to the ground floor lobby where the heaving marble facings were knocked off of the walls, and even down in the basement seems a little bit fare fetched. And that is not even mentioning the impact of the plane which was hard enough to jam doors throughout the towers, cut the cables of elevators and damage many girders. Have you seen the film Bridge At Ramagen when the Germans try to blow it up and the pre placed explosives do not work?
No demolition expert in the world would expect his charges (whatever they were) pre placed in critical points to work after they had been subjected to unpredictably located impacts and fireball explosions from vast amounts of aviation fuel;. I am not saying it is impossible that it could happen but I do say it is for all intents an purposes a non starter as a plan. No one would try to make something that baroque into practice if they were answerable for getting results. It’s Alice in Wonderland White Knightish inasmuch there are technical elaboration for no good reason. Again, the human element is the reason I don’t think a plan such as that would ever be approved.
The solid parts of the plane did get through the steel beams. Slice through? Maybe a few where the engines hit. Most of the holes created were beams whose bolts broke. This is clearly visible in pictures.
Tip: Don’t dare ‘would, should, could’ me. WTC7 free fall happened = inside job, basta. Kindly go wank elsewhere.
PS Not so BTW, NYT = corrupt&venal MSM = not quotable, in ‘polite society.’
What I have tried to show is that no one comes out the 9/11 official narrative very well. Not the people responsible for the poor fireproofing or the FBI . Let us see if the CIA are going to be the heroes of the story.
If you are, indeed, a seeker of the truth and an intelligent person (which I’ve verified to my satisfaction by reading a number of your posts) your closed-mindedness about the “Princeton Paper” and the Khalezov cartoon which you post directly after your words
is appalling.
The “Princeton Paper” which you like to cite deals with the subject of the containment of radioactivity from nuclear testing. If you are trying, in some way, to extrapolate sizes of craters and other data from the “Princeton Paper”, you are barking up the wrong tree. Have you read the paper?
Heinz (to whom a tip of the hat) has quoted several times from Teller’s book and has also given a link to a book edited by Glasstone and Dolan, “The Effects of Nuclear Weapons”, 3rd Ed, prepared and published by US DoD. I do not have any easy access to Teller’s book because the nearest university that might have a copy is well over 100 miles away. Glasstone & Dolan is available free and online per Heinz’s link. If you’re bandwidth limited just download Chapter 6.
Using their book, if you look at Chapter 6 and specifically Sections 6.70 et seq. you will see how to calculate the radius and depth of the crater created by detonation of a nuclear charge as a function of charge yield, depth of the zero box, and the type of soil. I can give you some numbers, but I think I’d be insulting your intelligence if I did. The calculations are very easy except that one number might be a little hard to compute, so I’ll share that: 150 to the 0.3 power is 4.50 (to 2 decimal places).
Once you see the numbers, my guess is that you will stop waving the “Princeton Paper” around.
The Khalezov cartoon is just that and is used by him in his book to explain a concept. If you read the book itself, you’ll find that he does NOT believe the zero box was directly under the middle of a tower (and ditto for WTC7). He does state that the zero box was 77 m. under ground-level, but this error may have a curious origin (at this point I’m guessing). This may be exactly the information he received while in the Soviet military as part of the demolition plan submitted to the NYC Building Dept (when the nuclear data was passed to the USSR per treaty) before the towers were constructed and might easily have been changed/corrected later when WTC7 was constructed and American engineers made better calculations to set the depth properly to get the desired demolition. As you may know, nukes especially those based on Plutonium require a certain amount of TLC, so storing charges under WTC7 would make a lot of sense. Revisiting calculations made at the time of construction is not a bad idea either.
If you are intent on finding errors in Khalezov, save yourself the effort. I’ve found a pretty good number of them — including an error I’ve alluded to in a prior post (but not attributed to Khalezov): Benzene is NOT benzine, despite the way many European tongues have managed to make it easy to confuse them. Benzene is an aromatic chemical, benzine is an aliphatic distillation fraction aka petroleum ether, which is usually mostly hexane. The former has been identified as a carcinogen for a specific type of cancer. Radiation exposure is the other “carcinogen” for this same cancer.
When you attack a man or his paper or his book you do yourself a great disrespect if you don’t learn about the man and/or read the paper/book first.
“Revisiting calculations made at the time of construction is not a bad idea either.”
This is argument is absolutely correct: this way of working is actually the norm and is observed in all engineering project, where a scheme design is followed by many more elaborate detailed designs .
In particular, in civil engineering projects, the nature of the ground is of crucial importance and cannot completely be ascertained until preparatory construction works have started, which allow sampling at the desired depth in the purpose of gathering the finer information required to finalise the design.
The blatant smoking gun, the sign that the Khalezov scenario you describe is extremely plausible, is the amount of heat released for over 3 months at Ground Zero.
Intuitively, it is obvious straightaway for anybody with a scientific background, that having fires with temperatures of 1500 degree C, molten steel, in the open, several weeks after the collapse, is simply impossible to achieve with conventional fuelling material. Short video here:
http://www.nucleardemolition.com/
No conventional fuel, covering only such a restricted surface, can have the ability to burn for 3 months, producing such high temperatures. It has to have been nuclear material.
Finally, the practice of embedding nuclear means of demolition within strategic buildings to prevent their takeover in case of conflict was apparently common in the 60’s.
In France, such measures were quite well known by the public, because military conscription was still mandatory at the time.
It’s a fair question. I’ve said all along that we’re on shaky ground when we have to rely on photos and videos for evidence. Both are easily edited or even created entirely from scratch with photo realism, but I maintain that it is very difficult to do the video fakery perfectly so that it eludes detection. Unfortunately, virtually all of the critical physical evidence like the core columns was hauled off before researchers had a chance to examine it, and so we’re left looking at pictures.
Here, in this 93 minute NIST video, I’ve pointed the YouTube player to 43:03 at the beginning of a remarkable sequence that was broadcast live on CNN:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlA2NJo1lLI&feature=player_detailpage#t=2583s
As the camera continues to zoom out, some curious artifacts or clutter appear at the bottom of the frame beginning at 43:30 instead of the buildings we should be seeing there, and by 43:31 we can see clearly that Manhattan has completely lost its bottom.
I don’t know if that was the mother of all flubs, but it must be a contender.
No, some people do dispute their conclusions. NIST used an artificial early start time so they could stretch the collapse for the first 18 stories to 5.4 seconds. As John Gross said during the technical briefing they looked at one pixel to determine when it went from “building” to “sky”. However, they used Camera 3 which looks up at an angle towards WTC7. This would not distinguish between lateral or vertical motion. If fact, when you view the building through the camera angles level with the roofline you don’t notice any downward motion in the roofline till about 1.5 seconds later. So you are pretty much left with free-fall and nothing else. In fact, they admit this in their report, “It also appears that the east end of the north face is rotating to the north relative to the rest of the north face.”
NIST denied free-fall and said that descent speed was constant. That’s complete rubbish. NIST tried to hide free-fall when they could and then tried to downplay its significance when they couldn’t. The NIST report on WTC7 is a scientific fraud in the service of a massive cover-up.
So what if it was a nuke in the basement. Bin Laden could not have made a nuclear weapon, but him having secretly acquired one is well within the grounds of possibility. There is evidence of continuity between the New York cell of the Blind Sheikh, the assassination of Meir Kahane (his killer had a mailbox at Sphinx Trading) , the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and 9/11.
See NYT, 1995, THE TERROR CONSPIRACY: THE OVERVIEW;SHEIK AND 9 FOLLOWERS GUILTY OF A CONSPIRACY OF TERRORISM
Osama bin Laden declared a holy war against the United States, and signed a fatwā in 1998 justifying the killing of Americans. The 1993 WTC bomb was in the basement
Ron Unz writes:
Nonsense! The purpose of terrorism is to force retreat from a powerful opponent, not “show” anyone anything by means of a Public Relations coup.. I saw a Taliban fighter being interviewed and he said the reason he was fighting is there are foreign troops in his country.
Osama bin Laden’s major complaint, which he made clear on many occasions before 9/11 , was the presence since 1990 of US combat troops in Saudi Arabia, which very many Saudis were extremely unhappy about. And the actual 9/11 hijackers were mainly Saudi Arabians. The troops were withdrawn in 2003, so Saudi patriot Bin Laden achieved his objective of getting the American army out his country and so did those Saudi hijackers.
What?! Are you trying to say that letting A/H-bombs off on a test range would produce different results than under WTCs?
Statements of the form: “You are …” may be fallacious, but not if true. Like this one:
You [Contrarian III] are a complete and utter idiot. As are Khalezov, Tahil & Woods.
The proof is distributed within the various contributions by serious truthers in the so far 2,098 comments to this article. The proof that you are a complete and utter idiot is the fact that you can’t sort out the chaff [= ridiculous myths like nukes & dustify] from the wheat [the truth = inside job via conventional pre-loaded explosives.]
You can’t even paste and copy a number from your calculator or can’t use calculator: 150^0.3= 4.496. Besides 1/3≠0.3 and 0.3333 should be used because the scaling factor is (kt)^(1/3) which means that for kt=150 you get 150^(1/3)=5.313. The latter number then is multiplied by parameters in formulas for radius of cavity (melt zone), crushed zone and cracked zone. For 150kt nuclear device you get:
Melt zone: 21-64 m
Crushed zone: 160-212 m
Cracked zone : 424-5845 m
Only the crushed zone is of interest because it is where rocks are actually broken into smaller fragments. The fragmentation size distribution in the crushed zone depends on the distance form the shot point. Only within r<70m one finds dust. But the average size of fragments (by weight) for 150kt is 23 cm according to equation the averages fragment size =0.42*(kt)^(-0.12) and 89% of fragments are larger than 1 cm. These values are for the entire crush zone. But in concentric circles around the epicenter the size of average fragments will increase with the distance because shock wave intensity decreases with distance due to geometric factor and due to dissipation of energy spent on crushing. So 100 m from the epicenter the average crushed fragments will have size larger than 23 centimeter. There is no dust at 100 m.
What does it mean? Assuming that the nuclear device was placed 80-100m under the center core the shockwave was not able to create small fragments amounting to pulverization. Creation of dust was thus no possible!
Khalezovians (Hinze) claim that steel columns were pulverized by the shockwave. The shockwave did not have energy to do it even if there was no significant loss on coupling between ground and steel columns. Furthermore steel is much stronger than granite: shear strength by factor of >5 and tensile strength by factor of >15.
The bottom line is that the mode of destruction proposed by Khalezov was impossible. There was no steel pulverization. And there is no evidence for steel pulverization. Just like Cherenkov radiation it is a figment of imagination.
This is pure fantasy and confabulation on your part. While nuclear devices were tested and considered in demolition but in military sense of the meaning of the word demolition which is an euphemism for destruction. You can blow up any building with a nuclear device. There is no question about it. But you would do it on the enemy territory only. Nobody considered demolition for civilian use where safety and minimum damage to the surrounding is of paramount importance.
If the heat released was due to ongoing nuclear reactions, all the responders would have died within days. Nuclear reactions generate a lot of radiation per unit heat.
I can only say that earth acts like an insulator, which means that heat can retained for much longer than it would on the surface. Perhaps there were broken gas mains? I don’t know.
This site is claiming there were underground nuclear reactors. Not just bombs, but nuclear reactors. That’s ridiculous. Where did the cooling water come from and go to? Where did the electrical output go? And no one knew? And the explosions were simply nuclear meltdowns? How passe. Nuclear meltdowns are almost always (excepting prompt critical events) simply the overheating and bursting of pressure vessels. They’re comparable in yield to a chemical explosive. Also, compared to bombs, reactor meltdowns generate much more fallout since they’ve been building up a supply of waste material for many years, whereas a fission bomb is not particularly radioactive until it goes off.
Underground nuclear bombs was a very long shot. Underground reactors? Absurd.
Both are absurd.
Underground nuclear explosion could melt parts of steel columns only if the bottom of the center core of the WTC tower was reaching all the way to the melt zone. For 150kt nuclear device, as Khazelov postulates, the radius of the melt zone is 21-64 m which means that the epicenter would be close enough to the surface to lead to entirely different mode of destruction than what he proposes. If this was the case then we would see a total devastation of the bottom part of the building due to expanding gas (vaporized rocks) wave and thermal radiation. We would see crater formation and debris shooting upwards. Khalezov claims that it was the shockwave that lead to the destruction and postulates the nuclear device was planted much deeper than 21 m. While I am convinced that Khlalezov scenario in which he emphasized pulverization of the steel structure by shockwave is impossible his scenario excludes the possibility of melting. Which apparently proponents of his hypothesis do not realize. This understandable because he is all hand waving. No quantitative statements. There is plenty of room for magical thinking which follows the invocation of the magical powers of nuclear weapon.
In 2001 NYT reported that Mr Pincus had told the Times that only 3 Jews died in 911 attack
There is actually a crowd sourced effort to perform an experiment with the strongest part of an Airplane Boeing 767 wing mounted to a rocket sled, accelerate it to 550 mph and smash it against a steel frame box column section (built to the specifications of the WTC), film it with high speed cameras and produce the results for the world to see (online).
Here is an intro video:
And this is the website with all the info:
http://www.911crashtest.org/
1993 WTC confirmed the collusion between the terrorist and the US agency. In the court, Egyptian infiltrator and also an US agent disclosed how he tried to alert his boos that the bomb which was supposed to be fake was an actual bomb He was told to carry on and give it to the “terrorists’ People died.
NYT
It would need to have the weight of the fuel in the wings (almost half the weight of the plane) and the be attached to the loaded body of the plane for a proper test. Anyway the aluminium facings were what the wings hit and they were silver so the visible wing impact zones were not necessarily an exact match for the hole punched through the steel box columns by the central mass of the plane. The fuel/wings killed hundreds of people in the sky lobby on the lower part of the impact zone.
It was observed that people came to the large hole made by the body of the plane early on before the fire spead there. The steel frame box column sections of the WTC were 5 inches thick steel at the ground floor but only a fraction of an inch near the top of the buildings. The first responded firemen saw pulverized flesh (remains of passengers) airline tickets and luggage all over the street so the body of plane crumpled as it hit but at high speed and with the weight it went through.
So we’re agreed, the element analysis of WTC dust samples provides zero evidence of a nuclear explosion.
Your post is so disingenuous that it hardly deserves a reply.
Where did I ever say that there were nuclear reactors under the WTC? Where did I ever use the word “reactor”?
All my comments were about means of destruction embedded at construction, i.e. means to detonate A bombs for purpose of controlled demolition.
The link I posted contains an video, which link would not be posted separately, showing a fireman/construction worker (??) commenting on temperatures of 1500 degree C, red hot/bright orange coloured steel, 6 weeks after the collapse.
The guy clearly states that it is “unbelievable”: you should watch it, you really need to get grips with the physical world.
Reading, not skimming, what posters write appears to be an epidemic-proportion problem here. Had you read my post, you would have noticed that I was giving our friend, Skrik, a formulaic approach to doing the calculations he likes to do by waving the Princeton Paper. Since Teller’s book is long out of print, I referred him to Glasstone and Dolan, Chapter 6, Sections 6.70 et seq. which is still available free online. In this book, there are formulae for computing radius and depth of craters caused by underground nukes. If you take the time to check my reference, you’ll see that the book’s formulae use (Yield) to the 0.3 power, not 1/3 power. As a convenience to Shrik, since he may not have a calculator that does x to the y power calculations, I posted the value of 150 to the 0.3 power, thereby facilitating use of the formulaic approach.
To two decimal places, this number is 4.50. Thank you for supplying the extra decimal place; I believe the number you supplied, 4.496 is indeed 4.50 to two decimal places, so you have nicely confirmed my correct use of my calculator (which would have given me the answer to more places by pressing three keys). Quoting you:
Using a scaling factor of 1/3 instead of 0.3, as the power of Yield, would have introduced a confounding issue when I was trying to make the process as easy as possible for Shrik: “Just select the numbers and plug them into the nice, easy formulae found here …”. I had sent an earlier post to Shrik asking him to explain how the Princeton Paper could be used to prove Khalezov’s explanation wrong. Quoting myself (Post 2054):
“Second, I’ve read the PP and read Heinz’s excerpts from Teller’s book. Would it asking too much for you, quoting the Princeton paper, to cite chapter and verse in a syllogism which negates the Khalezov explanation? I can’t find it, so please help this challenged person to see the light. What I do see is that PP does not deal with the issues (cited by Heinz) that Teller has already addressed adroitly in his older, but still classical, book.”
Since Shrik declined my request (silence to a substantive request), I tried in my post 2095 to give him a formulaic approach in lieu of the requested syllogism.
The portion of your post
wouldn’t have been of any great use to me in helping Shrik because it doesn’t include a reference to the calculations that yield the numbers you show. Please remember, I was trying to help Shrik answer my question.
Since I don’t know how the irrelevant Princeton Paper negates Khalezov’s explanation, I made a stab at it and guessed at crater radius and depth. If you cite an available source for the calculations that led to the numbers in my above quotation from your reply, perhaps we can add zone radii to the list of things Shrik can use to dismiss the Princeton Paper once and for all. Please remember that my goal is to give him a nice, easy formulaic approach.
Do not lie, Heinz. Your Khalezov can’t stop talking about pulverization of steel and turning it into dust.
And he claims that only columns on very top and in few corners in the “dead zone” in the bottom were “spared by the general pulverization.”
Does he say that only small fraction of center core columns were pulverized or is he saying 50% or more than 50%? Tell me.
So you are not disagreeing with Khalezov. You say that he might be wrong here or there but the general picture he paints is correct. Most importantly, he is correct in your opinion on the steel dust because you yourself ‘saw’ the steel dust in the video. How did you see it?
I will post the videos at the end so you can view them few more times. You realize that color of the dust plume depends on whether you view it in the reflected (backscattered) light or in transmitted (forward scattered) light. All clouds are white but then sometimes they look very dark, right? In case of the dust detaching from the falling spire it appears dark because we see it in the background of bright blue sky. The dust acts like a blocking screen. It is opaque. If you looked at the same dust from above possibly it would have much lighter color like color of concrete dus which is not white by grey or detaching fireproof coating that is also dark grey?
This ends the total of evidence you have of steel dust.
Now let’s’ address the schockwave’s almost discontinuously steep front and that it is not “ordinary” shockwave “produced by chemical explosives.” By the time the shockwawe reaches the bottom of the center core that is imbedded in the bedrock it might be like an ordinary shockwave. Its pressure and particle acceleration will be greatly reduced after traveling 100m in the rock. The rock is not a homogenous medium particularly for high frequency components. So there will be dispersion and
what was originally almost discontinuously steep will no longer be so.
Rock dustification occurs only in the layers close around the melt cavity. For the whole crush zone of 150kt the average fragment size of rock is 23cm. But in the region of 100m away from the shot point the average size is larger and at 200m there will be no more broken rocks only cracked ones. There is no dustification occurring 60m or 80m or 100m away from the shock point. The schockwave does not have the juice anymore to dustify. But you and Khlalezov would want people to believe that steel however will get pulverized and dustified even if though steel’s tensile strength is 15 times higher than basalt and granite and the sheer strength is 5 times higher and its density is almost 3 times higher. The same shockwave that can’t dustify granite anymore will dustify steel?
Good at least that you admitted you do not how shockwave would propagate in steel columns. Your speculation about waveguides and that steel being more homogenous would promote propagation are just speculations. What applies to nice acoustic waves will most likely not apply to destructive shockwave.
The bottom line is that you do not have evidence of steel dust or pulverization. We haven’t seen a single column that we could say, look, this thing seems to be partially pulverized. It is like with Cherenkov radiation that nobody saw. Though some people saw Satan’s face in the plume.
Nevertheless you believe or pretend to believe that pulverization and dustification occurred and was major and important to the building collapse. If faith can move mountains so it can dustify buildings. Allahu Akbar.
Now let’s go to your mode of collapse which you state as follow:
Was it fully contained explosion? Was it deep enough? Because if it was, the creation of the crater is not guaranteed:
And what about the uplift? It did not happen? Building was not pushed up first? The uplift happens before the subsidence crater is created. Sometimes you have to wait minutes or even hours before the crater begins to form. The cavity collapse can even be delayed indefinitely.
I am sure that in the book “Underground Explosions” by Vitaly V. Adushkin and Alexander Spivak that is available on the web in pdf you can find formulas to estimate the depth of the crater depending on charge size, its depth and type of soil/rocks. Perhaps then you could add some precision to your hand waving arguments. How deep was the crater? Let me know when you figure it out.
But let suppose that the center core indeed as you want begins to fall into some crater that is, say 10m or 25m deep. What will we see? And assume as you suggest that there is no general dustification (not any kind of “general dustification”. Khalezov oversimplifies, yes. ). Will we see what everybody has seen? No, if center core begins to sink it will be pulling external shell of the building inward along the heigh of the building. Did we see it, no. Nothing. No sign of stress in the external shell below the moving down destruction zone. So perhaps the center core was no longer connected to the outer shell. What could have done it? I got it. Schockwave, pulverization and dustification. We made a full circle back to your dust.
Nothings adds up. You have one way out of it. Invoke Simon Shack CGI that all what we saw was synthetic. Including your dust. Then everything become faith based theory. Allahu Akbar.
Now put your X-ray fluorescence goggles that can detect metals and enjoy the videos of your steel dust.
The book is here
http://www.dtra.mil/Portals/61/Documents/NTPR/4-Rad_Exp_Rpts/36_The_Effects_of_Nuclear_Weapons.pdf
on page 261 they have correct formulas for cavity radius with power 1/3. On page 263 indeed they use 0.3 but state it is approximate but it might be justified because it is for crater diameter and depth which are more random and harder to predict.
I tried their crater depth formula and it seems to be producing way too high numbers.
I do not know what is your beef with skrk and do not care because he is annoying and he does not think though he probably is more right than you because at least he does not believe in the Khalezov’s nonsense, however he has no clue why he is right because he just repeats what he read somewhere. You otoh should consider snapping out from Khalezov nonsense.
” It would need to have the weight of the fuel in the wings (almost half the weight of the plane) and the be attached to the loaded body of the plane for a proper test.”
Why is that? Because the momentum and kinetic energy of the plane matter? And do you think that the reaction momentum of the WTC Tower does not matter?
The mass ratio of the plane to the WTC tower would have been approximately 1 to 1000. It would be perfectly relevant to carry out an experiment that would replicate a same mass ratio. If you insist on using a complete plane, than you must also put a complete tower in front of it !!!
But more fundamentally, the reason why the official version is an unbelievable cock-and-bull story is not related to the momentum and kinetic energy of the alleged plane. It has to do with a mechanical characteristic called hardness.
Hardness is measured by empirical methods, such as Brinell, Vickers, Rockwell. It is not expressed by a mathematical equation, so the result of a crash between a hard body and a softer one cannot be predicted with scientific accuracy.
But Aluminium is incomparably softer than steel. An aluminium plane cannot cut through several rows of steel columns to the point that it would disappear. It would shear at the first impact on the much harder steel. If the WTC tower would have really been hit by plane mainly made of aluminium, we should have seen detached parts of the plane falling on impact with the steel columns constituting the façade.
Would you find it normal if one morning, the steel knife you use for breakfast was cut by the piece of butter you dive it into? No? Welcome to the real world.
The plane penetrating and cutting
French open letter for CRIF members
http://aitia.fr/erd/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Sans-nom-27-01-2018-v2f.pdf
No, we’re NOT in agreement. Try reading what I actually wrote. It would be conclusive proof of a nuclear event (either above ground or underground) if someone had found abnormal levels of abnormal isotopes of, say, Strontium, in the samples. No one did such isotope analysis, which is itself amazing in view of the number of Federal agencies that got involved. [N.B. How do you spell “coverup”?] Therefore, we have to rely on what was done AND what’s accessible to us.
To his credit, Tahil did an analysis of the elements found by the USGS Element Analysis by comparing the ratio of Strontium to Barium (just to stick with this example) on a sample site by sample site basis. The degree of correlation of Sr/Ba is startling. When you add to this, the correlations he found of other element pairs in the USGS data, you get a very STRONG case for a nuclear event. Add to that the presence of elements that shouldn’t be expected (Yttrium, e.g.) and the case based upon the samples becomes compelling for a nuclear event. Tahil did a good job in his analysis; you just have to ignore his claims about underground nuclear REACTORS.
The high heat coming from the pile for about 100 days after 9/11 makes another compelling argument for a nuclear event (there are a variety of nuclear decay processes going on long after a nuclear event, all of which (I believe) are exothermic.
But that’s not all. Look at the incidence of cancer and the types of cancer occurring among 9/11 first responders. Multiple myeloma is a cancer not to be expected among the first responder demographic. Ditto (although slower in developing) for thyroid cancer. I’ll provide specifics in a separate post in the near future. Most importantly, as some research would show, there are really only two causes of multiple myeloma worth talking about: Exposure to benzene and exposure to radiation. For thyroid cancer, it’s simpler — its cause is radiation.
And what was the source of the benzene? It’s normally found only in chem labs and chem mfg. plants. It’s a 6-carbon aromatic compound (in a classic organic chemistry context, you’d describe it as as having alternating single and double bonds in the ring).
Don’t confuse benzene, though, with benzine. Jet fuel is similar to benzine. The former is mostly 7- and 8-carbon alkanes; the latter is more like 6-carbon alkane (hexane) and other aliphatic compounds mixed in. Neither benzine nor jet fuel is a single compound. Benzine is a petroleum distillation fraction; jet fuels are intentionally mixed blends plus additives like de-icers, etc. There may be some aromatic compounds in jet fuel, but only in very small amounts that can be safely ignored and would not pose a myeloma risk.
Those first responder cancer victims are a grisly form of radio-isotope detectors. They carried alpha and beta radiation out of ground zero by breathing it or swallowing it in their food and drink. The alpha and beta were all over the vapors and particulates around ground zero and fresh radiation from the pile arrived every day for months.
Surely you know this is wrong. They assumed that the descent was constant. They did so because it didn’t matter–until the truthers changed their claims.
The free fall isn’t significant at all. Truthers pretend it is, but free-fall is consistent with the buckling of exterior columns. These columns buckled quickly once the exterior collapse began because the inside of the building that stabilized them had already collapsed. The NIST explanation is sensible and truthers respond with only claims that the columns buckling quickly is “impossible.” No analysis, no reference to the building’s design–just plain incredulity. That’s unconvincing.
I like the idea of truthers testing their ideas. But the wings didn’t cut through the columns, they sheered the bolts. Seems stupid to spend money to disprove something that no one believes.
He also is apparently unaware that nose cones are weak because they have to be transparent to radar. Not a good sign.
I not only read what you wrote, I cut and pasted it. So you are a liar as well as a propagator of rubbish theories about 9/11, which one must suspect are intended to help paint all those who question the official 9/11 story as conspiracy nuts.
Here are two incontravertible facts:
You have no evidence whatever that the concentration of strontium in the WTC dust was higher, on average, than that of soil samples from across the US.
You have no evidence whatever that the strontium in the WTC dust is a radioactive nuclear fission product.
Your ridiculous and dishonest comments do, however, provide abundant evidence that you are a troll.
One thing that never changes in debates with the “debunkers” is that they never offer any positive evidence for the government’s position, they only engage in semantic word games and “gotcha” tactics and believe this is winning a debate. It isn’t. If someone says, “I assume that Brett Kavanaugh is guilty of the accusations leveled by Christine Blasey Ford.” Then later states, “I never said he was guilty. I just assumed he was guilty.” Yeah, big difference. This is just Humpty Dumpty word games.
The Truthers didn’t change their claims, they demanded accuracy. Free-Fall matters because it tells you the forces acting on the building at a specific time. You can’t get that from looking at only two data points. So for 2.25-2.5 seconds there was nothing from below resisting the falling building. So how did column strength disappear for 8 stories?
This has no basis in observational reality. It only exists in the NIST model which does not mirror the actual collapse in any way. Let’s look at the actual collapse. The west penthouse only started to descend about half a second before the roof-line. It was actually still visible when the roof-line began it’s free-fall descent. So how could’ve the interior completely collapsed while the west penthouse is still standing?
Also in the NIST model the interior collapse goes from east to west. If this was the case then the eastern exterior part of the north face would have collapsed before the west, yet you don’t see this either. The roof-line is level for the first 18 stories of collapse.
If people believe a fire only theory can induce a free-fall collapse in steel-framed high rise then why doesn’t anyone actually try to prove this experimentally? Why can’t a simple experiment be performed to show us the feasibility of such an event(i.e. momentum transfer at free-fall acceleration)? Because they can’t.
Truther ideas have been tested since the days of Galileo.
I would like to see the NISTians test their ideas. Let’s see any of them destroy a steel-framed high-rise like WTC1,2 and 7 with only impact damage and fire. After all we’ve spent trillions of dollars on this “war on terror”. Couldn’t we spare a dime and test the government’s own theories? You’d be for this, right?
Hispanic immigrants have attained maturity in a Hispanic culture. To determine the genetic propensities of Hispanic Americans one needs to look at second and third generation Hispanic immigrants. Comparing the heredity of two groups can only be done by controlling for culture. When both groups have been brought up in the same culture, then one can make a comparison. Ron’s argument could be correct if culture does not matter, but he needs to demonstrate that by citing the data on second and third generation immigrants to show that they are as law-abiding as Hispanic people who crossed the border and came to live in the US once they were adults.
I don’t suppose you could incontrovertibly substantiate that?
Both you and Contrarian III [“shrik”] are rude enough to mangle my ‘nom de plume’ – *no* respect.
In your ear, matey.
But thnx for the reminder of the spire.
So in return:
How about you destroy steel framed high-rises with silent explosives?
I have to admit recreating 9/11 and testing the official story would be be more useful than wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. But conspiracy theorists would just claim the tests were fraudulent, so what would be the point?
This is only your guess and it isn’t particularly convincing. The interior needn’t have completely collapsed to the ground. Also, the steel tube design is particularly rigid.
Of course they could. But truthers would call the experiment fake and, frankly, truthers aren’t important enough to bother with.
Where does the burden of proof lie? We’ve completely re-engineered our foreign and domestic policy based on the traumatic events of 9/11. If we are going to start wars in foreign lands the burden of proof is on the government to prove its case, not on the Truthers to prove their claims. If a prosecutor is going to send the accused to the chair, the burden of proof lies with him to show guilt, not with the defense to show innocence.
“Silent Explosives” ???
Sure if you ignore all the eye/ear witnesses.
“We were there I don’t know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions…”
Edward Cachia, FDNY
“We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.”
Louie Cacchioli, FDNY
“While searching the floor there was a tremendous explosion knocking me off my feet
onto the floor, I was covered with debris…”
C. Krueger, PAPD
“I got up, I got into the parking garages, was knocked down by the percussion. I thought
there had been an explosion or a bomb that they had blown up there.”
Michael Donovan, FDNY
I believe there were over 100 firefighters that testified to hearing, seeing or feeling explosives. If many people testify to hearing explosions then they obviously aren’t “silent”.
But 9/11 Truthers are willing to do experiments and the “debunkers” are not. So it is your fellow “debunkers” who are hostile to the experimental method.
This is a nice admission that despite spending millions of dollars on the 9/11 investigations none of it was really ever proven because, why bother? Scientists and engineers that actually believe in their theories will set out to prove them. They walk the walk, while the “debunkers” just talk the talk.
Permit me to apologize for mistakenly calling you “shrik” instead of “skrik”. No offense was intended. If you knew me personally, you’d know that I have “fat fingers” and do my typing hunt-and-peck style. I try to catch my errors before I publish, but I’m not perfect at that either. You’d also know that I’m not an idiot and am not intentionally rude.
Unfortunately, I can’t make the last statement (about “rude”) about some of the posters here, who seem to like to nit-pick, sometimes even making absurd errors in the nit-picking, while ignoring substantive issues (reminds me of typical social media like FaceBook).
While we’re on the issue of apology, permit me to speak for “utu” and apologize for him, since I believe his mishandling of your pseudonym was unintentional also.
You do realize that my request for a Princeton Paper syllogism is still unanswered?
Well yes, but with all due respect, this terminology is *not* quite correct. Whereas we truthers are honestly seeking the truth, attemptedly concealed by the rotten rogue regimes and their slimy handmaidens in the corrupt&venal MSM, our ‘opposites’ [hardly productive as you point out] are most properly termed ‘trusters.’ In a nutshell, they place their often quite blind trust in the lies we seek to expose, truthers knowing that sunlight is a good disinfectant. rgds
You do realize that my rejection of conversing with irrationals still and always will stand? Proof, if any more were needed, is your irrational belief in and defence of the Khalezov nukes/dustify fraud.
I recently found an old quote I’d saved in my Gmail inbox back on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 in 2011. I still believe it, can’t remember where I found it, but it’s never been mentioned by any of the 9/11 theorists who’d rather believe in teams of Mossad saboteurs running up and down the buildings planting charges in the days before. My guess is the guy quoted was probably an Electrical Engineer or technician working in a lab that certified components of electric motors, like commutators, for a 50 year duty life in the yet-to-be-built Twin Towers. Elevators? What else would need electric motors with a duty life of 50 years? I don’t know. Is there among you a structural engineer who can either confirm or refute this?
Start quote:
One day, as the lead consultant engineer was in my lab talking just about “stuff”, I asked him, “Sometime in the future, in 50 years or so, how are these Twin Towers going to be taken down, as tall as they were going to be and as tight as land is in a crowded city, without causing the vast destruction of other buildings?”
He was standing upright. He outstretched his right arm with his palm down. And said, “Bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam” as he lowered his hand down one imaginary floor at a time. All the way down to the floor. I knew that we had to certify these commutators to be able to operate continuously for 50 years without service or repair as our part of the contract.
He explained that as the buildings are being built, explosive charges are being incorporated into the structures at key floor joint locations. So, that when the first charges are set-off at the top floors, they will take that floor down to the next. And the charges at that floor will take it down to the next floor.
This will continue all the way down. The Twin Towers will come straight down like a stack of pancakes. When the buildings get old and no longer useful or profitable to own and maintain, all it will take is a phone call to take them down.
End quote.
I have tried repeatedly to introduce at ‘realist’ blogs such as westhunt.wodpress.com, isteve.blogspot.com, and amren.com the apparently wild notion that planes would actually slow down as they hit buildings unlike the planes in all the 9/11 footage.
I know only the most stupidest physics but as a result I can’t take these guys, Cochran, Sailer, Taylor, seriously. They are the most horridly hobbled who pretend to be the most brave.
Planes do slow down as they hit skyscrapers. End of discussion. Know to ignore all experts who insist otherwise.
“He explained that as the buildings are being built, explosive charges are being incorporated into the structures at key floor joint locations”.
I don’t think this is realistic:
– Embedding explosives in a building at construction would be far too dangerous: it is not possible to fully control accidental sources of ignition , such as atmospheric lightning strikes, or electric faults in the installation. No insurance company would accept that.
– Explosives (apart from nuclear bombs) are composed of chemicals, which are substances with a relatively fast degradation rate compared to the life of a building. No explosive will remain as it was initially after 10 years, let alone after 50.
– However, it is very likely that specific locations of explosives for future demolition are defined at the design stage. In modern civil engineering, the lifetime of a residential building is estimated between 70 to 100 years. In particular, it makes perfect sense to plan for the demolition of commercial buildings such as the WTC as early as the construction stage: the safety regulations evolve considerably over time, and after a few decades, buildings become obsolete, non-compliant and a potential legal liability.
Not so.
In fact, in my comment #1942 above, I wrote:
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2531841
Not that I expect any but the most determined and discriminating readers to glean the worthwhile signal from this mountain of noise, although you could do much worse when separating the wheat from the chaff than to pay particular attention to my comments, ahem, but the general rule is to be circumspect with the use of the word never.
Never say never.
From The Matrix
Recall too that the top-down demolitions of the twin towers began with the substantial multi-floor top section of each building suddenly plummeting downward as if all structural support and resistance beneath each of those massive sections had been annihilated.
Nice work, if you can do it.
Permit me to make a tiny correction and then use your closing remark to put a little emphasis on the rest of your as-usual intelligent post, but especially its close.
The tiny correction is that the wings (and most of the exterior surfaces of American airliners are made out of duraluminum, usually shortened to dural. Dural is not as hard as structural steel but it’s not much softer. For the sake of this post, I’m going to say the hardnesses are equal. The exterior surface is only a few millimeters thick, however. I’ve seen numbers as low as 2mm., but I can’t vouch for the authenticity of that number.
More to the point, however is that the structural exterior columns of the two towers and WTC7 are made up of box columns and/or I-beams. Whenever either of these structural members is struck by a wing or almost any other part of an airliner (engines excepted) you have a collision between a dural surface a few millimeters thick and one or two pieces of steel which IN THE DIRECTION OF THE IMPACT is effectively not less than 4 inches thick (I believe that is the smallest box column involved in the virtual collisions; I can verify the exact number but it takes a lot of digging). The steel edge that the dural surface is striking is therefore like a knife slicing through the butter (airplane skin) impaling itself on that knife.
My point is that a plane crashing into a tower is like a knife cutting through butter, but viewers should be careful to label which is the knife and which is the butter. It’s not what the CGI would have you think.
In mitigation of this analogy, there are stiffeners and other clap-trap in the wings and the box column steel members are made up of thin steel (as would be the web and flanges of an I-beam), but my kitchen knives are all made of thin metal and they still all do a good job of cutting the food I eat. Any flexure out of the plane of the blade is inconsequential just as it would be in the column/wing impact.
Good post!
Can liquid go though steel? Yes.
The HEAT anti tank round uses a thin liquid copper bolt propelled at such speed that it goes through several inches of hardened steel armour plate by kinetic energy alone.
https://www.youtube.com/ab270bc4-1499-4902-b794-e090a95b2c8f
As he repeatedly said Osama bin Laden’s terrorism was intended to get the US army out of Saudi Arabia and a couple of years after 9/11 the US forces left.
While it is true that the Israel Lobby and the Deep State hijacked 9/11 to remove Saddam, after Desert Storm Saddam’s Iraq was always unfinished business. According to Bruce Gudmundsson of the US Army college, Norman Schwarzkopf’s tanks simply ran out of fuel, and that was why Desert Storm left Saddam in power. There was no 9/11 policy watershed, except for America and Western armed forces getting out of Saudi Arabia. The WTC destruction just showed the efficacy of organised violence, as did the invasion of Iraq. Everyone got what they were known to be after, though there was a price.
‘Scuse, pliz? Whatever Q some “Supersonic Ping Pong Ball” might be the answer to, possibly only you may know.
1st lemma: One [deliberate] lie kills any/all credibility [stone-dead].
2nd lemma: You can’t have it both ways; did your Supersonic Ping Pong Ball a) go straight through the WTC steel-box section perimeter wall then through the 10cm concrete floor panels, ‘edge-on’ [like a knife through butt…] – err, like a thin liquid copper bolt propelled at such speed that it goes through several inches of hardened steel, or b) splatter, break up and drop blood and guts [aka your “pulverized flesh” etc., see your quote below] onto the street oh, so far below? [Your imagery; I’ve already noted your ‘atrocity propaganda’ style.]
My Q was, repeat:
Whereby “that” is your:
It may seem like just a tiny matter in ‘the big picture’, but possibly with huge ramifications for you, namely your now self-critically-challenged credibility.
Recover from that = ‘all your own utterly defective work;’ bet you can’t.
PS Adequate substantiation = via reputable, checkable citations, please. Or not = liar.
No, the box columns were of 4 inches or more thick steel low down in the WTC building but at the top where the airplane impacts were they were well under an inch and more brittle that standard steel.
As Mr. Astaneh-Asl examined the construction documents, however, he was horrified by aspects of the design. He says the structure essentially threw out the rule book on skyscraper construction. “This building was so strange, and so many violations of practice and code were introduced,” he says.
Sorry I butted into this discussion between you and Iris, but could you share with us the dimensions of the box columns at the two (one per tower) points of “impact”. The thickness of the steel used to make the box columns is interesting but not terribly relevant. It was the dimensions that I didn’t look up because doing so was a PIA. I use steak knives and butter knives every day and I have only a rough idea of how thick they are; more important to me is how “deep” (the dimension in the direction of the force applied to cut the pork chop, e.g.) they are and, for some uses, how sharp.
Steel the box columns were made of was 3/8 inch thick at this floor.
This indicates that OBL might have had the motivation but you still have to show he had the means. If you look at the forensic evidence of the crime scene to establish guilt then Al-Qaeda was certainly not capable of rigging WTC1,2 and 7 with explosives.
Nope, Dick Cheney explained it very well back in 1994. Unfortunately, he seemed to have lost his way at some point.
“Because if we’d gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn’t have been anybody else with us. There would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq. Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off.”
Unfortunately, Americans thought that we were fighting a war on terror when the entire time we were fighting wars for empire.
Fail, total fail. You were challenged to prove your “pulverized flesh (remains of passengers) airline tickets and luggage all over the street” assertions; you have not even attempted to do so, but present your next atrocity porn ‘distraction.’ Sooo; what remains is Sean = liar.
Thanks, you’re a scholar and a gentleman.
My recollection of the data I’ve seen is a little different (probably because of the way they were formatted), but not consequentially so . Your data means that a typical meter long piece of the dural wing (with the fuel behind it) is impaling itself on a pair of steel blades about a foot apart (exact distance depends upon the orientation of the column relative to the plane of the façade) where the blades are 3/8″ thick and about a foot deep. This is a slightly wrong statement if our hypothetical dural manages to impale itself partly on one column and partly on the next. I’m also ignoring a non-normal impact, a wing with roll, and any edge-on collision with concrete.
If you watch the series Battleplan, there is a bit of debate on the question with Gudmundsson, who is well aware of those claims of strategic restraint you mention. He pointed out that the huge numbers of six gallon to the mile tanks in Desert Storm simple could not have been supplied with fuel to invade Iraq, and that was that. Operation “Iraqi Freedom” took far fewer tanks but still ran out of steam after 250 miles, and had to halt for a vulnerable trucks and tankers to resupply them
Skrik, you forgot to note that the celluloid material of the ball is in fact denser than the material of which the paddle is made. At a sufficient velocity, the flexibility of the ball is overwhelmed and it bursts so that a sufficient density of the material at a high enough velocity is instantly brought to bear on the material of the paddle to penetrate it. I know, Newton’s laws of motion still stand after 350 years (or so)! Who knew? Well, certainly not Sean…
I was hoping for a comment from an actual structural engineer with some experience in this type of construction. FYI, Thermite and modern high explosives have indefinite shelf lives, are safe to handle and are next to impossible to set off accidentally.
Forgive me for not reading #1942 before beginning my own rant #2132. Has, to your knowledge, any actual structural engineer ever confirmed our suspicions? While such practices may be common among the builders of skyscrapers, they are a small community with, I suspect, some very closely-held, need-to-know, signed-in-blood non-disclosure agreement, trade secrets.
If you want others to believe the buildings were demolished with explosives, then it lies with you.
Every video of a controlled demolition features clearly audible explosions. Not one of the dozens of videos of the WTC collapse features audible explosions. Pointing out that people thought they heard explosions or that they heard explosions well before the towers collapsed doens’t address this problem.
Again, there’s no point. Conspiracy theorists always change their stories.
What’s more, since the collapses started at the fire and impact points, demolition charges would have sent an easily visible ~ Mach 20 shock wave through the fire and smoke. We see no such thing in any video.
So the government is never under any obligation to prove any of its claims? The government can merely assert certain things to be true and they can start wars or infringe on civil liberties without ever making their case. What if our criminal justice system functioned like this? Certain people could assert things to be true without having to prove them and they were allowed to execute people based on zero evidence? This type of justice system would be corrupt, lawless and tyrannical. This also would describe our foreign policy since 9/11. But who cares about a lawless, murderous foreign policy, it’s Truthers demanding evidence that is the real threat to our Republic.
There are normally only a few explosives used to bring down steel-framed high-rises as commercial demolition companies need to be economical. World Trade Towers 1 and 2 were thoroughly pulverized top to bottom. So during the destruction it just wasn’t a couple blasts, but probably thousands so it sounded more like a constant roar than individual blasts. It would be similar to hearing applause in a large auditorium where it sounds more like a roar than individual claps. This is exactly how some of the firefighters and others described it.
“We got to the point of being in between the Vista Hotel and the World Trade Center, at which point we heard a — we felt a loud — a very strong vibration, shaking, and a loud noise like a subway train coming through a station at speed, like a jet engine at full throttle. It was a roaring sound…”
Charles Wells
“When the South Tower collapsed, firefighters on upper floors of the North Tower heard a violent roar, and many were knocked off their feet…those firefighters not standing near windows facing south had no way of knowing that the South Tower had collapsed; many surmised that a bomb had exploded.”
“I’d say we were in the 30th or 31st, 32nd Floor, or something like that, and a few of the guys were lying wiped out on the floor, you know, taking a break with their masks off and lying in the hallway when there was a very loud roaring sound and a very loud explosion, and the–it felt like there was an explosion above us…”
Brian Becker, inside WTC1 as WTC2 collapsed.
“Right as he said that, I heard a loud roar, “boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom,” and it was getting louder. I looked around, and we were looking at each other. What is that noise? I just looked out the window of the lobby. I could see stuff out of the window of the lobby hitting the street, and I just dove into the corner of the wall.”
John Citarelli
Did you know that John F. Kennedy was not assassinated by a gun or rifle? He was killed by someone throwing rocks at his head. You see a gunfire gives off a loud bang and the Zapruder film did not pick-up any sound this. Sure there might’ve been been eye/ear witnesses that reported hearing gunfire, but you don’t hear that on the Zapruder film itself, that’s how we know it was someone throwing rocks that killed Kennedy. This is also how we know it was just fire that destroyed WTC1,2 and 7.
If we got a hundred witnesses to testify to seeing body parts, why wouldn’t you claim they’re lying?
If we showed photos, why wouldn’t you claim they’re fake?
(https://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f10/644339d1443100024-bodies-body-parts-9-11-01-wtc2.jpg)
Correct. Purdue University got pretty strong behind the official narrative. Early on they created an animation model which they claimed was scientifically correct. Then they came with the ping pong ball.
Hmm — Is this not exactly how Andrew Breitbart died?
Oh how ‘nice;’ just what we need = more atrocity propaganda.
Q: Are you and Sean running an ‘atrocity-porn ring’ from your mothers’ basements?
Truthers’ business is honest = to expose what turn out to be rogue-regime lies; seems like trusters are after … blood, gore & guts in support of waging illegal & immoral wars. Fits to psychopaths.
Whatever it was [planes, drones, CGI] that was the immediate ‘precursor’ to the explosions ‘we’ve all seen’ on WTCs 1 & 2, it is *supernumerary*; proof = WTC7 free fall collapse, without significant damage, whether faked, simulated or whatever.
The *only* ‘fact,’ theme or meme that was required to bamboozle the sheople, was the alleged 19 Arab/Muslim ‘patsy/pseudo’ alleged hijackers, upon which the GWoT [desired by Zs, to be executed by US&Co] = WC7in5 “Shock’n whore” planned destructions, after the ‘warm-up’ attack on Afghanistan [ObL got away! Or just died from kidney failure, widely reported in 2001/2], that Afghanistan attack predicated on the US ‘carpet of gold or bombs’ threat.
Q: Oil or [illegitimate entity] Israel?
A: Both, plus US hegemony; disgustingly ‘lording it up’ over most of the planet.
Ron Unz made available Cognitive Infiltration by Griffin.
I wonder how and by whom Judy Woods and/or Dimitri Khalezov were inspired and helped to gather data and spread their ideas. I think that Judy Woods had access to photographs nobody has seen before within the truther community.
Bob was pointing out the Mach 2o shockwave(s) would have been visible where the collapses started— at the fire and impact floors. There were fires and there were impacts from the airliners crashing into the floors where the collapse started near the great big holes where the plane went in. We can see those things. We can see people standing innthe holes just as we can see there were people jumping out the building to get away from the fire.
G’day. From Sparkon:
Well; perhaps could have been. But really, ‘inbuilt obsolescence via construction-included demolition’ was clearly *not* the case here, due to the observable and large ‘collateral damage.’ WTC7, possibly; it ‘only’ bit off a small part of the building directly over the street, but the WTCs 1 & 2 destruction ‘took-out’ almost all of the entire neighbourhood [plus the ~3000 murdered US residents]. IMHO nooo; the ‘pre-loading’ was a 1st time effort, meaning a) it truly was ‘novel’ in design and therefore b) nobody could have had any ‘practice run,’ hence the massive ‘overkill’ = big steel bits thrown wa-a-ay out and those pyroclastic clouds, laced with asbestos. Apropos, it was that dust which caused the hapless 1st responders’ respiratory-type diseases. To this day, there must be comprehensive ‘chain of custody’ samples of the dust; the govt. [aka rogue regime] could easily have such tested for explosive residues, thus demonstrating that it really was wholly and solely [alleged Arab/Muslim] hijackers wot dunnit, causing the whole imbroglio. But oh no; no testing – and haw. rgds
Can it be, that you really are sooo stupid? Your atrocity-porn image showed a person [alleged to be ‘Edna Cintron’] *waving*, not *jumping*.
There’re at least two things to be considered here, 1) IF a jetliner had just burst through the heavy box-column steel wall, breaking that wall as it entered at an angle, such that the wing-carry-through box would have encountered multiple concrete-on-metal deck floors ‘edge-on’, that in turn meaning that those floors would have been shattered, destroyed, became ‘instant history,’ THEN just how did that person actually get to the ostensibly photographed position? Not only that, but 2) after each ‘putative aircraft’ [possibly civil, military, drone or other = CGI & Co] impact, there were huge, ostensibly jet-fuel explosions, leaving that ‘standing room only’ position a bit ‘unfriendly’ to visit – one may think. Better would have been to go down a few floors, then open a window, perhaps? Yes, your next atrocity-porn image showed a person [resembling the same ‘Edna Cintron’] free falling down. Q: Why would such a person jump? Why not flee via the fire escape? IIRC, not all were blocked.
You being an obvious, proven liar & pro-rogue regime troll, it would be futile to query your motivation – but I do wonder – what’s in it for you?
2nd bite:
Well, I already posted a video showing pretty-well exactly that [#2124], but here it is again:
Your job [should you be ‘wo/man’ enough], along with all the other pro-rogue-regime trolls, is to convince the audience that all of these videos, documenting explosive demolition, were in fact wholly and solely attributable to *alleged* Arab/Muslim hijackers and resulting *alleged* ‘plane-impacts.’ So far, my estimate is that you and your ‘mates’ are making utter fools of yourselves convincing nobody by ‘preaching to your own choir.’
Of course, your opinions may vary – that’s freedom, ain’t it?
I am a recent, however frequent reader of Unz. There is however a certain discrepancy with the thesis presented. I do not doubt the Mossad involvement but I certainly believe in Al Qaeda responsibility in a way very similar to how the Spain´s secret services instigated, manipulated and in several ways used ETA to implement the assassination of Enrique Carrero Blanco in order to disrupt the inheritance of power from Francisco Franco, the Spanish dictator. I have written a book on the subject. I believe the American services either FBI/CIA did know of the plot but let it go. They did not originate the plot but allowed it to happen.
Did the planes actually fly? yes.
Did the passengers die? yes
Did the 19 terrorists exist? if so, who can or could recruit 19 young suicide attackers, or shahid other than a muslim organization or movement?
Were they manipulated like ETA members were? quite likely.Was Israel the great though not the only beneficiary? yes
Who else benefited? Arabs self esteem and millions of muslims who though suffering feel vindicated and started to fight.
So you’re saying that B767s were equipped with anti tank weapons? Do I understand correctly?
Or do you mean that these anti tank weapons are just marketing hype since any liquid (e. g. kerosene) can go through steel without any special design/properties?
Please be more explicit.
No, I haven’t seen any such statement. Plausibly it would be privileged information enforced with non-disclosure agreements, but in general terms the idea (that a bulding’s eventual demolition would be addressed in its original design) must have some merit, as Juan Rodriguez reports:
https://www.thebalancesmb.com/ways-to-demolish-buildings-844420
During the hamstrung and half-vast investigations of the WTC in the wake of 9/11, the Building Performance Assessment Team was required to sign confidentiality agreements, first with FEMA itself –possibly SOP — and then with the New York Port Authority, in order to gain access to the architectural drawings and blueprints of the World Trade Center.
From the March 2002 House of Representatives Hearing
Learning from 9/11 — Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy77747.000/hsy77747_0f.htm
(my bold & edits for brevity)
What was it about the design of the WTC that necessitated confidentiality agreements?
One truther demands proof that there were body parts and another complains that the proof is ever shown. And around and around it goes.
At a rough guess:
1. The WTCs were not built on rock, but nukular-infested sand.
2. The WTCs were not built of sticks [steel] or stone [concrete], but straw.
3. All 2 passing Boeings[*] had to do was ‘huff and puff,’ and not *2* but *3* WTCs all fell down.
*PS the Boeings were piloted by 19 Arab/Muslim hijackers, none of whom could fly a Cessna – but they were trying to learn, and ‘recreated’ by sniffing cocaine in pole-dance bars. rgds
George H. W. Bush was responsible for 9/11 by his failure to finish off Saddam in 1991. Allow me to elucidate. The Saudi monarch has tremendous prestige from his role as protector of the most sacred places of Islam he officially styles himself the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. Yet had had an army of Infidels protecting his regieme , which many Saudis, especially devout Muslims, found unacceptable. In addition to the religious motive, no one wants a foreign army in their country. Some people believe in their country and are willing to die for it. It is known, because he publicly said it, that Osama bin Laden’s main objective was to get the American army out of Saudis Arabia , where US forces had been since 1990 to protect Saudi Arabia from Saddam’s Iraq.
Only total ignorance of the mix of nationalism and religion in that family dictatorship ruled country made the US think it could keep an army in Saudi Arabia. Yet leaving Saddam Iraq substantially intact, made it imperative to keep and American army in Saudis Arabia. Osama bin Laden forced the withdrawal of US forces from his country and the invasion of Iraq.
Take a look at the map.
Osama bin Laden wanted the American armed forces out of his country and the US could not hardly leave Saudi Arabia while Saddam was in power, could they? Bin Laden must have realised that to succeed he was going to going to cause an invasion of Iraq. He and his mainly Saudi hijackers did succeed in getting the US and other western forces out of Saudi Arabia in 2003, right after the US had overthrown Saddam and neutralised Iraq as a threat to Saudi Arabia.
Now someone questioned if Osama bin Laden had the ability to mount 9/11, presumably because it was assumed that just crashing airliners into a couple of super skyscraper building is something Bin laden would not have tried to do unless he could be sure they would just penetrate and bring the building down. I don’t now whether bin Laden expect the aircraft to do any real damage to the building but the symbolic act was key for him. The Pentagon was certainly be destroyed by an aircraft .
The main effect of 9/11 was and was intended to be on internal politics in Saudi Arabia. It succeeded.
I am sorry your sensibilities were offended by photos of the survivors Elaine Duch and Lauren Manning (severely burnt by fireballs in moments after the after the crash near an 88th floor stairwell and the ground floor lobby elevator doors respectively). I had mentioned them to show the very surprising way the fireballs traveled down the shafts and horrifically burnt people in the ground floor lobby in addition to blowing out windows and the marble facing off the walls. No one could have predicted it, A lot of counter intuitive things happened on 9/11 to increase the death and destruction, no one can deny it, but by the same token those things being planned to happen just as they did is far from probable. A suicide attack by Saudis, masterminded by a Saudi got the US army out of Saudi Arabia. The Israel lobby helped bin Laden by getting America to invade Iraq, as he probably half expected.
The proprietor of this site asked, repeatedly asked, for the discussion to concentrate on who, and we are still going around and around how it was done 2000 comments later .
I think the government has met the burden of proof in many respects. It’s fine if you disagree.
But truthers don’t just disagree. They state that the fraud is obvious from looking at the collapse of the towers. They claim innuendo as proof. They suggest that entire plane loads of people were hidden and a bunch of other nonsense without any evidence whatsoever. They claim that any evidence against their theories is fake–again without any evidence.
Our foreign policy sucks–you don’t need some vast conspiracy to account for that.
Again, this is just your guess. But a building collapsing without explosives would sound like a roar too.
As an attempt at ‘gilding the lily,’ this of yours is quite a poor show. Sure, ObL wanted “US-out” – who doesn’t? What you are trying to suggest here is the very opposite of KISS; there are other, simpler solutions to 9/11 – see my #2172 above, say.
‘Who’ is easy, part repeat: some
ObL involved? No evidence, but he gave his denial. 19 Arab/Muslim hijackers? Also no evidence, excepting possibly a passport fluttering down out of a putative jet-fuel explosion. Risible. You and your pro-rogue-regime troll-team are resisting – futilely – the general consensus: WTC7 free fall = inside job = US/Z rogue regimes dunnit.
The way the plane went into the building, the collapses, happening way they did was all very counter intuitive: everyone was surprised. But that is hardly evidence the surprise was KISS-principle mandated by whatever objective the planners of 9/11 would have been trying to achieve, and that the counter intuitive events that seemed to merely happen were actually planned and careful directed to a very specific scenario. Killing two hundred people in a spectacular terrorist attack that happened in a more expected way (eg the plane did not completely penetrate the building and the building did not fall down) could serve any intended purpose rather well as far as I can see.
Your putative planners are the ones gilding the lily , with what would be at the very least an extraordinarily difficult covent demolition pointlessly piggy backing and parasitical on an eminently do-able operation for simply crashing the planes into the WTC. Your putative 9/11 plot is taking in the military industrial complex war for profit, oil extraction industry peaceful plundering of corrupt Gulf Arab wealth, the Israel lobby taking out Iraq and US deep state geopolitical strategists’ monomaniacal desire to subjugate the world by military occupation. That is not a conspiracy its a pyramid scheme, and one in which some insiders would have different interests with their fellow members. Nothing I cam see would constitute common ground to tie all these disparate interests together to make them trust each other.
The 9/11 attack was followed by a military withdrawal from Saudi Arabia and binLaden wanted that. He had the tight little group and resources and he had the ultimate weapons: men willing to die for a established cause they believed in. Disbelieving in everything their country tells them, scoffing conspiracy theorists are unable to understand sacrifice for a cause.
In the NOAA high resolution overhead images of Ground Zero taken some time after 9/11, any number of the central core columns can be seen scattered about like pick-up sticks, but most appear straight and relatively undamaged among the dust and multitude of 3-column x 3-story chex sections from the building’s exterior.
Donald Friedman was a privately contracted consultant from LZA who helped NYC oversee clean-up operations at the WTC. He shared his up-close and personal observations about disturbing details on the heavy metal from the WTC’s central core, apparently unrestricted by any non-disclosure agreement:
(my bold & edits)
“I was hoping for a comment from an actual structural engineer”
You clearly would be unable to recognise one if you met them anyway: you have no clue what engineers’ constraints, responsibilities and professional ethics are.
” FYI, Thermite and modern high explosives have indefinite shelf lives”
Thermite is not suitable as an explosive to be used in controlled demolition: it is not powerful enough.
Nanothermites would be suitable. However, they were developed as explosives from the 90’s, twenty years after the WTC towers’ construction was completed in the early 70’s.
But I am sure Netanyahu would have obliged and lent his time machine to Osama Ben Laden, so you must be onto something.
Me; post hoc fallacy: cum hoc ergo propter hoc
One may speculate and/or observe, possibly deduce.
Speculating on ‘who’ is fraught; I go only so far as ‘some covert group’ as above. Consider the Yinon and PNAC plans, the [mainly US] oil industry plotting to get at least control over as much of the oil on the planet as they can, banksters plotting to get all central banks under one BIS ‘boot,’ US rogue-regime plotting to get hegemonic control over most countries on the planet [democracy/dictatorship whatever] and the illegitimate entity always wanting to steal ever more Lebensraum and you have an extremely nasty little flock of undesirables all flying in the same general direction. But correlation does not imply causation.
Observation: I have provided at least three videos plus one photo altogether showing [I say proving] ‘controlled’ demolition of WTCs 1, 2 & 7. In turn, specifically and absolute key deduction: WTC7 free fall incontrovertibly means inside job …
Until you a) disprove ‘inside job’ or b) accept it, I have nothing further to discuss with you.
PS To be successful, a conspiracy must have ‘perfect’ security = compartmentalisation + strictly ‘need-to-know’ communication. With 9/11, we have two components, 1) the ‘fly’ team managing the alleged [patsy/pseudo] hijackers and 2) the ‘blow’ team managing the explosives pre-load then detonation. Neither team need communicate with each other, although they would share the ‘big picture’ gist, however vaguely. The point to be made here, is that even IF ObL somehow ‘provided’ the putative hijackers, THEN they would need to be locally managed [rumours if this do exist]. BUT *no* ObL-type could have ever gotten within Cooee of the ‘blow’ team. Getting it yet?
Finally, it is anyway an enormous stretch, to claim that any putative ObL’s ‘hijackers’ team could trigger a cause/effect chain to force US out of KSA. Think ‘coincidence;’ US doesn’t get forced all that easily. Last words again: Utterly risible.
PPS “They wouldn’t/couldn’t do that!” – Oh yes, they would, could and they did it; you could start learning to manage your cognitive dissonance.
Thnx for the quote. I now have no Qs left as to the ‘how.’ In general, an entire floor’s support columns were severed by 45° cuts, as simultaneously as possible = detonation impulse at light-speed if wireless detonators were used – actually, I would think, a must. For WTCs 1 & 2, the 1st ‘blown’ floor would be at or close to the putative plane-crash wound, for WTC7, a very low level if not basement. We couldn’t see that low, but the rubble pile visibly started down at ground-level. WTCs 1 & 2 collapses did not reach free fall speed – it wasn’t necessary, but something went wrong at WTC7; its free fall was probably a ‘plan B’ event – ‘fatally’ unlucky for the planners.
Once the 1st 45° cuts were made, the building section above went into free fall [= ‘unloading’ all the vertical joints], thus *allowing* successive floors to be ‘collapsed,’ most likely by ‘kicking’ the support columns with shaped charges, rotating them from vertical to horizontal. This process would continue upwards from the low base at WTC7, and both upwards and downwards for 1 & 2 from the ‘crash’-level. The ‘office’ floors of 1 & 2 got ‘special’ treatment, pulverized by something very much like det cord inserted into embedded wiring conduits, explaining the billowing pyroclastic clouds of concrete dust + toxic asbestos, etc..
All the rest is to be seen on selected videos. Finito. rgds
Accusing other commenters of lying is a typical troll behavior. And being at odds with logic too.
So let me summarize: you say I’m “lying” because I would say Khalezov is not talking about steel dustification (and you claim he is, which is true), and then you say there are no proofs of abundant steel dust. So you try to claim I agree with you more than with Khalezov? No chance.
But first it seems that you still don’t understand something very simple: I’m not Khalezov’s public relations man and I will not even try to claim he is always right. I’m just talking about his work because everyone can read it on the internet and because it is so far the explanation of the events which is the most acceptable according to physics laws.
As I think any explanation must obey physics laws, I reject all other ones which don’t, like for instance Judy Wood DEWs or nanothermite-only theories. Now if you know other reports, freely available on the internet, which are better than Khalezov’s, please let us know. But in order to explain the huge amount of heat coming from Ground Zero and the extremely high temperatures, there is no other option than deeply buried big nukes. That’s all, I don’t bother discuss the details if anyone doesn’t already aknowledge the basics. No need to discuss the colour of the curtains in your bedroom if you have no idea what your future house will look like.
Now about the steel dust issue, you make me claim things I never claimed: yes I know what light scattering means, and I don’t conclude anything about the optical appearance of clouds only. But if you have read some papers about dust analysis at Ground Zero (used usually to promote the nanothermite theory) you should know that a large amount of iron-rich particles were found in it, which does not mean they were created purely mechanically (maybe you restrict the “dust” definition to this?) but which proves very small metallic particles were a major part of the dust. And the rather dark grey aspect of the deposited dust in NYC streets says a lot about the metal (or at least, conducting material) content of it, too.
In all the following of your post you try fine tuning some predictions without understanding the basics. Example:
You mean the engineers were stupid enough to make a nuke explode “just for fun”, without designing it the right way?
No, the uplift does not necessarily happen… Yes, the collapse can never occur in some cases… If you mix all possible results in order to understand what happened in this very special case, where everything was designed on purpose for building collapse, you might be seriously wrong!
Try answering simple questions before going into details you can’t control:
– where did the huge amount of heat come from?
– how has some steel been melted and even vaporized?
Yes, there has been reports of that:
https://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/29/nyregion/nation-challenged-site-engineers-have-culprit-strange-collapse-7-world-trade.html
Israel and Osama Ben Laden’s agendas converged: they both needed an American invasion of Iraq.
Osama bin Laden was a civil engineer I believe. A pretty good structural engineer too, from what I hear.
Osama bin Laden was fond of quoting Charles de Gaulle. What could they possibly have in common (apart from being 6’4”) ?
Charles de Gaulle saw his country and religion as part of the same thing, and would not tolerate a foreign army in his sacred homeland. How can we avoid the conclusion that bin Laden saw a fellow spirit in de Gaulle, the man who as an unknown in exile was the symbol of his country through fighting on, even though he had to fight virtually alone against overwhelming odds and every kind of personal attack. Bin Laden saw the Saudi leadership as de Gaulle saw Vichy collaborationists, and bin Laden saw the American army in Saudi Arabia in the same way de Gaulle saw the Wehrmacht occupying his homeland. De Gaulle would not permit his country to suffer the presence of even supposedly friendly Nato forces lingering more than absolutely necessary. Every country needs men like that who can inspire sacrifice and must wait for them to step forward. Meanwhile, conspiracy theorising quitters are ten a penny.
Thanks for the citation at the end of your post. I knew there were such reports but finding even one is a serious problem. Reports about the thinning of I-beams are helpful, but only imply melting, not boiling or vaporization. I love the way the NYTimes reported this key datum at the very end of their article — how typical.
If you don’t mind I’m going to plagiarize this quotation from your post:
A troll who’s in the habit of misquoting me is about to get his comeuppance and I’m going to use your quotation.
Please keep up your inexorable use of logic and physics. Khalezov wrote a 1000+ page book and his explanation (not theory) is the only one that makes sense and fits observations. Is his book error-free? No, but the physics book I learned freshman physics from wasn’t either — and it was professionally edited.
One of my favorite 9/11 pictures is the one showing a very heavy I-beam bent like a pretzel. Who would have thought you could use thermite in your cooking? Or did the intense heat (?) from the kerosene fires make the I-beam that soft? See NIST for temps of the steel and their explanation of intense heat.
You are a liar. And a fool. And Heinzy Schvwanzy is egging you on.
Among the staff of my high school newspaper, there was a little joke/putdown to the effect of “Go away and misquote someone”. I had just about forgotten that adolescent humor when CanSpeccy rose up and showed me that misquotation is indeed live and well. Is that a fair statement – well, let’s look at the record (CanSpeccy words in italics; mine in roman):
From his post #1733:
Such massive contamination with radioactive strontium would leave the entire area of the WTC heavily radioactive to this day. [CanSpeccy added the word I show in bold to a statement I made in my post #1723. I ignored it until he repeated his misquotation practice.]
**************************************************************************************
From his post #2029
The mean concentration of strontium in the samples analyzed was 726 ppm not 3000. [Again, I added the bolding.] Apparently, CanSpeccy read my quotation from Tahil “When we find Barium and Strontium present, in absolutely astronomical concentrations of over 400ppm to over 3000ppm” and interpreted “to over 3000 ppm” to imply that Tahil (or I) was talking about a mean concentration of 3000 ppm.
I tried to set CanSpeccy straight with this statement in my post #2072 : I think the plain meaning of Tahil’s words is that Strontium readings as high as 3000+ ppm were found, This to me means maximum, not mean. This datum was actually 3130 ppm and occurred at USGS sample site WTC01-16 (see Tahil, p.16). That type of misquotation would have gotten you thrown off my high school debating team. The immediately preceding sentence was intended to be a shot across the bow of CanSpeccy.
Those numbers are not much higher than concentrations reported in New England Soil samples, which range up to 1000 ppm. [Interesting but totally irrelevant, what do soil samples have to do with collapsed building dust samples which were carefully collected to avoid contamination with ambient soil?]
May I say that for someone who claims to have done their homework, your understanding of the data seems rather superficial. [I disagree, conflating irrelevant soil samples with collapsed building dust samples which were carefully collected strikes me as a good example of a lack of understanding of the data and unbelievably superficial. Carefully distinguishing them strikes me as a good example of a good understanding of the data.]
*************************************************************************************
From his post #2108
So we’re agreed, [No, we’re not agreed. This is not only a misquotation, but suggests CanSpeccy is somewhat dyslexic or is logic-challenged.]
the element analysis of WTC dust samples provides zero evidence of a nuclear explosion. [Bolding added by me. This is clearly a misquotation or a clumsy attempt to put words in my mouth. Moreover, the Element Analysis provides good evidence of a nuclear event once you take the next step, either isotope analysis (which USGS didn’t do) or correlation analysis (which Tahil did do).]
***************************************************************************************
From his post #2118 (which was deceptively addressed to no one, but quoted one line from a prior post of mine, so I assume it was a covert message to me):
I not only read what you wrote, I cut and pasted it. Interesting, but where did you cut and paste it and does it matter?
So you are a liar Please identify any lie I’ve uttered. You’ve misquoted me four times (#1733, 2029, 2106, and 2118 (see below)), doubling down twice after my shot across your bow in my #2072).
as well as a propagator of rubbish theories about 9/11, which one must suspect are intended to help paint all those who question the official 9/11 story as conspiracy nuts.
This is your opinion and you’re entitled to it. I don’t agree with it but that’s my opinion – which is based upon my own knowledge of myself and my careful examination of competing theories, none of which I consider rubbish except Tahil’s (violates known physics) and probably Woods’ (involves unknown physics). I’m trying to get at the truth and wasting time on posters who don’t know how to follow basic rules of good high school journalism is not productive.
Here are two incontravertible (sic) facts (sic):
You have no evidence whatever that the concentration of strontium in the WTC dust was higher, on average, than that of soil samples from across the US. Probably true exactly as stated (I’m not terribly interested in soil samples), but note the artful change from maxima to “on average” (see Sr concentration of 3130 ppm at WTC01-16) so I would be inclined to call this either an artless attempt at misdirection or a sophistic misquotation especially since CanSpeccy all but repeats thereby his misquotation of me from his post #2108 (but note the covertness of the entire post #2118) — but in any event also irrelevant. What is the relevance of comparing building collapse samples with soil samples as I said before?
You have no evidence whatever that the strontium in the WTC dust is a radioactive nuclear fission product. This is a half truth. No direct evidence is true but Sr/Ba ratio evidence is good indirect evidence, which is supported by other evidence of nuclear events at Ground Zero I’ve previously cited.
Your ridiculous This is your opinion and you’re entitled to it.
and dishonest This is based is upon no evidence; I invited you above to cite a single false statement of mine. On the other hand, I’ve cited three or four obvious and blatant misquotations by you. Do we have a pot-kettle problem here?
comments do, however, provide abundant evidence that you are a troll. I’m not sure that I know what a troll is, but I do know what a liar is and I think your ratio of misquotations to true statements qualifies you as a not very skillful liar. Quoting from a recent post by Heinz which does a reasonably good job of defining “troll”: “Accusing other commenters of lying is a typical troll behavior. And being at odds with logic too.”
With all of the above said, I’d prefer to engage in serious dialogue with you, CanSpeccy, but please knock off the misquotations; they demean you. Also, a wise man once said, “Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight”.
The following quotation from my post #2190 should have been italicized since it was said by CanSpeccy. There was no intention to deceive or misquote CanSpeccy. I saw the error after EDIT time was over but before AWAITING MODERATION time was. It appears in the last section of my comment.
Can anyone who believes Israel did it explain why they didn’t frame the Palestinians?
That’s a joke, right?
The “Israelis” have been framing the Palestinians since Rothschild Inc. decided 150+ years ago that Palestine was the perfect strategic location [ie the hinge between Europe, Asia and Africa] and that stealing it could also be ‘justified” on biblical grounds – so long as the once-Christian West is gullible enough to accept the “Old Testament” as fact and not a self serving document filled with self-serving claims such as “Yahweh” promising the invading hebrew tribe this land and that they are the “chosen people”.
Once “Israel” steals – sorry, expands to – the east coast of the Nile, thus taking over Suez [ie controlling the link between the Med and Indian Ocean / Pacific], Rothschild’s strategic goal will be fulfilled. Stealing Gaza and the Golan Heights, and future “expansion” to the west bank of Euphrates, is simply lebensraum – i.e. other nation’s agricultural land, oil and water. Laying waste to the rest of MENA is the “security” paranoia of an aggressive invading group surrounded by those they invaded and their allies; laying waste to the cultural patrimony of Babylon, Syria and Iran [next] is pure jealousy and spite; and engineered migration to Europe solves multiple goals from ethnic cleansing to cultural degradation.
Can you tell me what actual evidence the government has presented that would pass muster in a court of law? In fact, the government has presented no evidence whatsoever. Osama bin Laden(OBL) was not even listed for being wanted in the 9/11 attacks on the FBI’s most wanted page. He was only listed for being wanted in the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. It is a legal cliché that you can indict a ham sandwich, but apparently you can’t indict OBL for 9/11. Ed Haas actually contacted the FBI back in 2006 to determine why OBL was not listed for being wanted in the 9/11 attacks. This was the response he was given:
“Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11. The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI
FBI director Robert Mueller said back in April 2002, “In our investigation we have not uncovered a single piece of paper—either here in the US, or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere—that mentioned any aspect of the September 11 plot.”
That’s because they were digging in the wrong place.
The Taliban regime even offered to turn over OBL if evidence of his involvement were forthcoming. It never was.
Secretary of State Colin Powell promised a so-called ‘White Paper’ showing bin Laden’s guilt. Powell stated,
“We are hard at work bringing all the information together, intelligence information, law enforcement information. And I think in the near future we will be able to put out a paper, a document that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking him to this attack.”
This ‘white paper’ was never produced.
So there is no evidence of bin Laden’s guilt and there is no official explanation for the collapse of WTC1,2 and 7 that can pass the experimental method. So forgive me for questioning the government’s story.
That depends on how you define conspiracy theory. You see there was conspiracy theory that got us into Iraq. There is this man named Osama bin Laden and he is colluding with this other Muslim leader named Saddam Hussein, the leader of Iraq. Saddam Hussein has WMD, anthrax and is seeking nuclear weapons. He plans on giving these lethal weapons to his friend Osama bin Laden. And we must act to stop this before there are mushroom clouds over American cities. This was a conspiracy theory promoted by our media, our government and our intelligence services. This conspiracy theory is responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people and trillions of wasted dollars. But this is never referred to as a conspiracy theory because as we all the know the government has a monopoly on the truth.
You asked for evidence of body parts, I supplied it. If you want more, I can supply witnesses, including a nice lady who worked at Deutsche Bank and who still has nightmares of seeing body parts on the ground.
Childish insult duly noted. I’m a fairly well-to-do retiree. My mother passed away more than a decade ago at age 82. But maybe you should get out and interview people who were at GZ if you still want to dispute body parts. You don’t have to do it in person. Ever hear of SKYPE? I’ll pass it along to the higher-ups at NWO Central to give you a pass and not have you assassinated forattempting to do actual research. [/sarc]
It is hard to believe that any but a paid troll, one of Crass Bumstein’s agents of cognitive infiltration, most likely, would go to the trouble of lying so extensively as you have to discredit someone by whom they had been exposed as a liar and a fool.
Certainly, I have no desire to engage with a person such as yourself who has demonstrated as clearly as you have that they are pushing bullshit theories they are are either extremely dumb or totally dishonest. Thus, I hereby end my participation in this discussion.
Au contraire, it destroyed Iraq and the strong man Saddam Hussein who kept it various communities together. It allowed Iraqi oil to be shipped out of Basra for free [ie stolen] for a decade and counting. It allowed Israel + USA to attempt to make their phoney client state Kurdistan, still pending. It provided untold billions of profit to cheating, lying US corporations on the ground. It created the conditions to create proxy army “ISIS’. It allowed the jealous ones to destroy World Heritage sites and steal priceless ancient artefacts. It put huge US bases in the heart of the peninsula. It has left a devastated black hole geo-strategically and killed tens of millions of Iraqis, white phosphorus and other carcinogens will produce cripples for generations to come,.
From Israel’s POV, this was a 100% Win-Win : without having to put a single soldier on the ground or spend a nickel.
Thank you.
BALI attacks were nukes, Australia’s venerable magazine, ‘The Bulletin’, now defunct, had a photo on its front cover showing colossal damage, not just ground zero, but buildings 20 Blocks away with their roofs ripped off. I remember how gobsmacked I was seeing this picture which was never again shown.
Ah. So you intruded into an exchange taking Sean’s ‘CD denier’ side [aka pro-rogue-regime = ‘with us or agin’ us’], just to inject some more atrocity-porn into UR, in order, perhaps, to stimulate some more nightmares? Nice. Note that Sean’s porn was already off-topic to the theme of the discussion with me at that time, namely that 9/11 was/still is an inside job, which Sean denies – or simply cannot ‘believe,’ hence my PPS suspicion of Sean’s cognitive dissonance.
Lemma: At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories, apologists and/or ‘idle’ bystanders. It is incumbent upon *all* witnesses where possible a) to attempt to restrain malefactors and b) to rescue victims from harm. *All* present and not in active resistance to the crime attract proportional guilt by the accessory before/after mechanism.
Sooo, by taking the pro-rogue-regime side, you [and other nutters like Contrarian III, Heinz and Sean] make yourselves accessories after the fact – the fact here being inside job leading to body-parts [from ~3000 ‘own people’], plus their blood and gore on the ground. And [briefly] in the air [.pdf].
Note that Deutsche Bank has a rather high ‘score’.
He is a flake w/o a sense of reality.
“You are a liar. And a fool. And Heinzy Schvwanzy is egging you on.”
The fools are anybody who believes that temperatures of 1500 degree C can be sustained in the open air by a finite amount of conventional fuel for over 6 weeks, with visible presence of molten steel as undeniable indication of the temperature.
This is the prodigy that allegedly happened at the WTC site. If such thing was possible in real life, one wonders why we bother building blast furnaces.
How about Bin Laden’s confession, just for starters?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/bin-laden-claims-responsibility-for-9-11-1.513654
Then the financial connections and meetings with Atta and surveillance of Atta getting on the plane and on and on and on.
So the FBI and CIA were going around saying Bin Laden was responsible, lying to everyone, but they couldn’t update the ten most wanted list or something? The fact that you would think this is some important point just shows how illogical your thinking is on the entire subject.
This was relevant in 2002, but not anymore.
Except him saying that he did it. Oh, but that was a CIA robot or something, right?
I agree. And focusing on bullshit theories about freefall just draws attention away from the atrocities the American government ACTUALLY COMMITTED.
Since the more sane truthers are having some trouble here, the proper reaction to the really dim-witted “9/11 was a nuclear inside job” crowd is to make fun of them.
How can someone be so deluded to think it was nukes when it was really mind lasers? Oh, you don’t think it was mind lasers? That’s exactly what someone who has been hit directly in the parietal lobe by a mind laser would say. Or possibly a lizard man.
Iris, you are well intentioned, so your idiocy is of a useful kind. Obviously there were some explosives and on lower level basements probably some big ones which lead to high temperatures, etc. But this does not imply nukes. One thing about a nuke is that ones it goes off there is no more fuel and things start cooling down. In the melt cavity the evaporated rock are condenses after only 8 minutes after the explosion. Otoh thermite in excess or scattered by other explosive can linger longer and it might be a more likely the culprit of hot and melted steel. Then Khalezov scenario of a big nuke (150kt) buried deep can’t explain the melt steel either. To melt the steel the center core would have to reach into the cavity melt zone. This is impossible in his scenario.
Donald Trump’s dad’s brother
The Donald’s reaction to 9/11, ‘explosives must have been used’ and ‘I now have the highest building in the city’. See creating a 9/11 conspiracy theory is easy. NE1 candoit.
I would like Iris, utu, Heinz or skirk to cite anyone who was severely injured by 9/11 that will believe any of their theories. No a one, and skirk and company wonder why, they could be enlightened by holding a lit candle under their bare skin flame (I could help with that) and then see if they scoff at the opinion of those such as the woman who was engulfed by a fireball that came down the elevator shaft and burnt people in the ground floor lobby to death, or the woman who suffered 80% third degree burns in a fireball that came down an 88th floor stairwell in as the plane crashed into the North Tower:
“atrocity porn ” indeed!
Thank you utu for this post, which is very interesting indeed, as it exposes clearly the unscientific nature of your comments.
Let’s assume the following is correct (apart from “ones it goes off” which should be “once it goes off”):
Now let’s take another example where we can be sure that “things start cooling down” from the very beginning: a thick lava flow coming out of a volcano, for instance.
How long does it take for the lava to cool down to ambient temperature? Well, it depends on its thickness, of course… but it can take months. Surface cooling will be rather quick, but it takes much longer at the bottom.
Cooling time, without any exothermic reactions, depends only on the thermal resistance of the body, which in turn depends on its thermal conductivity and thickness. Every engineer knows that, and even everyone knows that empirically: if you pour 1 liter of hot tea into as many small tea cups as necessary, it will cool down much faster than if you keep it in the teapot… or even if you fill a cold 1 liter bottle with the teapot.
Totally wrong, again. Initial temperatures at zero point in a nuclear explosion are in the millions of kelvin range. Assuming a linear temperature gradient between the cavity and the surface (in the so-called “steady state” heat transfer regime), and given a melting temperature for steel in the 1700 K zone, there is absolutely no need to reach the “cavity melt zone” in order to melt steel.
This is, again, quite obvious for any engineer. But maybe some commenters here have no idea about heat transfer processes. They can however work hard to catch up with the lead pack:
http://www.uotechnology.edu.iq/dep-materials/lecture/secondclass/HeatTransfer14.pdf
Too bad you didn’t learn to read when you were in school. If you had, you’d realize that my post #2190/2191 did a good job of destroying any credibility you ever had and you still don’t get it. Sad. Instead of accepting the olive branch I proffered in your direction, you chose to double down on your lie — calling me a liar. I do admire your hubris.
Anyone who wants to see the entire context of my post #2190/2191 can look at our entire past exchange:
From me: #1721, 2025, 2072, 2115
From CanSpeccy: #1733, 2029, 2108, 2118 (no addressee)
I don’t know what you do for a daytime job, but you can always get a job with the Main Stream Media in the USA. They like people who can lie like you and still keep a straight face. Be careful not to take a job that requires some degree of plausible deniability, though.
Goodbye — I hope you enjoy your echo chamber.
“One thing about a nuke is that ones it goes off there is no more fuel and things start cooling down”
It is hard to be more wrong.
The nuclear fission reaction of a few kilograms of uranium releases as much energy as one million tons of TNT explosive (trinitrotoluene). Equivalent energy is released for a mass ratio in the order of 1 to 1,000,000,000. I wrote all nine zeros so you can figure it out.
The conservation of energy is a basic principle in Physics. In absence of convection and thermal radiation, negligible underground, the phenomenal amount of thermal energy released by a nuclear explosion will be mostly dissipated by conduction, at a very slow rate. This is why 3 months after the collapse, firemen were still putting out fires at the WTC 3 months.
If the videos of firemen stumbling upon molten steel, in the open air where massive natural air convection takes place, weeks after the collapse, if these videos are genuine, then the most likely 9/11 scenario involves a nuclear explosion.
Only in microseconds when the volume is small. SiO2 in the melt cavity entirely condenses back in only 8 minutes after explosion which means temperature of cavity becomes 2230°C. So the temperature of cavity at time t0+8min is 2230°C. The cooling down progresses by heating the outer layers in the crush zone. Now look at volume of the crush zone compared to the volume of the melt cavity. I would say the ratio is at least 20. Which means that the outer edge of the crush zone will never reach temperatures higher than 110°. Actually the temperature will be somewhat higher because of the energy dissipated by the shockwave.
You know that nukes were considered to produce aggregates (I gave you the link). Would they consider it if there was rock melting in the crush zone? There is no melting in the crush zone! Melting point of rocks (granite) is lower than melting point of steel. So there will be no molten steel if steel reaches the crush zone only. That’s why my original statement stands:
Khalezov scenario is impossible!
But if you want to defend it stop being a weasel as you are all the time an make few affirmative statement that are falsifiable. Propose a specific scenario: depth and yield so we may look into it whether you found the sweet spot where you could achieve both melting of the steel but without the unleashing of the hellfire into the building.
You physics sucks.
This is 3D case. Think about volume. You are prone to statements and mistakes like that because you are very hand wavy. Never quantitative.
It seems that you have never thought it through. You seem to be smart but why did you believe the hand waving Khalezov without putting some thought into it? Perhaps you can’t really think on your own. It will be hard to undo it now because of the well know phenomena: ‘It’s Easier to Fool People Than to Convince Them That They Have Been Fooled.’ And it is even harder to un-fool people who have high opinion of their own intellect. The other possibility is that you are a troll.
Iris, do not strain your poor head. Everybody knows that there is a law of conservation of energy. But some people also know how to use it. For you it is just a slogan. Just as well use the identity 2+2=4 as your killer argument and battle cry.
Man, that’s one amazing passenger!. I see we caught them just as they’re pulling of of their pike in preperation for their entry into the…well never mind. I believe the point is, Sean, you’re claiming dead passengers while Skrik is claiming their weren’t any, at least not on the ground at Ground Zero.
Skrik, correct me if I’m wrong there.
Khalezov postulates 150kt nuke. For this size of underground explosion the seismic shock on the Richter scale should be over 6.0. Instead the collapsing towers registered only 2.1 and 2.3 on the Richter scale which is equivalent to between 10 and 30 tons of TNT. One can check the table at
10-30 tons TNT would be consistent with a mini nuke, so a mini nuke is not excluded by this result, but Khalezov is.
Khalezovians must postulate that Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University fabricated false results.
You use far too much derogatory terms to look any credible, you know that, right? Arrogance is the shield of ignorance, it is a usual defence reflex that goes along with a challenged intellect. A lesson one learns very quickly in the work environment.
I am not sure what your problem is with Khalezov: I have better things to do than read your endless string of bitter, spiteful, obnoxious comments. One thing is certain: his core hypothesis may have many inaccuracies, it is nevertheless the one that best explains the 9/11 crime.
You should stop criticising his works the way do: it makes you look envious as well, on top of everything else.
No one in the plane could have survived the impact (or the fall obliviously); what firemen saw in was not recognisable as people but looked like quantities of a pinkish grey substance; it was actually the pulverized remains of their bodies on the street along with airline tickets and baggage . The the passport of a hijacker, a Saudi law student was also found. No doubt he was keen to get the American army out of his country and being an Arab was obviously too stupid to realisee he could never get past NSA (which listened in but had no interpreters for the dialect being used) the CIA and FBI.
Note the different organisations. In conventional war when armies mount an attack they like their offensive to strike at the juncture point of two opposition units, where there is not clearly demarcated responsibility and command. The CIA loathed and distrusted the FBI and did not tell them what they needed to know. And that, old mate, is how these Arabs armed with boxcutters managed it.
It seems to me the case against American intelligence and counterintelligence agencies is for a lack of collusion with each other.
First, responding to Iris (even though this is a comment about Utu’s latest drivel):
Yes, Iris, it is hard to be more wrong than Utu. His jewel is
Ignoring his typo about “once”, the reality is that once a nuke goes off there is plenty of “fuel” and things don’t start to cool down with any great rapidity. The cooling exception is, of course, the rapid cooling down of the millions of degrees plasma. Apparently, Utu is related to the recently-demolished troll, CanSpeccy, and doesn’t seem to understand that the release of energy in a nuclear event is accompanied by the breaking up of the fissioned U235 or Plutonium into a cascade of fission products in several known pathways. These fission products have half-lives all over the map (see Tahil’s book for examples of the pathways, products, and decays), and, as they decay, emit more energy. Nuclear decay is generally an exothermic process (probably universally; I’m not a nuclear physicist, but have trouble imagining a decay which would be endothermic) so not only is the heat in the “pile” (I love that word) conserved by a lack of serious convection there but is being augmented by the exothermic decays.
Moreover, unless the nuclear event is 100% efficient (and few are), there is plenty of thermally hot Uranium/Plutonium around in the form of “unburnt” fuel which then starts its own radiological decay to become radiologically hot. [Think nuclear power plant with no control rods and not enough cooling.]
But that’s OK, Utu may be enough of a physicist to know that there is an (empirical) law of energy/mass conservation and maybe even how to apply it (as Iris and Heinz obviously do) but he’s not enough of a mathematician to know that 2+2=4 is NOT an identity. It’s a provable theorem, but now I’m getting nit-picky with these nit-pickers who love to throw pejoratives around. [Wasn’t it you, Utu, who said, “You are a liar. And a fool. And Heinzy Schvwanzy is egging you on” about me?] These trolls seem to like to throw “liar” around as one of their favorite pejoratives. CanSpeccy did that even as he sank into oblivion. Needless to say, they never seem to realize that “You are a liar” requires some proof and is a falsifiable statement.
First note that I wrote:
I never said it was, and let you read message # 2216 by Contrarian III about this particular aspect. But let’s concentrate on your reasoning.
In microseconds yes, “when the volume is small” is meaningless since I wrote “at zero point”.
Right (at least approximately). So you still acknowledge cavity temperature is much higher than steel melting temperature?
Assuming these are still °C, I don’t know which kind of physics permits such a rough calculation (even neglecting other aspects). Maybe some unknown physics like Judy Wood’s.
Although only approximately correct (some specific steels can melt at 1130°C while granite will at around 1250°C), let’s consider you’re right on the melting points.
You implicitly assume a smooth temperature gradient underground, which is obviously not the case precisely because of the cracks. In other words, very hot gases can escape from the cavity at a much higher temperature than the melting point of steel (and of granite). “No melting in the crush zone” means no bulk melting, not that temperatures can’t reach higher values outside of the “melted rock layer”, which is by no means a tight gas container.
Yes, cracks are produced before vaporized rock condenses (or melts because of heat conduction), and even if a relatively tiny heat fraction escapes through them, there is ample energy left to produce locally extremely high temperatures, even in the crush zone.
Now try to answer this relatively simple question: how much energy would be released by a 150 kt underground heat, which fraction of it would convert into heat and how it would compare to the amount of heat released at Ground Zero.
Khalezov himself in his book, if you’d bother to read it, disbelieves the Lamont data, as I do. If you want more details about why I believe Lamont is non-believable, please read my post #1839 (see especially my comment about Fukushima in case you think government lying is limited to 9/11). Post #1839 cites several witnesses who felt ground-shaking and other indicia of a seismic event very significantly greater than 2.3 Richter. There are other such data I can cite (a few of which are objective) so I should update that list, but I’ve been a little busy disposing of another troll who is truth-challenged. He was more than a little trigger happy; much like you he didn’t even bother to specify the nature, time, or place of the “lie”. That tells me I’m starting to get close to the truth about these trolls. That encourages me to talk a little about the truth – or, per Khalezov, truths (plural).
If anyone here besides the few who seem to be serious seekers of the truth (and you know who you are) has actually read any or all of Khalezov’s book, you’d know that he speaks of the three (3) truths of 9/11. His first truth is the dog & pony show of 19 crazy Arabs crashing three airplanes into three buildings (two in NYC, and one in Washington) which then burn and collapse (and a fourth airplane in rural Pennsylvania), thereby leveling almost all of the World Trade Center and leaving a mess in the Pentagon. This level of truth is meant for John Q. Public who accepts as gospel truth whatever the TV and other news media tell him.
Khalezov is not exactly sure what the second truth is, but in its essence it involves something like three small nukes (~ one kiloton) detonating low in the three NYC buildings and a malfunctioning ½ megaton nuke mounted on a missile and launched by Saddam Hussein or equivalent. More importantly, this truth is intended for the “patricians” which, briefly, consists of all the government officials NOT privy to the real, or third truth which he devotes most of his book to, in an attempt to share it with his readers, and which is known by top government officials (down to members of Congress, e.g.) in the USA and major foreign powers. The first level of truth is understood by patricians to be a cover story for this second truth.
What I have inferred from reading posts here and elsewhere is that there is really a fourth “truth”, which is the orthodoxy to be followed by anyone who is not gullible enough to accept the first truth and is not privileged enough to know the second truth and must be steered away from the third truth lest he learn enough to be dangerous. This fourth truth is therefore another gatekeeper truth intended to keep serious inquiry from emerging from the collective intelligence of the non-gullibles.
This fourth truth seems to rooted in a mystical substance which is like thermite, but very different from it. Just as Tahil uses voodoo physics to have nuclear reactors detonate, this fourth truth uses this magical substance with voodoo chemical properties. When required, it burns fast enough to be an almost silent explosive, emits very little light when burning, but it can also sit underground smouldering for months and creating temperatures only consistent with buried or near-buried nuclear event decays. This thermite-like substance also has properties that are more properly described as alchemical, rather than chemical, since the substance can cause Iodine-127 to capture neutrons to change it to Iodine-131, the notorious isotope which seems to cause thyroid cancer. Either this property or some related property should be added to the causes of multiple myeloma along with benzene and radiation.
The importance of this fourth truth is that it provides comfort to the not too critical thinker who doesn’t know much physics or much chemistry but knows enough to smell a rat when he sees the first truth dog & pony show. More importantly, it serves as an orthodoxy that can be used by trolls or paid shills to steer curious people away from the third truth. For it to serve this function, every 9/11 forum has to have attack dogs (whether trolls or paid shills) to do whatever they can to keep the discussion channeled along the lines of who did it and why (as if the “how” doesn’t reveal a lot about the who and the why) and to pounce on anyone displaying any knowledge of physics or chemistry beyond what is needed to reject the first truth. This forum is no exception: It has attack dogs who will shout incantations (sans holy water) to ward off the modern devil, Khalezov, if they are really physics-challenged or use pseudo-physics if they are not that challenged.
This fourth truth has an interesting natural history. It was born after enough questions had arisen that only the real gullibles or sleeping general public were still accepting the first truth. A nuclear physicist went looking for energetic materials in the 9/11 dust and naturally settled upon thermite as the obvious choice in view of his own expertise in chemistry. Interested professionals have coalesced around this fourth truth and have managed, by 2017, to get the first scientific evidence that there was a major hole in the first truth. In parallel, and probably independent of this evidence, a US presidential candidate made a campaign promise in 2016 to re-open the 9/11 question and do an honest investigation of what happened. I sense progress, don’t you? But be careful you don’t get knocked down by the glacier as it roars by.
Personally, I don’t claim any great expertise in physics. I pursued physics formally only as far as the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian formulations of Mechanics and a good intro to Quantum Mechanics. I am largely ignorant about plasma physics and what happens to thermodynamics behavior, e.g., after a phase transition to the plasma state. I decided physics was too hard, so I switched to an easier major, math (an inside joke; if you don’t get it, don’t worry). The physics I know beyond that modest amount was gotten by hanging around with physicists and non-formal study and reading. I can’t explain all the physics that was happening on 9/11, but I don’t believe the perps somehow suspended the laws of physics.
True. I agree with the discrepancy between the 150 kt nuke and the 2.1-2.3 magnitude seismic events (it’s called local magnitude scale rather than Richter scale now, however, but it does not matter). Maybe not “over 6.0” (5.5 would be fine) but clearly 2.1-2.3 are too small.
Do you think there are no other examples of academic institutions producing bold lies in order to support the official 9/11 conspiracy theory? Never heard about Bazant, about Purdue University?
Now try to find some other academic sources than the well-known “Kim paper” which you can dowload here:
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf
And conclude by yourself.
Note that although not being as “fool” as the “Khalezovians”, some geophysicists have already produced interesting data analysis concerning the “Kim paper”:
http://journalof911studies.com/resources/RousseauVol34November2012.pdf
And note also that some other aspects, not scientific actually, might be interesting to consider. You will find them here:
https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news-events/seismology-911
I let you (and other readers) guess what.
You have just written another 1100 words of no substance. Just hand waving. Nothing specific. Nothing quantitative.
Let me try to set you on the right track by making you do simple calculations that you have learned in high school physics. You do not need Hamiltonian physics for it because it is just simple calorimetric calculation.
Calculate temperature increase ∆t when mass m absorbs heat Q. You know the equation: Q=cm∆t, where c is the specific heat.
Now I will outline the problem: The nuclear device of 150 kt yield is buried underground. Assume that the rock surrounding is granite. The specific heat of granite c=0.19 cal/g and density is d=2.75 g/cm^3. Or you can calculate it for other types of rocks.
The question is what temperature increase ∆t will be observed in the solid sphere of granite of radius (1) r=100m and (2) r=200m?
And now the most important part: how much energy is released by 150 kt nuclear device? It is believed that 1 kt of TNT is equivalent to 10^12 calories. This include all energy that is released in all forms. So we are asking the question what if all of this energy was converted into increasing the temperature of rocks.
After you do this calculations return to my claim:
And remember that for 150kt the crushed zone radius is 160-210m and the melt zone radius is 21-64 m.
An try to imagine where the bottom of the center core containing the steel box columns would have to be with resect to the shot point to cause the melting of the steel? And then think of what would be the consequence of explosion of 150 kt device in Manhattan that was buried only 21-64 m deep?
Do not come back until you do the calculations.
Heinz, again you are just waving hands. Did I ask you to put on the table specific parameters like depth and yield? But let’s go back to temperatures.
I don’t know which kind of physics permits such a rough calculation – Very simple. I scaled by the ratio of volume of radius r=200m to volume of radius r=70m which are approximately the sizes of crushed and melt zones, respectively for 150kt. Using this and the data point that after 8 min SiO2 condenses, which gives the temperature of the melt zone, I obtained that the temperature of the total r=200m volume would be not higher than 110 *C. But guess what? It is even lower. I took your advise and calculated the total energy released which you should have done 10 years ago. But you are too lazy.
We can calculate the temperatures of 200m or 100m volume directly because we know how much energy is released. The conversion factor is 10^12 between calories and kt. So you can do an exercise and calculated it. I gave this exercise to your sidekick Contrarian III but it will be useful for your as well to do it:
As you can see the temperature is even lower than my pervious estimate. You won’t be even able to melt paraffin at the outer edge of the crushed zone. And you, poor man, wanted to melt steel.
Melting steel is out of question. Rocks do not melt in the crushed zone. And your arguing about the melting point of steel is really pathetic. Poor weasel.
Internecine warring Truthers cannot stay on the same page, but they are convinced everyone opposing them is secretly working for the Big Boss. Most amusing .
You and all Khalezovians have no choice but to believe that LDEO report was fabricated and is false. This is understandable. A belief in nonsense always leads to expanding circle of denial.
What about ground shaking in the NYC. I was in 6.2 earthquake 15 mile from the epicenter and I remember how it felt. Nothing like that was experienced by people in the NYC.
And don’t tell me that underground nuclear explosions do not make ground shake? In 1986 150kt was tested in Pahut Mesa NV 102 miles form Las Vegas.
I looked at your 1100 word spiel again. It is a perfect example of repetition of irrelevant arguments including allusions to persecution mania of being attacked by the non believers. The martyr syndrome of the true believer. The believers like to keep repeating their articles of faith because it reinforces their belief. They like to hear themselves talking. Any snake oil salesmen does it because he knows that if he believes himself his ability to convince others will improve, so he keeps pushing ante of his spiel. People can detect liars but it is much harder to detect lies in true believers.
You transformed yourself into a believer and lost the ability to delineate between what you know and what you believe. You think that your beliefs are facts. I wonder when did it happen for you? Was it after reading Khlalezov book or was it before when you watched his presentation on the YT that he recorded in Thailand? It was professionally done. The interviewer with a perfect professional British accent was very good. Some money went into this production. Always ask the question where did the money come from? Who might have been behind the loser like Khalezov? Just like you should ask who is behind the flake like Judy Woods? Who gave her access to excellent photographs that nobody else had? So was it Victor Bout (who still had money) who was fighting extradition to the US from Thai jail and Khalezov claimed to be his ‘lawyer’? Did these two losers concocted a plan to get some bargaining leverage with the US gov by coming up with damming ‘evidence’ for the US and Israel involvement in 9/11? Anyway it did not work. Bout is doing life in the US federal prison and Khalezov is penniless in Thailand.
I watched Khalezov presentation and was impressed and was almost convinced until I thought of his drawings of the envelopes of the shockwave propagating in the building or under the building. They were always elliptic. Narrow at the top and broad in the middle. Why elliptic? So he could squeeze them into the building. But they should not be elliptic. It is a bad basic physics. Then I knew where the manipulation was occurring. This was the crux point of his manipulation. I did not have to do any calculations or look into scientific papers to know that it was just BS.
This discussion here with Heinzy Schwanzy forced me to look up few things because initially Heinzy Schwanzy seemed like exuding some professional knowledge of physics, schock waves, etc. After doing some homework I asked him few specific questions co he could not use his hand waving and verbiage anymore and bring him back to reality. And what we see? There is no more Heinzy Schwanzy. A pin prick and the air form balloon is gone.
Start using your brain, man.
You do not have what it takes to make a rational judgment about Khalezov hypothesis. You arrived to your belief in his hypothesis by an irrational process. The hypothesis appealed to you but not on scientific grounds which are beyond you but for some other reasons. You have been tricked. Khalezov conjured up a non scientific scenario based on cartoon physics not real physics. His scenario is impossible once you know something about underground nuclear explosions and do some rudimentary calculations. But you do not know it. You are a victim.
Start answering questions, troll.
I note you still don’t acknowledge your lack of understanding about heat transfer around an underground nuclear explosion: it seems that for you there are cracks (when it’s useful to say so) but that at the same time there aren’t (when they could be too efficient for heat transfer via extremely hot gases venting, or even plasma).
But concerning heat, I was not asking here if you could convert kilotons of TNT into joules (or calories, which aren’t used any more by good scientists):
This conversion is too easy to even mention.
I was asking if you could estimate the amount of heat released at GZ and compare it to the heat generated by a 150 kt (or 3 * 150 kt, more precisely) underground nuclear explosion.
This is not “hand waving” and “verbiage”, this is conservation of energy or, if you prefer, first law of thermodynamics. We should exclude any explanation that violates first law of thermodynamics, shouldn’t we?
The question was simple: How much the energy form 150kt explosion can increase temperature of r=100m or r=200m spherical volume of granite? You know that the answer to this question kills any possibility of the melted steel in the crushed zone. No melted steel in the crushed zone!
And it follows directly from the heat transfer and more specifically form the II law of thermodynamics that the heat transfer must obey. If you apply heat Q to one end of the rod of mass m to however high temperature t (gazillion Kelvins) and the total amount of heat applied is such that it could raise the temperature of the whole rod by ∆t=Q/(c*m) then the opposite end of the rod will never have temperature increased by more than ∆t during the cooling down process unless you will manage to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics of heat flowing from cooler to hotter.
Now instead of rod think of a sphere within a larger sphere. The smaller sphere receives all energy form the explosion and then the energy heats up the larger sphere by heat transfer. The amount of energy in 150kt device suffices to heat up r=200m volume of granite by only 8.6°C. For gods sake only 8.6°C. The sphere r=100m will heat up by 69°C. You could not even boil water at the outer edge of r=100m zone. And you want to melt steel.
It looks, Heinz, you got nothing. Just hand waving and more hand waving. Just deflated old balloon resembling old wet rag.
You know, Heinzy Schwanzy, I am pretty sure you are a troll. You appear to be smarter based on your verbiage than defending the indefensible, so you must be doing it in a bad faith which meets the definition of a troll and a liar.
Yes, a wrong answer to this question kills any possibility of the melted steel in the crushed zone. You confirm you still think that venting of extremely hot gases – if not plasma – through the cracks, escaping from the cavity because of the tremendous pressure, can play no role in heat transfer. Thank you.
By the way, in which case can you encounter “pyroclastic flows”? Usually, in a volcano eruption. What were saying people who were trapped under the dust flow after towers collapsed? That it was very hot.
http://911review.com/attack/wtc/dustclouds.html
How high went the cloud after WTC7 “collapse”? Roughly 1300m.
http://www.911history.de/aaannxyz_ch01_en.html#autoid893291/
That’s quite impressive for thermal effect of “excess nanothermite”. And the optical effect was quite impressive too, with a dark night at 10 am on a sunny September day:
Ron Unz, Thank you for concurring and your support!
It’s very much like the Japanese Pearl Harbor attack. Yeah, members of the Roosevelt Administration probably knew the attack was coming a lot sooner then than the Americans getting bombed and killed in Pearl Harbor Hawaii – the delay in reporting, preparing was probably due to these folks wanting to get the United States in to World War II, especially in to the European theater to oppose Germany, aid our traditional allies Great Britain and just enter World War II for Jewish interests/Soviet Interests – that’s not really something weird, nothing like aliens from Outer Space UFOs.
It’s similar to our response to 9/11/01 – the Neo Conservatives/Zionists used this to start another US war/invasion/occupation of Iraq – secular Baathist Arabs in Iraq or Syria had nothing to do with 9/11/01 done by Saudi Arabian Sunni Islamic extremists.
Saudi Arabia Sunni Islamists and Israel, the Jewish lobby are on the same side in everything that matters (throwing the Palestinians under the bus) including flooding Europe, UK, USA, Canada Australia with millions of Muslim migrants – Saudi Arabia and Israel take ~ zero Syrian war refugees but demand Germany, Sweden, Canada and the USA must take unlimited numbers of Muslim migrants defended as Syrian war refugees anybody that objects is an evil WASCIST NAZI.
My main take on 9/11/01 is to note that yeah Islamic extremists were allowed in to our country on student visas, overstayed their visas (illegal aliens) then proceeded to slaughter thousands of our people here in our country.
That’s a bad thing.
So were the many subsequent Islamic extremist terrorist attacks in Paris, Manchester England etc.
The correct course of action was/is to do what Hungary, Poland and all Central and Eastern European nations do:
Restrict all Muslim migrant invasions, not allow mass Muslim immigration.
That’s just common sense.
Hungarian and Polish Political leader also don’t invade, occupy Iraq, spread nonsense that Assad’s Syria and the Russian are gassing little children in Syria the same as Hitler supposedly did to the jews in World War II.
All’s well that ends well – congrats.
It looks, utu, that you still don’t understand what’s going on in an underground nuclear explosion, and try to “prove” something using basic calorimetric calculations that are technically right… but totally irrelevant in that particular case.
Yes, I know what the volume of a sphere is… and what specific heat is… and what the second law of thermodynamics says… and can conclude as you do that if you heat homogeneously a r=200m granite sphere (V=3.35 x 10^7 m^3, M=9.05 x 10^10 kg) with 150 kt TNT-equivalent (or 6.28 x 10^14 J) then its temperature rises by less than 10K. That’s perfectly correct. So what? Is it the way heat transfer occurs in that inferno? Gentle heat conduction like in your central heating radiators during winter? Of course not.
Underground nuclear explosions have been tested for decades, including failure cases when containment was supposed to be complete but was actually very limited. Have a look at Baneberry test for instance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Flat#Baneberry
It was only a 10 kt nuke, 270m below the surface. But some cracks decided to grow larger and longer than expected… This is how real life is: very often much more complicated and dangerous than an undergraduate university examination.
Now, if you finally acknowledge that a real experiment deserves more attention than just multiplying or dividing volumes, densities, specific heats or other numerical values for calculations which say nothing about real phenomena, maybe you will end estimating how much heat was released at Ground Zero, and compare it with 3 * 150 kt (or another value consistent with the “big-underground-nuke-nonsense”).
You can take 50 instead of 150 kt if you like, no problem. Khalezov is already wrong by some other figures, I really don’t care.
But you will have, one day or another, to propose something else than an excess in nanothermite material to explain the phenomena we’ve all seen (see videos above, message #2228, for a few of them).
Thanks.
I pretty much agree with all what you say except concerning the “Islamic extremists”: none of them were present during the 9/11 false flag operation. Airliner’s wings can’t cut steel buildings columns, period.
When TV channels broadcast videos that don’t obey physics laws, then images aren’t proof of existence, they are proof of non-existence. And reality does not depend on our ability to cope with it.
“To melt the steel the centre core would have to reach into the cavity melt zone.”
Deliberate or not, and as so intelligently put by Contrarian, your comment seems a perfect attempt to divert the focus from the real truth of a nuclear demolition (the 3rd scenario) to an ersatz truth based on the use of conventional explosives (the 4th scenario).
1- Why are you insisting on the steel melting as the only possible evidence of a nuclear detonation? This statement is a red herring: there was no need for the core steel pillars to melt for the WTC towers to collapse. The nuclear explosion created the underground cavity, and after a few minutes the roof of this cavity collapsed, possibly even creating a chimney which engulfed the tower.
This is a standard pattern in underground nuclear explosions, always present in granitic-like soils. (Such pattern does not happen in salt environment, which would not have been used to build a tower in the 60’s anyway).
Another undeniable smoking gun for a nuclear explosion is the few minutes that elapsed between the seismic shock (the nuclear explosion) and the collapse of the WTC tower (when the Megabars pressure has decreased and the cavity’s roof collapses.
2- Why are you insisting on melted steel being visible?
It is well documented that after the transient initial explosion, plateau temperatures of around 600 degree C are established within a typical granitic cavity. Thermal conduction models based on this value have been proved as correct by sampling of actual explosion sites.
Thermal conduction to the open air is therefore limited by this 600 degree value . What witnesses described as “molten steel” would have been red/orange smouldering section of steel, not melted one. And so what? What difference does it make?
What mysterious, endless source of energy would have maintained logs of steel at 600degree C for weeks, in the open? One created out of thin air by the Tel-Aviv fairies?
For all the intelligence of Anatoly Karlin and Ron Unz, they failed to notice that the coverup against overwhelming evidence is by and large an inside job. Ron Unz did not mention that NORAD was deactivated on 9/11. Are the Mossad in charge of NORAD?
If the rules of Physics state that for every action there is a reaction, which totally negates the possibility of a free fall of the three demolished towers, then we can deduce that, in the realm of logic, for every blatant crime that goes uncovered and unpunished there is a coverup at the highest level.
Unfortunately we live in a world where truth is a matter of feeling and or personal opinion induced by mind control. Since the MSM is shaping most people’s beliefs, and since the simple minded imbeciles are more easily influenced by false or fake arguments, and as long as simpletons far outnumber people who have learned the discipline of critical thinking, official and MSM version of the truth about 9/11 will prevail.
“The amount of energy in 150kt device suffices to heat up r=200m volume of granite by only 8.6°C. For gods sake only 8.6°C. The sphere r=100m will heat up by 69°C. You could not even boil water at the outer edge of r=100m zone. And you want to melt steel.”
You are completely out of your depth.
After the initial explosion within granitic soil, the steady state temperature within the cavity, at which thermal decay is initiated, is about 600 degree C. So you can expect the surface of what you call “the sphere” to reach 600 degree C by conduction, especially in the early weeks after the nuclear explosion.
This 600 degree C initial value can be maintained for as long as six months at the centre of the cavity in granitic soil. This has been undeniably proven by sampling in the early 60’s , by the French in their Sahara nuclear tests , by the Americans at the site of the 13.4 kt SHOAL test, etc…
You can boil much more than just an egg with 600 degree C, you can boil the structures of an entire tower.
A tower unfortunately full of innocent people whose memory is insulted everyday by depraved governmental lies.
” The question was simple: How much the energy form 150kt explosion can increase temperature of r=100m or r=200m spherical volume of granite? You know that the answer to this question kills any possibility of the melted steel in the crushed zone.”
This is another pearl of knowledge that deserves special attention.
It is a fundamental misconception to state that, inside a cavity formed by an underground nuclear explosion, the steady state temperature (the baseline value from which the “slow” thermal decay commences) varies depending on the kiloton-rating of the nuclear charge.
For a standard granitic ground, the steady state decay temperature does NOT vary function of the nuclear charge, and is around 600C. It is the radius of the cavity R (metres) which varies function of the W charge (kiloton) as per the approximate formula: R=7.5* (W at the power of 1/3).
You are so wrong that it falls into the category of “not even wrong.” Your ignorance you displayed in this comment renders any argument attempting to rectify it powerless. I begin to wonder whether the the Enlightenment project to root out illiteracy was wrong. Some people would be better off if they were illiterate. Clearly teaching you to read and write was a mistake. You should have been sent to a vocational school at age 7 to learn shoemaking or woodworking.
Pls, stop. If it was possible to convey to you how wrong you are and how embarrassing are your para-scientific statements you would commit seppuku out of shame. Fortunately for you your ignorance is your shield so you will never know. Ignorance is bliss.
“Pls, stop. If it was possible to convey to you how wrong you are and how embarrassing are your para-scientific statements you would commit seppuku out of shame”
As this is an important discussion on an event that caused the untimely death of thousands of innocent people, I have to restrain from responding to your constant insults. They do you no credit.
For the benefit of fellow American commentators, below is a legacy scientific article by the French governmental body in charge with nuclear energy (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique). The article is in French, however the curves are very easy to understand.
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/03/031/3031840.pdf
The curves show that a temperature of 600C will be sustained for several months within the cavity resulting from an underground nuclear explosion in granitic soil:
– Curve II is for a French nuclear test in the Sahara (1960- 1966)
– Curve VII is for the US Shoal test.
Both curves, obtained from samplings, show a 600C temperature plateau. Such temperature would explain why firemen at the WTC were stumbling across “molten” metal weeks after the collapse.
In summary , the dancing Israelis were celebrating the use of nuclear weapons against innocent civilian citizens of New-York.
I hate you Joe Levantine. Your clear-eyed assessment of the both the lack of critical thought amongst even the best intentioned (that’s right, I’m lookin’ at youse, Mr Unz), and the childish “I hosey it so” culture in which we are all now enveloped courtesy of our craven media elite(ists), leaves me despairing for the America I dreamed of in my youth (“America, where are you now?/ Don’t you care about your sons and daughters”). However, I do disagree with the “imbeciles ” and “simpletons” argument; it’s a simple fact that the common man will never remonstrate against their own full bellies and those of whom they love the most. They know full well that they may swell a progress, but never lead it, nor would they had they the chance – all in humility. Rather, place the blame squarely on the heads of those who have led this retreat from good sense and decency, and shame them constantly. God bless you, sir!
WTF does that even mean, yo? If their were “parallel internal explosions” doesn’t that mean there was a ground operation of some duration prior to the air operation? HTF could that possibly be considered irrelevant? Jeez! Tighten it up, already!
Aw, come on now, Sean! You know full well that that is not a liquid as in ‘like water’ (I hope). Rather, it is a metal solid which has been rendered to a state of matter known as superplasticity via a shaped charge of high explosives which simultaneously accelerates it to a hypersonic focused stream of particles bombarding the target. Like so many things in nature (magenetism, gravity), superplasticity is a state of matter little understood, but of which through experimentation we are able to grasp an understanding of it’s effect and that’s about all. So, no, still, liquid cannot go through steel. FFS!
‘”Courage!” he said, and pointed toward the land,
“This mounting wave will roll us shoreward soon.” ‘ And it is mounting, Nick, to be sure. Gird your loins, friend, the fight ain’t over ’til it’s over! And, despite your ‘stupidest physics’, that just happen to be inviolable, we cannot ignore the so-called “‘realist’” blogs as long as they are lauded by any but those who are declaimed risable by the least perspicacious among us.
Thank you for re-reading my previous post (#2218), but it still appears that you didn’t understand very much of it. I’ve never tried to write a children’s book, but I guess I should consider the Dick-and-Jane set more carefully when I write.
My post really had two main points, one dealing with seismic intensity, but is primarily an allusion to my post #1839 which I would be updating right now if I didn’t feel compelled to respond to a pseudo-physics troll.
The other point is that I believe there’s a group of people interested in 9/11 (some of whom may be truth-seekers and some of whom may be — who knows?) who have created a new orthodoxy: What I have called (mimicking Khalezov) the “fourth truth”. Technically, a better name for it would be the “first and a halfth truth” because position 1.5 is where it really belongs in the hierarchy, but I don’t like that neologism.
That is not arm-waving. It’s also not quantitative. This second point is really philosophical and is aimed at people who think, like Heinz and Iris, e.g. The significant science in my second point is my recognition of the alchemical (or voodoo chemistry) thermite-like substance which has properties unlike those found in the chemical world I’m acquainted with, and my interest in the etiology of this substance. Rather than address this voodoo chemistry or the philosophical implications I raise, you dumb-down on bad physics and insult.
I think I can do specific heat calculations in my head (I did stay awake in freshman physics) but making a calculation which is irrelevant is a waste of time. In your post #2221, you even make a great case for its irrelevancy:
Obviously, steel did melt at Ground Zero and parts of the “pile” was still at melting temperatures for weeks later, finally officially “cooled down” by fiat 100 days later. Do you not see the cognitive dissonance in your own writing? Or are you unaware of the long-term hot spots at GZ?
I’m also not impressed by your trap, aimed at Heinz, trying to get him to design the nuclear demolition scheme for the WTC towers. I’m inclined to agree with Khalezov that this scheme was probably designed by the Loizeaux firm. My further WAG is that it was a multiple man-month job done by professionals who had very complete access to USG data. Traps like yours are part of the war of attrition practiced by the fourth truth enforcers.
The reality of the design you’re seeking is that a successful design was indeed created and deployed. Moreover, it was used AS THE EVIDENCE CLEARLY SHOWS (look at the totality of the evidence for underground nuke). Was the result what the designer intended? I don’t think so. The design is hare-brained but even if it was intended to be used in an intentional demolition of an obsolete skyscraper (not a 19 crazy Arab scenario), huge precautions would have been taken to minimize what actual unintended consequences did occur on 9/11.
Except for some cartoon drawings by Khalezov, his drawings of the demo mechanism show and refer to an egg-shaped (not ellipsoidal) cavity developing with the small end of the egg pointed up (toward the sky). This is not to fit the egg to the building above, it’s because “up” is the path of least resistance to a nuke buried deep enough to be underground but not so deep it’s unaffected by surface effects. Do you need a citation for this obvious statement?
Sorry, I didn’t make this post earlier, but I’ve been spending a decent amount of time today putting together all the seismic data I could find (mostly in Khalezov but scattered throughout). This involved correcting some of his errors (not fatal to his explanation) as well as tracking down now-obsolete links.
Two of the data are particularly interesting. They supply a good estimate of a number Iris referred to in a post today. They also give me a sense of how close to the margins the demolition scheme designers were working. They also tell me how close the perps behind 9/11 came to an even bigger disaster — not that they care. Ruthless is too mild a word for them.
How about bin Laden’s initial denial for starters?
“The US government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders’ rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations.”
Osama bin Laden
And his second denial:
“I have already said that I am not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States…Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked who carried out the attacks.”
Osama bin Laden
It is interesting to note that when you question the “hijackers” when it pertains to the 9/11 plot you are dismissed as a conspiracy kook, but when it comes to the Iraq fraud it is more legitimate. After the 9/11 attacks there were reports that Mohamed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. The purpose apparently was for Iraq to provide Atta with anthrax. Dick Cheney had stated, “Well, what we now have that’s developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that’s been pretty well confirmed that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack.”
So they did attempt to create a false narrative around Atta to provide justification for the Iraq war. But if someone starts questioning the narrative of Atta or the other hijackers over 9/11 it is instantly dismissed as conspiracy mongering. 9/11 is still too taboo for most.
Yes, these agencies lie. I’m sorry to break the news to you, but maybe you haven’t been keeping up on current events over the past two decades. You see saying something and providing evidence are two separate things. These agencies also stated that Saddam Hussein and Iraq were stockpiling WMD and working on getting nuclear weapons. But they were just lying.
In 2220 I said “Do not come back until you do the calculations.” Get lost till then.
This is a typical pseudo-scientific argument. Science is NOT about calculations first, it’s about understanding first. For instance, acknowledging that the “egg-shaped” cavity in Khalezov’s book was NOT made “to fit to the demolition scenario” like you said, but because physical considerations (relatively small overburden pressure) impose a non-spherical shape.
Too bad for your scientific reputation.
Thank you Iris for this VERY interesting French paper (as you say, no need to understand French, or a few words are enough). In my post #2232 I did not want to elaborate too much about utu’s “linear calorimetric” calculations since I think even non-scientists will laugh at them. That’s the reason why I concentrated on other aspects, like hot gases venting which are obvious as soon as you know the rock is being fractured.
Too bad Ron Unz endorses these errors, he might have been a good theoretical physicist but maybe too much of a theoretical physicist, with a lack of “common sense”. I know some people who belong to this category.
And since experiment is always the best argument against nonsense, you gain here a much better point than me!
Superplasticity notwithstanding , the HEAT anti tank round works by kinetic energy alone and the thin non-solid superplastic copper bolt is not harder that the massively thick purpose built special tank armour steel it penetrates by kinetic energy alone.
Anyway, the plane went in the building,which was very far from being armour plated (between the windows on the perimeter of the impact floor was steel , but a rather brittle steel which was 3/8 thick steel in box sections that were welded)
And the buildings fell down.
I do not pretend that I would have been able to correctly predict beforehand what would happen (what did happen) if a jetliner crashed into a WTC tower, and I was as surprised when I saw it as anyone. But I am not going to deny it happened, or engage in a futile debate with those who insist the airliner could not have penetrated the building so film of it happening must be faked.
“In 2220 I said “Do not come back until you do the calculations. Get lost till then.”
How unprofessional, and utu, better if you redo your calculations.
You want to use the specific heat equation Q=cm(T1-T2), and your mass is a sphere. At radius r the volume is 4*pi*r**2 dr and the temperature gradient is f(r) for some function f. Thus,
Q=integral_0 to R ( cg4*pi*r**2 f(r) dr )
To find f(r) you have to use the heat transfer equation Q/t=k(A/d)(T1-T2). Solve dT
dT(r)=(Q/t)(1/k)(dr/4*pi*r**2)
We can assume that the flow Q/t is the same through all ball spheres when the system is in a steady state and the spheres do not heat any more, so it is a negative constant -C. We get
T=f(r)=B/r where B=C/4*pi*k
Inserting f(r) to the previous equation we get Q=cg2*pi*B*R**2, not as you calculated. The issue is that the temperature in the ball falls as a hyperbole with the radius since the surface grows with radius. I did not calculate the numbers, but if you do them correctly, you most probably will get what Iris says based on empirical data.
And then, utu, when you did that calculation, you can ask if the assumptions are filled. Is it in a steady state, is the material homogeneous, and so on. I think you will find that it may be one way or another, not all things are so easy to calculate, at least if the numerical result should be correct.
“Obviously, steel did melt at Ground Zero and parts of the “pile” was still at melting temperatures for weeks later, finally officially “cooled down” by fiat 100 days later.”
Just for clarity, and because of the unbelievable nonsense posted by your critic, it must be mentioned that the visible colour of steel is admitted as an undisputable indication of its temperature in the metallurgic industry.
https://d2n4wb9orp1vta.cloudfront.net/cms/Craftman-Table.jpg;maxWidth=600
So many firemen reporting seeing red/orange logs of steel 6 weeks after the collapse is an undeniable smoking gun of underground nuclear explosion. Heat footprints such as the one below persisting for weeks in the open air cannot be explained otherwise.
“Now instead of rod think of a sphere within a larger sphere. The smaller sphere receives all energy form the explosion and then the energy heats up the larger sphere by heat transfer. ”
What happens is that the temperature of the stone further from the cavity drops as 1/r, that is, fast. The cavity hardly cools at all because of this conduction and the cavity stays hot for a long time. There are some vents, metal bars that conduct heat well, fallen roofs, cracks or so on, through which the heat flows to other places that become hot spots, and they also do not cool much because of conduction through the stone or rubble. Finally there are these hot spots in several places and they slowly cool first by conduction to the surface and then by radiation. External energy was provided in some way, this is one way, thermite is another way. This utu’s calculation does not solve the problem, a nuclear explosion passes it just as well as thermite does. Other arguments are needed to differentiate between them.
Oh no you din’t! Oh, you did, you DID!
“Superplasticity notwithstanding”?!?
Sean, look, if we do not understand the state of the matter which is doing the damage, then we do not understand how it is doing it. Theories abound regarding this, but none are proven. One might claim it’s entirely kinetic, but that don’t make it so.
Further, it’s not the bolt of solid metal that is formed as a byproduct of the shaped charge explosion that does the initial penetration of the steel; rather, it is the superplastic jet of material preceding the bolt that is penetrating it (And that requires precise timing – a millisecond [micro?, nano?] off either way and the superplastic jet will have either not developed sufficiently, or will have collapsed already, rendering the bolt ineffective as a penetrator).
At any rate, you seem to agree that this is not a liquid, yes?
Really? Did you read what I wrote? Because it does not look like it. Is it really that complicated?
Radial temperature profile within the sphere T(r)+T0 at t=0 is a step function, where T0 is initial temperature before heat Q was injected into the center of the sphere. It is a monotonic decreasing function: T(r1)≥T(r2) when r1≤r2 as time progresses for any t>0. (Time variable t is not explicitly indicated in this notation.). Why do we know it? Because of the 2nd Law of T and the causality principle.
What else do we know about this function? That T(r)≤Q/k for at t>0. Where k=c*m(r) and m(r) is mass of the sphere of radius r and Q is the heat injected into the center of the sphere at t=0 and c is specific heat of the sphere material. I am assuming here that the sphere is homogenous but it will also work with some modification in notation if we assume spherical (radial) symmetry that both material density and specific heat are functions of r only.
So if you inject Q amount of heat into the center of the sphere the temperature at r will never increase by more than Q/k, k=c*m(r).
Also you should read more carefully what Iris wrote. For instance this statement that you implicitly endorse is nonsense as you should know:
This individual either does not understand elementary things about heat they teach in grammar school or he thinks that the nuclear bomb is some king heating engine that will operate for ever pumping heat.
Fianally, to make things clear about my position on nukes is that I am not hostile and against the hypothesis of the nuclear device(s) use in the demolition. My inquiry and arguments are to narrow it down to what is possible which I do by rejecting claims which are impossible. I am trying to find out what is possible and what is not. There are way too many claims which are not possible out there. This includes many claims made by Khalezov which has a great supporter here in the Heinz character who, however, is slowly backing off and beginning to distance himself from Khalezov after I have managed to demolish several of the claims that Heinz supported by hand waving which is his forte.
As far as you I have one advice: try to resist sudden urges to mathematically masturbate in public. Do it first in private.
Of course you could have predicted it, you’re clearly better educated than that.
Please note in the following discussion I am not claiming there were no planes. I am only pointing out the anomalies that give credence to such claims.
A. upon impact the nose cone of the plane will collapse, doing no damage to the steel.
B. the infrastructure of the fuselage will impact the steel of the building and instantly slow down. This is the most critical fact.
C. upon the instant of the fuselage slowing down, pieces of the aircraft that are not designed to withstand a forward collision at hundreds of miles an hour (the wings and tail section) will separate from the rest of the airframe and continue their forward momentum separate from the fuselage.
D. most of that wreckage will fall to the street on the impact side
And when we first saw the images of 175 flying into the south tower, we all assumed that that is what happened. Only later did we learn that:
1) there is no live broadcast image of AA 11 hitting the north face of the north tower. Further, the single (imagine that in a city bristling with surveillance cameras) video image of that strike shows none of A thru D, above.
2) there is no live broadcast image of UA 175 contacting the south face of the south tower, so we cannot determine whether any of A thru D occurred, they only show the strike from an angle which does not show the south face. (You can argue for B til your blue, but it’s not an argument worth having)
3) all later videos (i.e. post broadcast) purporting to show UA 175 penetrating the south face of the south tower do not show any evidence of A thru D, particularly B
From that we can conclude that all post-broadcast videos showing either AA11 or UA175 contacting the faces of their respective towers are false, either because they are created from whole cloth, or they were manipulated to eliminate evidence of A thru D; however, again, that fact does not preclude the existance of planes.
Leading to the obvious question,”Just how did they manage to penetrate the towers then?”.
We can only say that, clearly, if the planes did exist, and they did entirely fly into or through the towers leaving no part of themselves on the impact side, then they – at a minimum – have had to have had “help”. They could not have done it without evidence of B, and if you have B, then you will certainly end up with C and D.
Internal evidence suggests bin Laden was trying to exculpate the Taliban regieme, he said the current leader did not allow him, very far from a denial he was so inclined.
Let us look at what bin Laden said before he was trying to protect the Taliban. Robert Fisk had interviews with Osama bin Laden in 1994 and 1997.
Fisk interviewed the father of Ziad Jarrah and was told that Ziad Jarrah went to Afghanistan for 40 days (this is when he and two friends he met in Hamburg decided to go for training so they could fight in Chechnya. the Hamburg cell were spotted as technically proficient, educated, and familiar with the West , thus ideal for 9/11) Ziad Jarrah was born in Beirut to a wealthy rather secularised Saudi family and he was studying aeronautical engineering in Germany before going to America to do pilot training. The Kamikaze pilots were educated and very often of the elite.
Even the WW2 Italians produced some very good pilots and frogmen. Please do not tell me that with the backing and planning of bin Laden’s organisation, which was as much Saudi-patriotic as religious, selected Arabs were incapable of pulling off 9/11.
The American army left Saudi Arabia in 2003 , which was same year as America invaded Iraq. The American army had been in Saudi Arabia since 1990, and to get out they had to invade Iraq first as they could hardly leave Saddam in Iraq across the border (look at a map). The Saudi Arabian family dictatorship was facing severe unrest because bin Laden was far from the only Saudi outraged by the presence of an Western infidel army in Saudi Arabia. The 9/11 attack brought everything to a head.
The Saudi monarchy styles itself Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, and yet was relying on the Americans. The 9/11 attack was intended to get America out of Saudi Arabia and it achieved its objective. The American withdrawal from Saudi Arabia came after they had invaded Iraq . It had to be that way, and I am suspect bin Laden realised it. Cheney certainly realised it. The agendas of Bin Laden, the Lobby with Wolfowitz as mouthpiece, and most importantly Cheney as the éminence grise of the administration, all converged on an Invasion of Iraq. Of course even if Cheney and his underlings never knew that there were not WMD’s in Saddam’s Iraq, they did not really care if there were or not. The extraordinary timidity and lack of grip at Tora Bora that shows quickly catching bin Laden was not actively sought. Saddam would not let WMD hunting foreigners humiliate his country, just as the Saudi Arabian population felt having foreign armed forces in their country was a terrible humiliation. Nation states as such are the actors in wars. The people who happen to be in charge of every country have to follow the dictates of realpolitik and dissimulate.
In democracies that pretend to be motivated by morality above all, the elected leaders must lie more frequently and much more convincingly. Sure! But that is very different thing to any government actually doing something against the international power-political interests of their country as they see them. Maybe invading Iraq was a mistake or just maybe it was an admittedly regrettable necessity following 9/11 having made a US military exit from Saudi Arabia imperative; an act of strategy to keep the crucial American ally of the Saudi family dictatorship secure on the throne of their country. And maybe Israel did 9/11 it for their own reasons knowing that it would force America to overthrow Saddam. However, it seems to me that despite the benefit to Israel, the 9/11 attacks had results that American Jews did nor see as in their interests and must have greatly objected to
Au contraire! The evidence refuting your assertions is the fact that Mr. Unz has finally written on it, and here you are spreading your negativity! Just as with the Gulf of Tonkin, JFK, etc. skepticism regarding the official story is growing! Turn that frown upside down, boyos!
I am glad to see you are further distancing yourself from the Khalezov scheme. Congratulations.
You are making a progress but why were you defending some of his nonsense so strongly? Why did you keep kicking and screaming when I was just trying to bring some light to you? And you were acting in bad faith including lies. Bad boy. Because of your evident character flaw I do not have much hopes about you. You will go to another web site and will make the same claims that here you were already forced to agree that theywere false.
Though I am still concerned about your ‘I don’t care’ attitude. I thought that you would care to find out how possibly it was done. I would if believed that, say, it was done with X I would like to know what was the mechanism of X. I asked you several times to propose a scenario starting with the yield and depth. But you do not care. Nevertheless you ‘know’ that it was done with a nuke buried under the tower. Is it much different from Judy Wood attitude who invokes a method that she can’t explain? How deep and how big was the nuke and what was the mechanism of heat transfer to melt the steel? No hand waving. Give me numbers.
You are grasping at straws by bringing up Baneberry. Are you suggesting that the most important demolition job ever depended on random cracks and fissures happening just in right places?
Are you proposing now that the venting gas melted the steel? The gas in the cavity within first few minutes condenses and only the ‘non-condesable’ gases which are mostly H2O and CO2 depending on type of rocks remain. The gas has temperature of circa 2000°C at pressure circa 200 atm and the temperature is dropping down to the melting point of the rocks. When the gas migrates through cracks it does not melt the rocks. If the gas vents into 1 atm environment the adiabatic expansion will reduce its temperature to circa 400°C which is just a bit hotter than the air from a typical heat gun. Are you saying you can melt steel with a heat gun?
My initial claim/thesis still stands:
This thesis is important because it puts a constraint on all the hand waving scenarios of Khalezov and others. I do not have the problem with the nuclear demolition hypothesis. But you must outline how the nuclear demolition possibly could work. How deep and how big?
A good paper with quantitative data about gases in the melt cavity and how do they travel through the cracks and fissures is this one:
OPEN FILE REPORT 01-312: The Containment of Soviet Underground Nuclear Explosions,
VitalyV.Adushkin, William Leith
“As far as you I have one advice: try to resist sudden urges to mathematically masturbate in public. Do it first in private.”
utu, you are a funny guy, too bad we have no job for a comedian.
.
Your argument seems to be a rhetorical paradox of dichotomization rather than an unfeasiblity of the real world. However, let us for the sake of argument accept that you are correct in your conclusions. It would then follow that the planners understood that they were going to make it look like a plane was doing something that many cameras filming the damage to the north tower from every angle in the immediate aftermath, would take photographic circumstantial evidence that the plane had not done. It may, or may not be technically feasible to supply the putative “help” surreptitiously , but it would be a fiendishly complicated thing and pointless unless the objective was something completely unfathomable or trivial, such as a ghastly practical joke on the public (one that put the whole operation at great risk of being unraveled).
The South Tower plane had multiple cameras from various angles predictably filming the impact. Your method for the penetration would never get past the planning stage. I can say a false flag insider conspiracy would have high people in the know who were not keen to do something so stupid and such a pointless elaboration as you propose would be objected to if put forward. I think what you propose would be only possible in event that the agency behind it was partless. By partless I mean an artificial or alien intelligence of unified will lacking the problem of dissent at the planning stage, and possessing a social manipulation super-power could decide on and have carried out such a plan, but even the most hierarchical absolute one man led human conspiracy never could. Conspiracies have members who expect a certain amount of consideration, and can either individually defect/ turn informer or collectively form a covert conspiracy within the original conspiracy to take control of it and more effectively carry out the original vision.
Like the putative impossible impact-and-fuel-caused-collapses, if the airliners’s kinetic complete penetrations of the towers was going to be known by everyone with eyes to see as impossible given the photographs, then faking it with explosives would be counterfeiting a coin that did not exist. The aforementioned objection would have been made at the planning stage by a false flag 9/11’s architect’s minions, and that is why I think the complexities of covertly using explosive for penetration and collapse of the towers pale in comparison with the human resources problem of convincing any elite level of an organisation to use them. It is like Once Upon a Time In America when James Woods’s gangster boss character floats his master plan, which turns out to be robbing the New York Federal Reserve and everyone is appalled and realises he has lost his mind.
I don’t need your “light”, thanks, and won’t waste my time any longer answering to you. And I’m not “further distancing myself from the Khalezov scheme”, I repeat all what I have said so far: Khalezov is right on the overall picture but wrong on some details. Right on the “big nuke” (i.e. the 100 kt order of magnitude is OK), right on the “deep underground” although not deep enough (I would rather say a depth comparable to the rubble chimney height, which he doesn’t consider since he thinks the cavity itself must reach the basement), and of course right on the “no plane” analysis, although the steel thickness he considers is wrong.
You have convincingly demonstrated your troll function beyond any expectation, thanks.
Brrrpp! Man that is one tasty word salad. I haven’t had a repaste like that since I accidently listened to Sarah Palin yakkety-yakking (sp?) her way across the world stage.
Let’s see, is there is anything nutritious in there? Hmmm, does it mention anything about planes not slowing down in any of the videos. No? Dang, guess I’m gonna have to grill that steak I got marinating after all.
Sean, I’ve got to give you full marks for taking ignoratio elenchi to whole nudder level. Talk about counterfeiting a coin that doesn’t exist!
See ya, wouldn’t wanna be ya!
Pointing to non uniformities of temperature distribution at some time t>0 is no brainer. The question is what hot spots and how hot they can be? The only hot spot that can melt rocks or steel is the melt zone itself. There will be no other hot spots that could melt steel. So in order to explain the molten steel we must conclude that melting occurred in the the melt zone or its immediate vicinity.
Let suppose we had a full proof evidence that some columns that were above the grounds have been molten then we must conclude that the shot point must have been close to the surface or even above the surface. In this case the nuclear scenario is out of the windows. Why, because we saw no hellfire and destruction of the tower from the bottom?
But let suppose that we have a full proof that the only molten columns were at the very bottom of the center core of the tower then we must conclude that the shot point was below at depth not larger than the radius of the melt zone. This radius is R_MeltZone=4-12m/kt^(1/3).
Now one should look at consequences of having the device detonated at the depth R_MeltZone for different kt values. How big will be the crater? What pressures and temperature one may expect at 10m, 20m, 50m above the ground? How much debris would be pushed into the air? Would these estimates be consistent with the observed evidence? We did not see any damage to the lower parts of the building when the building began to collapse from the top. I am proposing the only methodology to evaluate Kahlezov scenario.
One should try to figure out what kt value is knowing that the bomb had to be buried not deeper than the melt zone radius. But I do not see it from the bozos like Heinz, Contrarian and Iris. They all wave hands and hide behind their unshakable faith (or trollism) that it must haven been done somehow because it was done somehow and Allahu Akbar. Allahu Akbar leads to self complacency and laziness. If the mountain will not come to Muhammad, then Muhammad must go to the mountain and they will have to move their asses. But they do not and thus can’t be considered as a serious players ready for a prime time. I am the only one here who is trying to do some work for them that apparently was not done for 10 years since Khalezov came up with his scenario. Just hand waving and back patting and grunting like a bunch of baboons reinforcing the cohesion of their group. It is a cult like behavior.
Then there is the seismic data which is consistent with maximum of 30 ton (not kilo ton) explosion. Could this explosion be a mini nuke? Yes, but this would lead to entirely different scenarios than what Khalezov proposed and his followers here are preaching. Baboons have no choice but to assume the seismic data was faked. Planes apparently for them were faked too because Khalezov said so even though this tenet of faith is not necessary for Khalezov scenario. If it will be demonstrated that Khalezov scenario was inconsistent with videos of collapse we saw they would adopt Simon Shack total video fakery just to save Khalezov scenario.
“This individual either does not understand elementary things about heat they teach in grammar school or he thinks that the nuclear bomb is some king heating engine that will operate for ever pumping heat.”
…….Says the individual who believes that temperature at the outer perimeter of an underground nuclear explosion cavity is 69C and cannot boil an egg…
It is obvious that you have a problem with Physics. On second thought, I concluded that you have problems with common sense as well.
We all have seen a photo of a nuclear explosion, of Hiroshima’s, of the immense display of thermal radiation, like a ball of fire. How much time do you think it will take for such amount of energy to dissipate?
According to Utu, the expert in conservation of energy, it will take only “a few seconds” underground, because-it-happened-underground-and-I-cannot-see-it !!!!
Heinz is correct and his approximation of the outer-cavity reaching 1000C is perfectly plausible.
Below is another article, posted on the AIEA’s site. See page 7.
The baseline temperature of a granitic nuclear cavity, several weeks after the explosion, is in the range 550C to 650C.
https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:1002670
By the way, I am not a “he”.
Faking something everyone knows is impossible and so must be an illusion makes perfect sense only if you are trying to entertain people in a showbiz magician act (and set them arguing about how it was done). The airliner penetrating (and the collapse) without explosives is impossible according to you. Yet you also claim it was faked. How can this be so?
A) Either it is possible and they were trying to fake it,
or
B) It just happened that way.
A “jet”.
“The only hot spot that can melt rocks or steel is the melt zone itself. There will be no other hot spots that could melt steel.”
Why is that? Because in you blessed ignorance it did not occur to you that the temperature in the melt zone, just after the explosion, far exceeded steel’s melting point?
Why do you think physicists involved in underground nuclear experiments wait several weeks after a detonation, before starting to drill test boreholes and diving probes into these ?
Could the reason be that transient temperatures are too high and would have melted any steel drill, as well as any steel pipe shielding a probe, Sherlock?
Refer same article, page 7:
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/01/002/1002670.pdf
C) The purpose was not to “entertain” but to terrorize people, make them surrender their reason and trigger a long war campaign based on this false flag operation.
” the “egg-shaped” cavity in Khalezov’s book was NOT made “to fit to the demolition scenario” like you said, but because physical considerations (relatively small overburden pressure) impose a non-spherical shape.”
Another genius idea from Utu the “expert” physicist. The “egg-shaped” cavity is a fabrication only in Utu’s egg-shaped brain.
1- This type of cavity is a standard pattern in granitic underground nuclear explosion.
“As pressure decreases due to gases escaping in cracks and condensation resulting from the drop in temperature, the cavity’s roof collapses, and through successive screes, an almost vertical chimney is constituted, with a radius almost equal to that of the cavity, and a height 3 to 4 times the radius. A few minutes to a few hours later, the cavity roof then collapses.” At Page 7:
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/03/031/3031840.pdf
” La pression diminuant progressivement par infiltration de vapeurs dans les fractures, ainsi que par une condensation résultant de la diminution de température, la voûte fracturée de la cavité s’effondre et, par éboulis successifs, il y a formation d’une cheminée sensiblement verticale, de rayon voisin de celui de la cavité et de hauteur environ trois ou quatre fois le rayon. La chute de la voûte a lieu quelques minutes a quelques heures après l’explosion”.
2- Such “egg-shaped” cavity is exactly as represented in research reports issued after real nuclear tests in granitic terrain. Please see page 13 in this article:
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/35/095/35095014.pdf
Below is a listing of seismic event witness testimony data relevant to 9/11, given on 9/11/2001 or relatively soon thereafter. The first of these testimony data was made later, but relates to a statement made on 9/11 by an NYC official:
As New York Daily News columnist Stanley Crouch later describes, (Deputy Mayor Rudy) Washington also finds “heavy machinery to get downtown for the cleanup and got the Navy to guard against a seaborne attack. He evacuated City Hall, which shook like crazy when the second tower fell. He gathered people who could give medical help, gave the order to find lights that could be used at Ground Zero and worked out new phone communications, since power was being lost. Accompanied by city engineers, he went into the streets around the fallen towers, testing the ground to make sure it would hold when the heavy equipment came in.”
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a092501nophotographs
This datum has several nuggets within it. One, is that the Deputy Mayor describes what the seismic situation at City Hall (not far from the WTC) was like: “shook like crazy” is a pretty good description and allows placing his testimony on the Mercalli scale (about which see below)
Another nugget is that he got the Navy “to guard against a seaborne attack”. This tells us that he was aware of the general origin (launched from a ship on the Atlantic) of the Granit missile that had slammed into the Pentagon. This means that Federal officials had shared some information about the Granit with NYC officials.
Yet another nugget is that he felt the need to have city engineers test the ground to make sure it would hold when the heavy equipment came in. The most logical conclusion you can draw from this concern is that he was aware that the ground under the WTC complex was probably already compromised by something that occurred underground – like detonation of the nuclear demolition scheme. To me, this means that the Deputy Mayor knew Khalezov’s third truth.
The next testimony data are silent data, but they (a pair) speak unequivocally when taken together. The first of the pair is a segment of the video taken by the professional French photographers (Saurets) who were in NYC putting together a documentary about NYC firefighters:
Play the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA
see when the collapse is initiated, and then replay it watching the camera action, a sudden violent shaking, 12 seconds prior to collapse initiation time.
This shaking could have been attributed to someone’s bumping the Sauret camera at an inauspicious moment, but this explanation is negated by the following video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXeAPcsD3-o
which was taken by a WNBC cameraman (from a slightly different angle and from a nearby, but different location) and later pried out of the hands of NIST by a FOIA request. If you want to believe the violent shaking 12 seconds prior to collapse of WTC1 was again caused by a second camera bump, go ahead, but Occam’s razor would suggest a common seismic event as a cause.
The next testimony data comes from a report from San Jose State’s Mineta Transportation Institute (Jenkins and Edwards-Winslow, 9/2003, p. 16), downloadable at
http://transweb.sjsu.edu/mtiportal/research/publications/documents/Sept11.book.htm:
“…People inside the South Tower felt the floor vibrate as if a small earthquake were occurring.… The vibration lasted for about 30 seconds. The doors were knocked out, and a huge ball of flame created by the exploding diesel fuel from the building’s own supply tank shot from the elevator shaft and out the doors of the South Tower, consuming everything in its path. Minutes later, at 9:59 a.m., the tower collapsed…
It should be presumed that the authors of the book/report were intending to present the data correctly as they gathered them, but that some errors were made in the editorial process of preparing the book.
The obvious corrections that needed to be made are that “the people” were really in the North Tower (so the word “South” should be replaced by the word “North” throughout the quotation) and the “minutes later” reference should really be “seconds later”. Probably the vibration lasted for less than 30 seconds, but it may have seemed longer to the witnesses.
The next data come from witness testimony collected by the City of New York:
“EMT Joseph Fortis is heading across West Street, when, he says, ‘the ground started shaking like a train was coming.’ He then looks up and sees the South Tower starting to collapse.”
“Lonnie Penn, another EMT, is outside the Marriott Hotel, which is adjacent to the North Tower. He and his partner ‘felt the ground shake. You could see the towers sway and then it just came down.’”
“Bradley Mann is at the EMS staging area on Vesey Street. He says, ‘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.’”
“Battalion Chief Brian O’Flaherty is walking into the lobby of the Marriott Hotel. He says, ‘I hear a noise. Right after that noise, you could feel the building start to shudder, tremble, under your feet.’ He then hears the ‘terrible noise’ of the South Tower collapsing.”
“Fire Patrolman Paul Curran is in front of the US Customs House (WTC 6), next to the North Tower. He says, ‘all of a sudden the ground just started shaking. It felt like a train was running under my feet.… The next thing we know, we look up and the tower is collapsing.’”
“EMS Lieutenant Bradley Mann is heading toward the EMS staging area on Vesey Street. He’d felt the ground shaking prior to the first collapse. He says, ‘The ground shook again, and we heard another terrible noise and the next thing we knew the second tower was coming down.’”
Note that this is the same Lt. Mann who also gave testimony (above) about WTC2.
Apart from the City-collected data, we also have CNN producer/reporter Rose Arce who reported from the WTC site at 10.30 AM EST how the North Tower has collapsed, she mentioned that the top of the Tower before its collapse “suddenly started to shake”.
The most revealing personal testimony (apart from the Deputy Mayor’s) is probably the well-known testimony of Lt. Richard Smiouskas:
“…All of a sudden there was this groaning sound like a roar, grrrr. The ground started to shake…. It
looked like an earthquake. The ground was shaking. I fell to the floor. My camera bag opened up. The cameras went skidding across the floor. The windows started exploding in…. [pp. 8-9]
…I didn’t know exactly what was going on outside. I’m thinking maybe the building snapped in half. I’m thinking maybe a bomb blew up. I’m thinking it could have been a nuclear….” [p. 9]
The page references are to a transcript of his testimony available at
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110210.PDF
Lt. Smiouskas gave this testimony in response to questions propounded by two NYFD officials on Nov. 27, 2001. To understand fully his testimony, you should know that he was an official photographer for the NYFD and had been at FDNY headquarters on 9/11/2001 doing paperwork when he heard a beep summoning him to drive to Ground Zero with his cameras and film. One should presume he was a well-trained observer. I would urge interested parties to download the transcript and read it. It’s not that long.
The most startling comment is about his guess about “nuclear” in the second quotation above. What is the most reasonable explanation about why this thought came to his mind? My guess is that he had overheard the word used by one or more of his superiors that day. They, like the Deputy Mayor, would have more access to what was really going on than he normally would.
To put these data about 9/11 seismic events into a usable form requires making use of some additional data. The first of these Is the Mercalli scale. This is a measure defined over a hundred years ago (and subsequently refined) intended to measure the intensity of a seismic event in terms of people’s sensing of seismic effects and their effects on the environment including the surface of the Earth. Articulations of the Mercalli scale can be found in many places, but a good one (cited by Khalezov and corrected by me) is
http://crack.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/mercalli.html.
The presumed purpose of the Mercalli scale is to allow us to look at events unobserved mechanically or events that occurred before seismometers were invented and make reasonable guesses about the energy of the events.
A second set of data required is an understanding of the Richter scale, which measures the energy of a seismic event. Therefore, unlike the Mercalli scale, it is a wholly objective measure. Articulations of the Richter scale can be found in many places, but a good one (cited by Khalezov and corrected by me) is
http://crack.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/magnitude.html.
In his analysis, Khalezov makes a general comparison of the criteria specified in the description of the Mercalli scale with the witness testimony and attempts to place the aggregated witness testimony on the Richter scale and thereby infers the 9/11 events to be between 5.5 and 6.0 on the Richter scale.
Personally, having lived in a seismically active area for many years (including being dumped out of my bed in the wee hours by what I think was finally decided to be a 6.7) I am inclined to agree with his assessment.
The reader is invited to make his own assessment based upon the cited tables presented below.
Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale
I. People do not feel any Earth movement.
II. A few people might notice movement if they are at rest and/or on the upper floors of tall buildings.
III. Many people indoors feel movement. Hanging objects swing back and forth. People outdoors might not realize that an earthquake is occurring.
IV. Most people indoors feel movement. Hanging objects swing. Dishes, windows, and doors rattle. The earthquake feels like a heavy truck hitting the walls. A few people outdoors may feel movement. Parked cars rock.
V. Almost everyone feels movement. Sleeping people are awakened. Doors swing open or close. Dishes are broken. Pictures on the wall move. Small objects move or are turned over. Trees might shake. Liquids might spill out of open containers.
VI. Everyone feels movement. People have trouble walking. Objects fall from shelves. Pictures fall off walls. Furniture moves. Plaster in walls might crack. Trees and bushes shake. Damage is slight in poorly built buildings. No structural damage.
VII. People have difficulty standing. Drivers feel their cars shaking. Some furniture breaks. Loose bricks fall from buildings. Damage is slight to moderate in well-built buildings; considerable in poorly built buildings.
VIII. Drivers have trouble steering. Houses that are not bolted down might shift on their foundations. Tall structures such as towers and chimneys might twist and fall. Well-built buildings suffer slight damage. Poorly built structures suffer severe damage. Tree branches break. Hillsides might crack if the ground is wet. Water levels in wells might change.
IX. Well-built buildings suffer considerable damage. Houses that are not bolted down move off their foundations. Some underground pipes are broken. The ground cracks. Reservoirs suffer serious damage.
X. Most buildings and their foundations are destroyed. Some bridges are destroyed. Dams are seriously damaged. Large landslides occur. Water is thrown on the banks of canals, rivers, lakes. The ground cracks in large areas. Railroad tracks are bent slightly.
XI. Most buildings collapse. Some bridges are destroyed. Large cracks appear in the ground. Underground pipelines are destroyed. Railroad tracks are badly bent.
XII. Almost everything is destroyed. Objects are thrown into the air. The ground moves in waves or ripples. Large amounts of rock may move.
Richter Scale Tables
Richter Earthquake
Magnitudes Effects
Less than 3.5 Generally not felt, but recorded.
3.5-5.4 Often felt, but rarely causes damage.
Under 6.0 At most slight damage to well-designed buildings.
Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings
over small regions.
6.1-6.9 Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 kilometers
across where people live.
7.0-7.9 Major earthquake. Can cause serious damage over larger areas.
8 or greater Great earthquake. Can cause serious damage in areas several
hundred kilometers across.
Richter TNT for Seismic Example
Magnitude Energy Yield (approximate)
-1.5 6 ounces Breaking a rock on a lab table
1.0 30 pounds Large Blast at a Construction Site
1.5 320 pounds
2.0 1 ton Large Quarry or Mine Blast
2.5 4.6 tons
3.0 29 tons
3.5 73 tons
4.0 1,000 tons Small Nuclear Weapon
4.5 5,100 tons Average Tornado (total energy)
5.0 32,000 tons
5.5 80,000 tons Little Skull Mtn., NV Quake, 1992
6.0 1 million tons Double Spring Flat, NV Quake, 1994
6.5 5 million tons Northridge, CA Quake, 1994
7.0 32 million tons Hyogo-Ken Nanbu, Japan Quake, 1995; Largest Thermonuclear Weapon
7.5 160 million tons Landers, CA Quake, 1992
8.0 1 billion tons San Francisco, CA Quake, 1906
8.5 5 billion tons Anchorage, AK Quake, 1964
9.0 32 billion tons Chilean Quake, 1960
10.0 1 trillion tons (San-Andreas type fault circling Earth)
12.0 160 trillion tons (Fault Earth in half through center,
OR Earth’s daily receipt of solar energy)
Please note that Mercalli levels are normally specified using Roman numerals and Richter levels are specified with Arabic numerals. Apparently unaware of this, Khalezov mistakenly uses Arabic numerals for both and conflates them as a result. [My personal opinion of his conclusions about Richter equivalences of the witness data is that he did a good job. This is not an exact science.] There are many equivalence “tables” available on the Internet, but uses them at your peril. Mercalli is mostly subjective; Richter is objective.
The reader is invited to look over the witness data, correlate with data with Mercalli, and the do his own conversion to Richter. All the table data needed has been supplied. Utu (Post #2223) was kind enough to note that a 150kton device in 1986 resulted in a 5.6 Richter which correlates pretty closely with Khalezov. Utu was even kind enough to supply some Mercalli-type data at two different locations for it. Thank you, Utu.
Hi J2; Lovely to see you around. What have you been up to?
That maybe makes sense for a foreign power, but not for Bush and the people around him. The US President is the commander in Chief of America’s armed forces. Bush could have gone to war on any little pretext . He had the power already, he did not need anything like 9/11 to squash little ME countries. In the Cuba crisis JFK went to the of brink nuclear war without any new Pearl Harbour. Bush had that power too.
Thank you, Contrarian, for the research and the great comment. It is a privilege to read you.
In particular, the demonstration you made with two separate videos recording the seismic shock (nuclear explosion) followed exactly 12 seconds later with the collapse of the tower (collapse of the nuclear cavity roof) is a smoking gun of underground nuclear explosion.
Such pattern is described in the most official articles about nuclear experimentations:
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2556396
I agree with your post, except that I would not take umbrage at Utu’s calling you “he”. Before our language got mangled by accessions made to the PC crowd, i.e., when we spoke “King’s English”. if a human, animal, or plant that could be said to have a sex was of unknown sex, the rule for pronoun use was fairly simple: Use masculine unless the noun was a country or a ship. “It” would apply to nouns that were asexual or actual sex was irrelevant. If the sex was known use pronouns of the appropriate gender.
Apart from that, Utu seems not only physics-challenged but rude.
If I may make a slightly off-post remark, I had made the inference that you were a woman — a very astute and articulate one. I have been too chicken to use a pronoun in addressing you or talking about you because to use “she” if you really were a “he” would have been a very serious insult to an Anglophone.
Straying even further off-post, your citation to that French paper made me realize how enduring the heat from an underground nuke is (I knew they took a long time to cool down, but the paper puts some real numbers on it) and how easy physics French is too. I have a number of math books in French, but all my physics books are in English.
To get completely off-post, I should let Utu know that Khalezov’s book is over 1000 pages long and has known errors in it. There is no sign that the book was professionally edited, so errors are the norm. None of the errors I’ve found are consequential. Aside from pictures and copies of web pages etc., there are really two things Khalezov states as true per his own personal knowledge: (1) The twin towers were both equipped with nuclear demolition schema, and (2) He and the mastermind (named in the book) of the whole 9/11 production were well acquainted with each other (friends for a time) and the mastermind celebrated his 9/11 success at a celebratory breakfast to which Khalezov was invited and attended.
A good part of Khalezov’s book is devoted to a very detailed look at the 9/11 timeline and to the many “truck bombings” that led up to 9/11.
The nuclear device was described to him as having 150 kiloton yield, but nothing would preclude it being smaller if the WTC architects and engineers decided a smaller yield would suffice. Larger would be a problem because the US would honor the treaty limiting size.
As far as the planes/no planes question is concerned, Khalezov decided “no planes” based on hardness considerations only. Personally, I consider this argument flawed. The more real question is whether planes could penetrate the steel façade and that to me is a question of what is meant by “penetrate”. If I put myself into the position of being the mastermind I would decide to use planes only if I had rock-solid confidence in remote control guidance. Simulated planes and some pre-planted fuel would work wonders without the risk of having the pilot crash into the wrong building.
Finally, have you noticed that no one has jumped up to defend voodoo chemistry?
Regarding the discussion about Khalezov. I roughly agree with @utu about the physics but I dont think Khalezov is other than sincere. Instead I think he was set up regarding the precise nature of the demolitions. Khalezov mentions that applications within the realm of the plowshare project included such demolitions.
The first stage in setting up Khalezov was obviously done by the agent who cultivated a friendly relation with Khalezov in Thailand. He enquired whether K remembered the emergency demolition plan for wtc and K confirmed his familiarity with it.
The agents identity and his claim to be from Mossad may have been a lie but he obviously had foreknowledge about 9/11and made sure in advance that K would watch TV on 9/11.
Utu’s critique of Khalezovs reasoning is correct in my view. However let me explain how I think K went there.
1) At the early stage when K began thinking about it there were claims about everything having been pulverised. Not even mm-sized pieces of human tissue. That eventually turned out to be completely untrue. But from Ks point of view that set him thinking about his rules-of-thumb knowledge relating to underground nuclear explosions in granite and he made an ad hoc argument trying to extrapolate to the case of the towers.
He is no physicist and quite humble about it and qualitatively it doesnt seem like such a bad idea.
But the initial premise about everything being pulverised including the steel was wrong!
Who set such a rumour in motion?
I suggest that was another part of the setting up of Khalezov. And the dupe or shill Judy Wood hooked on to the same false premise.
Since the agent who ‘coached’ him in Thailand had foreknowledge about 9/11, that agent presumably was an insider to the plot and he or his colleagues knew by what means wtc would be brought down.
The cancer incidence for wtc groundworkers may be used to estimate that there were on average several hundred times more than normal radioactive background if the cancer is attributed to radiation. Since there were very severe cases of cancer initially the levels were much higher in the beginning. So from that point of view there is evidence for some kind of nuclear bombs. David E Hoffman in Foreign Policy wrote three articles about the mini nuclear bomb W54 from around 1960 some time. Those bombs around a thousand of them had begun to age, to be contaminated with isotopes which lessened the efficiency.
The articles were titled ‘the little bombs that got away’ but being an official elite journal he didnt use any strong accusations. The people at Veterans Today who have intel connections went much further, claiming that the leading figures in the Us had given them to Israel.
Or at least let 350 of them disappear. So that may be a candidate for what kind of bombs were used at 9/11. The magnitude for such a bomb in mint condition may be set to 0.01 to 1 kt according to one source. According to another the range was from 1 ton to 16 tons.
If they were in weakened condition they might just give off some radiation without much mechanical energy. Fizzle.
Assuming there was no cost associated with a batch of them they would be capable of producing neutron radiation to weaken the steel much cheaper than with a large quantity of cutter charges.
There has been speculation that a tank of some chemical could have been used for enhancing a primary neutron source producing secondary generations of neutrons.
One suggested item for that purpose was a tank for refrigeration containing was it halons or something? I just note that in passing without having any opinion about it.
I think the idea was to get a stronger and also significantly directed neutron flow upwards within the core to weaken it as much as possible. Neutron radiation alters the composition of elements which obviously has a bearing on the material strength.
Anyway I note that this type of scheme would be what Khalezov deemed to be disinfo intended for an intermediate level of public, the patricians. But not the real truth.
Since my argument is that he was set up, we see how he came to unwittingly direct our attention away from the alternative with mininukes.
I have no doubt that conventional cutter charges were employed at 9/11. But the plotters could presumably cut down the costs significantly by using nukes if they could get away with it.
There is a lot of valuable insight in Khalezovs book and I recommend him.
He is so far the only researcher who has been able to connect the dotted lines in the wider context.
I didn’t realise Khalezov knew the mastermind of 9/11 🙁 🙁
Urghhh… How can one even bear being in the same room as such a person.. who even “celebrated” his 9/11″success …
I thought Khalezov had made educated deductions thanks to a previous background in the nuclear field. I haven’t found the time to even browse his book, but your comments were so interesting and intriguing that I felt the need to confirm a few things.
Projects to use nuclear explosions for civilian applications were absolutely rife in the 50’s/60’s. The Soviet Union had carried as many as an impressive 122 such detonations, for excavations, oil stimulation, etc…
http://scienceandglobalsecurity.org/archive/sgs07nordyke.pdf
The US were doing the same, although they seem to have stopped earlier because of a more powerful public opinion and concerns with radioactivity. It was the fad of the day, and it is completely plausible that the WTC would have been built with embedded “explosion chambers”.
Your observation about the Deputy Mayor revealing his inside knowledge by his checking of the soundness of the roads is very relevant.
The condition of the ground after a nuclear explosion is mostly predicted with mathematical models and “analyse dimensionelle”. This requires powerful computing capabilities that engineers did not have when the towers were designed. So the perpetrator of 9/11 would have had many uncertainties as per the outcome.
I know you don’t concur, but one other thing is a smoking gun, and that is the soft aluminium wings allegedly cutting through the much thicker steel structure. As a mathematician, empirical laws pertaining to hardness probably don’t much appeal to you. But to a mechanical engineer, this fraud shocking and unbelievable. I posted
Regarding voodoo chemistry, well, don’t expect much reactions: the gracious elves populating this thread are not stupid. They have other ways to overcome uncomfortable truth, posting a flurry of comments to relegate a dissident view being one of their much used tricks.
Interesting.
(1) Neutrons. 20 cm of steel absorbs 94% of neutrons so it is rather hard to imagine that neutrons could travel along the steel columned and do any damage beyond 20cm. I looked up about neutron damage to steel and it seems that tensile strengths actually increases with a rather high dose of 10^22 neutrons per square cm. I would toss out the idea about neutrons playing any role.
(2) Obviously we will never know what lead Khalezov to going public with his theory which is damaging to Israel and the US, though Khalezov stresses the US role much more. His theory is very elaborate (involving Granite missiles from Kursk). His claim that he knew Mike Harari is interesting. Is it believable? Was he put into it by Harari as you seem to speculate? To what purpose? Why did Khalezov wait that long if he supposedly he met Harari day after 9/11 and learned from him something about how it was done? Because life was good and business was good? What was his business? Weapon trade with Victor Bout? People like Bout certainly run into all kinds of semi rouge former agents who are weapon dealers from Mossad, CIA and FSB. But apparently Bout pissed off somebody and lost protection. I speculate that the (self) activation of Khalezov had something to do with Victor Bout being held in jail in Thailand and fighting extradition to the US. That’s when Khalezov went public and had very impressive professionally done 4h long infomercial. It was not cheap. Somebody had to pay for it.
(3) Khalezon indeed has a good story. One could make a great movie out of it.
(4). I haven’t thought much about mini nukes but I am not prejudiced against them. The 2.1 and 2.3 seismic shocks registered during tower collapses would be consistent with up 30 ton (not kiloton) explosions. As you say they made nukes as low as 10 tons TNT yields. However I do not know what would be the role of the mini nukes? I can see only one possibility: to cut the center core down and initiate sinking of it. But I agree with you that traditional cutting charges would still have to be used at higher floors.
It was not the outer perimeter of cavity (presumably you meant the melt zone) but 100m away form the shot point for 150kt device in granite and it was not absolute temperature but the increment ∆t. So if the initial temperature was 20*C then the detonation would never increased the temperature at 100m to above 20+∆t=89°C. And at 200m the increment would be 8 times smaller.
This calculation hinges on the validity of the assumption (which is commonly believed) that 1kt=10^12 cal. And the specific heat of granite and density of it need to be used. Plus obviously it assumes that granite in 200m sphere is homogenous.
By pointing to some occurrence of fissure of crack through which gas can escape and temporarily and locally increase temperature of some region by more does not invalidate this argument. The gas escaping through crack does not have sufficient heat capacity regardless of its temperature to melt rocks. Remember that I am arguing that you can’t melt steel columns unless they are in contact with the melt zone. That was my argument for Heinzy Schwanzy sake.
I agree with that. I don’t think that “Bush did it” or that “the American government did it” – just as Khalezov, or as Ron Unz, by the way. Bush was just a “useful idiot” whose election was necessary for the (massively foreign) perpetrators in order to perform their false-flag attack.
Actually, in the 1960s underground nuclear explosions were even considered as a possible way to produce “artificial geothermal energy”. I can’t locate the paper where I’ve read that but it’s not a joke.
“What have you been up to?”
Discussing Holocaust and darwinism with believers and trolls. I see you have done very good progress again. I have not followed this thread from the beginning, but one my students, a weapon expert, was all the time in the opinion that it is a nuclear weapon. But we did not think of an underground explosion, we thought of a nuclear bunker blaster, a mininuke, but it would have given radiation which was told not to be there. This theory of an underground nuclear explosion sounds quite good.
It looks like the aerial photos do not indicate very high surface temperatures and only for two weeks
https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html
while testimonies talk about molten steel for a much longer times. It agrees with a scenario of one really hot spot rather deep underground and some cracks, vents and metal bars heating the other hot spots for two weeks or so.
The molten steel would have been around a tunnel leading to the cavity from the basement after the cavity roof fell down. Not in the cavity itself. The cavity and the tunnel would have been very hot for a very long time as they could not much cool through the stone, and steel would melt if the tunnel passed or went close to steel structures. Hot steel would conduct heat further to other hot spots, which also would not cool fast, except for those close to the surface, which cooled in two weeks.
It may be a better theory than the thermite one, as the amount of thermite calculated in the Danish paper seemed too high.
Within 45 seconds of second hit Fox News anchor Jon Scott solved 9/11.
This modern day Sherlock Holmes has never been given the credit he truly deserves.
Really?
Khalezov’s theories when taken in whole read like something from a low-brow adventure novel, as I’ve shown above with a direct quote from Khalezov himself:
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2538688
It goes something like this:
Psst. The terrorists acquired Granit missiles from the sunken submarine Kursk. One of these hit the Pentagon but failed to detonate. Nevertheless, its distinctive remains convinced our leaders that two more of the Granits had smashed into the WTC earlier, and were poised to explode real soon now. To neutralize these powerful nukes before they exploded, other nukes hidden in the basements of the towers were detonated preemptively to prevent the Granits from exploding and destroying NYC, and that’s how the WTC was destroyed, but the Big Apple itself was saved.
It’s all cheesy pulp fiction of extraordinarily low quality — Paperback Writer indeed! — but utu and Heinz and others have created a mountain of noise arguing about what went on in the basements of the towers according to Khalezov, when in reality we don’t have any kind of comprehensive photographic record or account — other than many reports of explosions — and scant physical evidence of what really happened near the main foundations of the twins while they came down.
Neither BPAT, FEMA, nor NIST had power of subpoena.
Giuliani’s minions were able to keep America’s Columbos out of Ground Zero for weeks on end even while work crews were hauling away evidence, and the TV dick was tied up in red tape trying to get a search warrant — to put it into boob tube terms for easier consumption by any casually curious onlookers.
More seriously, please recall from my earlier comments here that BPAT never was able to inspect any of the steel from the core columns before that material was removed from the scene of the crime, shipped out to China, or destroyed.
In the high res overhead photo from NOAA I’ve posted above, any number of the core columns are visible scattered about, but none show much damage, certainly nothing like what one would expect from any kind of nuclear explosion. Since these columns are at the top of the debris heaps, it is reasonable to assume that they came from near the tops of the buildings, and also to deduce that the core columns from near the foundations are near the bottoms of the debris heaps, and thus not visible in the overhead photos.
So too in the available videos of the collapse sequences, growing columns of dust and smoke effectively obscured the lower half of the buildings. We can’t see what was happening in those critical main support areas of these massive structures while the upper portions of the towers were being ripped apart by a downward-moving spiral of small but very powerful explosions that seemed to turn the buildings into cascading fountains of dust and debris spilling out far beyond the respective footprints of each tower.
Despite these shortcomings – no physical evidence or photographic record of critical support structures – the men in the cave are easily able to tell what is going on merely by correctly interpreting the shadows on the wall.
Exactly, America’s imperial hegemony can never be in retreat. If we withdrawal our military from one country it is a moral imperative that we invade another country.
Saddam’s Iraq had been wrecked by war and weakened by our sanctions on their country. They were in no position to project their power abroad. Saddam really didn’t even have much control over the northern part of his country.
But the motivation for the 9/11 attacks was not to pull our troops out of Saudi Arabia. It was to launch a “war on terror” against whatever nation we so desired. It was a permission slip the neo-cons gave themselves to willy-nilly start wars at their pleasure. We have a lawless foreign policy now and if any other country engaged in such outrages they would reliably be condemned as war crimes.
Au contraire, it is a privilege to see your fine mind at work. You picked up the “smoking gun” aspect of the camera shakes almost before I finished publishing my post. Is it any wonder that NIST kept the second video locked up until a FOIA suit forced its disclosure?
The camera shake info gives us a measure of how long it took for the cavity cap collapse to occur after detonation. Perhaps I should ask our plasma thermodynamics expert, Utu, to do the calculations for us and do the relatively simple calculation to determine when the gravity driven force (weight of tower plus granite overburden) expressed as a downward pressure on the egg’s cap exceeds the cooling plasma’s upward pressure. A reasonable assumption would have to be made about the height of the overburden and the area of the cap (to do the force to pressure conversion), but these could even be variable parameters for “reasonable case” analysis. [Tensile strength of granite is probably well known.] This would allow Utu to do a major step in the reverse engineering of the underground nuke demolition scheme. He did ask Heinz in one post to design the entire scheme, a lot harder job than what I’m suggesting Utu to undertake.
As a second comment on your fine mind: Do you realize that you are the only poster here who picked up on my comment (in my early post #1434) where I expressed the opinion that the primary beneficiary under a “Cui bono?” interrogation asked AFTER the fact is the surveillance state (which has led to massive 1984-like surveillance) coupled with police state measures like the USA Patriot Act.
If you don’t mind a little digression, one of things I’m very curious about is what was the operational status of Russia’s overhead capability in Sept. 2001. Putting this curiosity into context: Did Putin have the ability on 9/11/2001 to look at recce pictures or video and see just what ship launched the Pentagon’s Granit and where it was or where it went after the launch was completed. There’s no serious question in my mind that the USSR had bird coverage that was on a par with USA’s and I know we could watch the oceans very well. The issue is what did Gorbachev and Yeltsin do to that capability and what did Putin do to it after Yeltsin left? Yeltsin certainly let the Russian navy go to hell; my Kursk studies made that clear. I’m sure you understand why I’m curious about this.
@Contrarian III
Low quality pulp fiction, in particular Janes timely and pedagogical article on 9/10, yet still too complicated for the mainstream observers to handle.
There are too many details which are in agreement with the scenario of an approaching and hitting nuclear missile. Like K assumed it was probably identified on the radar already since this was an old type. Giving a few minutes margin to act.
And no matter what demolition technique would be used it made sense after the attack in 1993 to be ready for something worse. You may have seen that K brings up many suspicious cases of covert use of mininukes. He includes the wtc attack from 1993, suggesting it was a mininuke hid in a sewer. Wrong or right in that particular case, the analysts knew what might happen next time.
K is alone in having covered and put into context that important sequence of events
But when I said Khalezov was alone in showing the wider context I also included his realistic understanding of freeemasonry’s role in the world. Mostly omitted by other observers.
@utu
The neutrons travel within some solid angle and would presumably hit the core diagonally.
Thus the absorptionlength of the neutrons inside (or outside the core columns) is of interest to calculate how far up the core from any given bomb the neutrons would be of use.
If the idea about the boosted radiation are relevant the geometry would become more directed. I remember I once looked up the same info about neutronirridiated steel as you did and didnt find it promising, but the VT people have come back to that in particular the idea to boost the radiation so I felt it might be worth bringing up. Maybe that was more about heating than elemental transformations..But some of the VT’s also have said they must spread 40% disinfo for their own safety.
One obvious motive for K would be for the protection of Russia against being accused for having attacked the US. But he was encouraged by other commenters before he was interviewed. He doesnt seem to have much economical support at all.
So it may be his own sympathies for Russia that made him stick out his neck.
And ‘Hariri’ – he doesnt look at all like the real Hariri and his behaviour is seemingly typical for someone used to recruiting agents. Playing on emotions, letting K feel like he was his son. Flattering him, reminding him of something where K has some precious inside info(about the 150kt demolition plan)
I wonder what would happen if Ks scheme would be, hypothetically speaking, carried out.
I think the core would tip over and most of the building would remain outside the underground chimney. Even with a much bigger charge and deeper placement, I suspect it still wouldnt work since it takes quite some time before the pressure decreases to allow for the collapse. The idea of nuclear demolition presumably has the prerequisite of cutter charges for the steel. But it looks like a neat idea to just disappear a highrise building and cover the ground with new concrete. Done!
Forget about neutrons. And cut down on VT.
Minor comments about this nuclear explosive idea.
1) 911Truthers found thermite, so there should be thermite. If there was also thermite, a nuclear explosion was used only to take off the central core, not more. That means a mininuke.
2) It is claimed that a building leaned and then straightened. You cannot do that with nuclear. It must be timed explosives, so nuclear could only take the main core. Means mininuke.
3) Mininukes are not old, so not preinstalled long ago. Dropped from the lift tunnel, hit ground, go deep to rock with conventional explosives, mininuke explodes deep in the ground, a weapon to destroy bunkers made to survive a nuclear explosion above, a cavity is formed, the roof collapses, the main core falls, later the building floors pancake. Only the external walls are taken down by thermite.
4) In Europe there always was a threat of Soviet invasion, so bridges and important buildings may well have explosives installed long ago, but Americans never much feared an invasion from Canada or Mexico, so they probably did not do it.
A combined solution: a mininuke for the core, gravitation collapse of floors and thermite to the outside core. Why not?
There is a much more comprehensive record of IR thermography pictures here:
http://hpub.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/GroundZeroHeat2008_07_10.pdf
It’s a remarkable work by Andrea Dreger, who seems to be a chemist or an engineer. You will find lots of IR thermography pictures in it, and especially on page 41 you will see 3 images for September 16, October 18 and… February 12, 2002. You can still find directly these images here:
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/911/911-maps.html
The last one (5 months after the destruction!) only gives one very small “hot spot”, without any temperature scale, but the very fact that there is still “something” out of the background noise tells a lot and is totally consistent with the extremely useful paper Iris gave us to read recently and that I recall here:
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/03/031/3031840.pdf
You must keep in mind that IR thermography looks at surface temperatures only, and that the zero box was really deep underground, around 3 or 4 cavity radii if the device was designed in such a way that only the top of the chimney reached the surface. So having only this “tiny hotspot” 5 months later is actually entirely consistent with temperatures over 500°C in granite 6 months after the shot as shown in fig. I and II of the Lavollee CEA paper cited by Iris.
Trolling is his full-time job, I doubt he has any time for comedy (which he is not very good at anyway).
Saddam was the US’s blue eyed boy untill he invaded Kuwait. It is difficult to believe that the US got Saddam to invade Kuwait so they could kick him out, but not invade Iraq and so have to keep an American Army in Saudi Arabia (causing the Saudi regieme to be discredited in the eyes of their population).. Then more than a decade later America is supposed to have staged 9/11, so they could invade Iraq and withdraw from Saudi Arabia (both happened in 2003–proof of the connection in my opinion).
Foreign policy expert commentator (and co -author with Mearsheimer of The Israel Lobby), Stephen Walt on why Saddam thought he could get away with invading Kuwait, which was the origin of the destabilization of the Middle East. He is discussing April Glaspie the US Ambassador to Iraq and the conversation she had with Saddam just before he actually invaded Kuwait
You don’t seem to be well attuned to the machinations of the Deep State and the MIC. The Mujahideen were our allies in the 1980s as well when we were using them to fight the Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Then they became our enemy after 9/11. Then Saddam Hussein and Iraq became our enemy too. Then after Saddam Hussein it was Muqtada al Sadr and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. And now it is the secular leaders who are our enemies(Muammar Gaddafi and Bashar al-Assad), while fundamentalist groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda are our allies in these countries. You see the point is to sow discord, strife and chaos in these Muslim countries to weaken and enervate them. The method by which you might want to accomplish this through may differ from country to country, but that is the strategy. George Orwell can explain the process as well,
“Since about that time, war had been literally continuous, though strictly speaking it had not always been the same war[War on Terror]…Oceania had been at war with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge, which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened[al-Qaeda is on Our Side in Syria]. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil[Assad, Putin], and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.”
George Orwell, 1984
You think that understanding a domestic system of politics or cabals in a country lets you predict the behavior of that country. And, as every country will get along fine with everyone else in the style of the Like to Teach the World to Sing Coca Cola ad, if there is war among nations that must be because the domestic political state and military-industrial entities in control of certain aggressor countries are malign. Nonsense,
I happen to think that Professor Mearshiemer is right and it does not really matter what the people running the country would like to do, they have to do whatever it takes to maintain the power of the country, or they are replaced. Trump mounted a hostile takeover of the Republican party then the political and state establishment because the American people had correctly understood that US power was in rapid decline relative to China.
The US can invade countries like Iraq or cause them to descend into civil war with a flick of its eyebrow. If 9/11 was a false flag it was not by the American government which had no need.
Yes, Trump is the first leader of Oceana. Trump and his supporters realised that China had always been at war with the West, and we have to start fighting back . The US Deep State can do what it wants only while America has the most powerful economy in the world. The Deep State is slowly but surely being co-opted by Trump because only Trump is pursuing a policy of preventing the China from becoming the most powerful country in the world, by any mean necessary–including a rapprochement with Russia. Some parts of the Deep State associated with the old consensuses: Middle East (there must be a Palestinian state) Russia (Putin is a target for regieme change) and China (its growth is no threat to the US primacy) are making common cause with the Democrats and their open-borders for Trade and maybe people economists (often Jewish) but they are losing influence.
It may have escaped your attention, but Trump said explosives were used in the 9/11 attack and later while still campaigning Trump said he was going to get to the bottom of who was really responsible for 9/11. Now, unless Trump has been replaced with a Deep State clone, he is living proof that the US Deep State was not involved with 9/11, except by their silly NSA-CIA-FBI turf wars and prosecutors like Patrick Fitzgerald’s over-emphasis on headline-grabbing investigations into the Mafia rather that Jersey City Jihadists. The real action is not in the Middle East shitholes with youth bulges that no one cares about except the Israel Lobby that Trump will use to run interference against liberal Jews, the battle is going to be against China.
Ron Unz’s article argues that Israel and the Mossad were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. There was Zionist control over the attacks, the narrative and the investigations. So this is likely the case. It doesn’t preclude smaller rouge elements in our government from being complicit though.
But the issue is the that 9/11 attacks were a false flag terror attack. The physical and forensic evidence from the collapse of the towers is enough to satisfy this conclusion. We don’t really need to speculate on motives once this is determined.
Maybe the battle will be with China at a future date. Now, however, the Deep State’s hostility is towards Syria and Russia. The “Russia hacked the election” nonsense, which has been going on for over two years now, is entirely a fake news story with nothing behind it. If the Deep State were really hostile to China this would come through in fake news about China, but it doesn’t. The current propaganda directed at the American people concerns Syria and Russia.
My reading of Gulf War and role of April Glaspie is different. I like the idea that Saddam Hussein was mislead on purpose to invade Kuwait, however I do not think it was Team A to which GHW Bush belonged. I also like to believe that GHW Bush and his administration was not ready to take advantage of it and go all the way. Actually I like to believe that Bush indeed bought into the ideal of the end of the Cold War narrative of reducing military spending, base closures and peace dividends and he believed that Saddam Hussein action was a sabotage that he initially wanted to ignore but was forced to act partly by the pressure from Margret Thatcher who apparently had a ‘better’ understanding of historical wisdom of the moment. So GHW Bush did what it took by arranging Arab coalition and was very upset when he had to pay $600 million to Israel so it would not undermine this coalition by acting unilaterally against Iraq. And then despite of pressures he did not go to Bagdad but did exactly what the international mandate allowed him to do. For this he was never forgiven by the Team B. But he made it even worse by standing up to Yitzhak Shamir in 1991 thinking that his exceptionally high approval ratings after the war gave him a mandate to challenge Israel. However he chickened out (there were assassination threats) and after concerted onslaught by media his chances for reelection were reduced to zero. Team B could not risk a chance of him being a 2nd term president.
Team A to which GHW Bush belonged to some extent was espousing goals and ideas expressed in Fukuyama’s 1989 essay “The End of History?” which would lead to shrinking military expenditure and reduction of American engagements abroad. This was still globalism but under a softer and evenhanded guidance. Israel and Zionism were to be secondary to Globalism.
Team B which was mostly comprised of Zionists saw globalism through a different lens, i.e, Israel was its focal point. They would say yes to American Globalism but Israel and its goals were to be taken care of first. In February 1992 Samuel P. Huntington gave lecture at the American Enterprise Institute that was the Team B’s response to Fukuyama. It was call to war against Islam which really meant wars for Israel in the Middle East. Middle East was to be rearranged and refurbished to the liking of Israel’s designers. American Empire resources and energy were to be spent in the Middle East.
Team B has managed to remove GHW Bush but his replacement the Clinton administration was still run by Team B (lukewarm to Zionism globalism of Brzezinski). They were willing to get engaged in wars for empire like in Yugoslavia but not for Israel. It was GW Bush who gave the Team B almost everything they wanted. Their trump card was 9/11.
The 9/11 attacks were a false flag terror attack, or by Osama bin Laden, or by bin Laden with the US intelligence turning a bind eye and the US air force standing down, or some thing else. Personally I think 9/11 showed up the agencies and armed forces of the US as rather pathetic, but I have a suspicious mind and rarely presume officials are so selfless as to obey secret orders that make them look stupid and weak minded and force them carry the can for a debacle. No US official was in on an Israeli false false flag 9/11.
Ron Unz thinks Sharon may have ordered it to end Saddam’s support for a suicide bombing that were campaign that was leading many Israeli Jews to think about leaving the country. I think Sharon was ruthless and decisive enough, but the decision to cut Palestinian suicide bombers had to do with something a lot more direct and effective that choking off the Palestinians logistic support. For all planners knew Saddam might well have let weapons inspectors into Iraq, and an invasion would not have happened. As a way of ending the suicide bombing, 9/11 false flag was hare brained. Sharon would have have to have been suffering from undiagnosed Alzheimer’s disease to try something so elaborate and dangerous without any reliable attainment of the objective at the end result.
The main weapon of the Palestinian suicide bombing was people who could cross into Jewish Israeli areas, and like the straightforward military man he was, Sharon just cut them off from getting to to their targets. This was less risky but pretty effective and it had the advantage that those ordered to do it would not be at risk. I mean the art student on a false flag 9/11 could have ended up in the basement of the FBI building having a Marathon Man type chat, or maybe released from jail to a swamp in Virginia and some fun and games with electric shocks. The counter intelligence services might or more likely might not obey orders to release people they thought had just killed thousands. They certainly do investigate their superiors, including the dual citizens.
The US , Saudi Arabia and Israel all want Iran crushed. There is an old and still influential consensus on China and Russia, but the people who make it up are losing because China’s growth speaks for itself, and cannot be left any longer.
In the interests of accuracy, I would like to make some corrections to a few posts of mine which contained errors other than typographical.
First, in my post #2115, I said no isotope analysis was done. Once I obtained a copy of Paul Lioy’s dust analysis, “https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/pdf/10.1289/ehp.02110703”, which involved testing three WTC dust samples, I found mention of the Lioy team radionuclide analysis. This mention, quoted verbatim and in its entirety is:
As this quotation makes clear, the team did not further report on their isotope analysis so we can’t conclude much from it. For what it’s worth, the concentration of Barium and Strontium found by Lioy are in line with the USGS data.
Second, in my post #2273, I said
This should have said
My error was in conflating E. Sauret with the also French Naudet brothers. It seemed there was a plethora of French photographers in NYC that day, all taking pictures of the towers.
Third, and this is really not a correction, I would like to explain why I have accepted the data presented by the USGS in their Element Analysis (and used by Tahil in his book) and rejected the Lamont seismic data. It looks hypocritical or as though I might be cherry-picking the data that support my position and rejecting the data that contradict it. To that, I plead “not guilty”.
As soon as Clarke, or whoever ordered the “red button” to be pushed to demolish WTC2, I believe a call was made to Lamont ordering them to “recalibrate” their seismometers so that a 5.6 Richter event would look like a 2.x Richter event. If this hadn’t been done immediately, Rose Arce (per my post #2273) or one of the other newsmen at the WTC might have called Lamont and asked how big was the shake I just felt. Better to kill an incriminating number before it comes to life than to deny it later. The reporters, anxious for any news, would have broadcast the correct number immediately if they knew it. NYC is just not earthquake country. The recalibration would, of course, also be applied to the WTC1 and WTC7 demolitions.
By the time the USGS data were published the public had bought the “19 crazy Arab” story so the USGS chemists just stifled their curiosity and didn’t do or didn’t report an isotope analysis on their samples.
Thank you Contrarian III for this wise analysis.
I would like to add something: do you know other reports of seismic data than the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory one? I don’t. A key aspect of scientific investigation is reproducibility. At a time when experts can tell you from their labs in the USA that North Korea just performed an underground nuclear test yesterday, it sounds to me extremely strange that everyone relies on one single paper.
Am I the only one to think so?
Since you have entered the path of rectification perhaps you should disavow this statement of yours that you inadvertently used in the heat of argument:
While not all fissile material will participate in the explosion what is left will be dispersed. U235 have 700 million years half-life and emits some alpha particles. And afaik it does not smolder or have significantly elevated temperature. You can keep it in your pocket. The same can be said about Pu-239 even though its half-life is shorter.
The bottom line is that injecting the “unburnt” fuel to explain the hot spots was false. Grasping at straws.
The only hot spot is the melt cavity zone where molten rock can be found. Cracks and fissures allows for filtration of ‘non-condensable’ gases like H20 and CO2 which may have high temperature (2000°C and dropping fast) but their heat capacity is low so they can’t melt rocks and when released too open environment adiabatic expansion reduces their temperature to below 500*C.
In his recent article at UR “Everything is a Hoax” Paul Craig Roberts wrote about 9/11:
If George W. Bush was not part of the plot, why did he lie about it later?
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=62832
By now, almost everyone knows that there was no live coverage of AA11’s reputed crash into WTC 1 on 9/11, so Bush is not telling the truth about how he initially learned of the first WTC event. We know that anyway from John Cochran’s live report on 9/11 showing Bush was told about WTC 1 already before he left his resort motel that morning.
There is no reason for an innocent man to tell that kind of transparent whopper. Bush may not be Jewish, but that boy sure enough got himself some chutzpah somewhere.
And he knows the media — and other friendlies — will cover his back, and work overtime to extract that silver foot from his mouth, and flush it all down the memory hole.
Mazel Tov!
As PCR himself asserts
Quite. But the non-deranged person would do well to remember the lies.
To be fair, Mr. Roberts makes some excellent points in his article until he gets to — wait for it — nano-thermite!
Now nano-thermite can cause “all sorts of distortions” to steel beams, and nothing else could do that. My understanding is that thermite — nano or not — burns bright and hot enough to cut through steel, but is not a high explosive. The nano adaptation of thermite simply lets the chemical ignite at a lower temperature by virtue of the reduced particle size. Keep in mind that the NOAA overhead image shows many steel beams from the core columns scattered around Ground Zero but few if any show much obvious distortion, but no worries because, as many of us suspect –
Thermite works in mysterious ways.
I’ll give Mr. Roberts the benefit of the doubt on the thermite question, where it is easy to be misled, just as Mr. Roberts has been misled on climate change.
Here however, another researcher studied WTC dust from the same set of samples used by Steven Jones et al, but reached an entirely different conclusion: no thermite or nanothermite either one:
http://911scholars.ning.com/forum/topics/dave-thomas-take-on-911-wtc-complex-3-towers-collapses-thermite
The dust is a bust.
Oy vey. Oy, a broch!
You might be a little too harsh on Khalezov. Yes, Khalezov definitely knew Harari, who admitted, or boasted to Khalezov that Harari was the 9/11 mastermind at the first breakfast after 9/11. H had invited K to the breakfast specifically to celebrate with K the success of the NYC/DC spectacle which H had engineered. Since this was in Bangkok, you have to do a time conversion to know whether it on Sept 11 or 12. My recollection is that previous to the breakfast K did not know that H was involved in 9/11. There was a hint from H that something was going to happen because he pushed a TV set on K which K did not want. As an interesting aside, can you imagine what K was thinking at this breakfast as H was dancing around his own apartment with a bottle of wine in his hand delirious with joy? Remember, two weeks earlier they might have spent a few hours discussing what life was like in the Roman Empire.
They had met months earlier (at an arranged “accidental” meeting). H’s interest in K was supposed to be because K spoke Russian and was familiar with Russian arms. H was involved in many nefarious businesses, probably illegal arms sales, and was wanted by two countries, Norway – for murder (Lillehammer affair) and the USA – for drug trafficking (H was Noriega’s right hand man). K knew that H was a deputy chief of Mossad. During their friendship before 9/11, they would frequently spend hours together sharing their respective experience and knowledge. H was a very intelligent man and well-educated. After K learned of H’s involvement in 9/11, K realized that the real probable reason that H had sought him out was specifically to learn how much Russia knew about the demolition schema in the WTC towers. K had this info through his job in the USSR and H knew what K’s job was and therefore presumed he would know exactly how much Russia knew on the subject. There’s no serious question that H and K knew each other well. Khalezov’s book has pictures of H on pages 839, 841, 842, and 881 and pictures of bogus H passports (with a bogus name, of course) on pages 840 and 842.
Thai police at different times arrested both men. The USA wanted to extradite K, but eventually either gave up or decided it wasn’t a good idea. H was actually sentenced and a non-lookalike double started to serve his time. France intervened and induced Thailand to send this double (with H’s bogus name) to France to serve his time in a French prison because H, under the bogus name I presume, was a French citizen. It’s probably safe to assume that once the double arrived in France he took the next plane to Mossad HQ.
I’m not sure I don’t concur with you about the 9/11 planes — if there were any, which is the real question to resolve first. CGI is a lot better today than it was in 2001, but it wasn’t that bad back then. The CIA has controlled the media for a long time (Project Mockingbird) so how much of the imagery on 9/11 was genuine and how much was fake is an open question. Once the first tower had been “hit” all the imagery related to it should be genuine; real people using real cameras could make a mockery out of any fake imagery. What was tricky was using fake imagery of the second tower plane crash. A few frames of fake video might be used, but the risk goes up as the number of frames increases.
My mechanical model of a real plane-tower collision is somewhat simple. First, I assume the aluminum has the same hardness as the structural steel. Commercial planes are not made from aluminum; they’re made from an aluminum alloy, duraluminum, which has almost exactly the same hardness of structural steel.
Second, I model the plane as consisting of 5 structures: One fuselage, two engines, and two wings. That is, I ignore the aft of the plane.
My building model is also simple. I ignore the windows and the aluminum cladding on the beams since they contribute little to façade structural integrity. I ignore also the spandrels connecting adjacent beams — even though they contribute a lot to façade integrity. [See post #2146 if you’re not familiar with how spandrels were used in the towers.] The building model in the upper floors where the “impacts” took place can thus be modeled as a mesh of vertical beams a meter (on center) apart and a mesh of horizontal floors about 3.7 meters apart. [Correct me if 3.7 is not right.] I’m also ignoring building contents since penetration of the façade is my interest.
To make the building a little more detailed, I have to model the beams with more specificity. One simplification in the beam modeling is to assume they have a square cross-section. Post #2146 shows this is not quite correct and gives actual dimensions for the beam cross-section. I would assume the outside dimensions of the beam cross-section are about 33 cm and the thickness of the beam wall is 1 cm. To describe a collision model for a beam, I would invoke a tiny bit of HS geometry, labeling the square (cross-section) ABCD, where A and B are the beam corners which are part of the façade and C and D are the beam corners 33 cm behind the façade. To make the description unambiguous, I would label these inside beam corners in the usual style used in HS geometry, so moving from A to B to C to D and then back to A would simply traverse the perimeter of the square.
With this description, AB is part of the façade, CD is parallel to AB and 33 cm inside the building. BC and AD are both normal to the façade and are also inside the building. BC and AD can be looked at as a pair of knives with blades 1 cm thick and 33 cm wide. This is true, of course, for each and every beam, so the beams present to an intruding plane as an array of such knife pairs with the pairs on 1 meter centers. The airplane also has to contend with first the AB face and 33 cm “later” the CD face of each beam.
Another set of “knives” the airplane has to deal with are the concrete floors about 10 cm thick. These concrete knives have enormous compressive strength but not so good tensile strength. These concrete knives thus have blades that are 10 cm think and many meters wide.
If an airplane impales itself on this array of resisting knives and plane surfaces what happens? The skin of the wings and fuselage is quite thin. I seem to recall running across 2 mm or so as skin thickness. Both, however, have additional internal structure which gives them some strength. Without doing the enormous finite-element modeling computations required, I’m willing to concede that the plane’s wings and their structure fight to a draw with the beam faces and might even win. The wings are no match for the knife array, however. They would suffer the same fate as a hard-boiled egg in one of the multi-wire egg slicers that used to be used in kitchens. This is assuming a beam didn’t break or get pushed out of the way (that is, its structure separated from the main body of the building). Could you say the wings penetrated the building if it got sliced like our hard-boiled egg? Yes, but it would really be the wing slices that entered the building interior. Wing-slicing would burn off a great deal of kinetic energy so it’s not at all clear that the wider parts of the wing near the fuselage would even penetrate in this limited sense. If a wing would have the misfortune to impale itself on a concrete floor, even that kind of penetration would be denied it. It would simply break at the concrete knife edge. This means that as far as the wings are concerned, they have the best chance of some degree of penetration if the plane comes in level and with zero roll angle.
Next, let’s look at the fuselage. Its collision is similar to the wing’s except that in this case the cylinder is shaped more like a circle in cross section instead of the airfoil shape of the wing — looked at as a cylindrical structure. Moreover, the collision occurs with the cylinder normal to the façade instead of almost parallel to it. The collision with the beam knives is, for the fuselage skin, similar to the wing collision except the fuselage skin lacks the degree of strengthening the wings have. The beam knives have to contend with the contents of the fuselage of course, but this can be safely assumed to be softer than the beam knives. Penetration, yes, but only in the same sense as the wing penetration: Pieces flying between the blade pairs and continuing into the building.
The engines, however, are a little different. They would be modeled as a solid block of steel or titanium in the shape of a right circular cylinder. This form factor means that an engine could indeed break a beam and continue its motion inside the building. Its real nemesis, however, is the array of concrete knives. Both the engine and the concrete would suffer badly. The best hope for any significant penetration would be for zero roll and a little yaw so the two engines would both hit the same knife blade and so that the second engine to hit would be hitting an already damaged concrete knife.
This leaves the fuel as an instrument of damage. I already discussed this in my post #2030 and would refine that post now only to say that the fuel might be looked at as being three shaped charges with the shaping resulting from the fact that the fuel is distributed among the wings and the fuselage. I still stand by my assertion that once the energy of the balloon/shaped charges have snapped bolts, etc. at the façade (thereby pushing beams aside) the remaining fuel’s kinetic energy and momentum would be somewhat dispersed by the tearing of the tanks by the building’s knife system and the building internals. Inertia is the only thing that keeps the fuel “collimated”. Fuel could easily penetrate the building although we’re really not talking about a lot of it. I also still stand by my statement about core damage. Any talk about significant core damage is risible.
As a final note, it’s hard to imagine a real plane crash without most of the aft (at least) falling to the ground outside the building. The vertical part in particular would impale itself on an untouched concrete knife or two. I think a lot of wing and fuselage debris would be there too.
In conclusion, this post (except for the part about Khalezov and Harari) is really quite qualitative and lacks quantitative rigor. Adding that rigor would require a dynamic finite-element modeling effort that would make Professor Hulsey’s static analysis on WTC7 at UAF look like a homework assignment. OK, trolls, have a field day talking about my arm-waving.
You are a piece of work. You really believe the picts are of Mike Harari? And you believe in a double serving time and then being extradited to France or whatever? You are very credulous. How do you navigate in life? I have difficulty believing that anybody can be that credulous and stupid that’s why I would rather consider you being a troll. That you are actually smarter but you are fucking with us. But what would be the motive?
Excellent point. If I were a director of a seismic station and I saw 2.x traces which matched Lamont’s, I would do two things: Publish my confirmatory data and do the triangulation to show that my data and Lamont’s both came from the same events in lower Manhattan.
Reproducibility and confirmation are part of genuine science, not the pseudo-science practiced by some of the trolls who’ve challenged your physics lately. One of these thermodynamic experts recently made a post suggesting that he has an understanding of convection effects in plasmas. The guy’s good.
“unless they’re lying…….” of course they are lying just like the WMD’s in Iraq crowd …
1.
The Project for the New American Century, September 2000
“Preserving the desirable strategic situation in which the United States now finds itself requires a globally preeminent military capability . . . the process of transformation . . . is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” —Rebuilding America’s Defenses, The Project for the New American Century, September 2000
2.
The official conspiracy theory in the 9/11 Commission Report was blown to pieces by thousands of scientists, structural engineers, high-rise architects, military and civilian pilots, first responders on the scene, and a large number of former high government officials both in the US and abroad.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50390.htm
For 150kt underground explosion plasma state may last only few milliseconds after the explosion. Within 500 msec temperature drops to 4000-5000°C and pressure to 150-200 atm. This happens when the cavity reaches its maximum size. Within 60-600 sec thereafter all evaporated solids condense back to liquid state and temperature drops to 2000-1500*C. What remains are “non-condensable” gases, i.e., H20 and CO2 which were created from rock chemical decomposition. Their proportion depend on the type of rock. The cooling of cavity is accelerated by the dropping roof and eventually formation of chimney and filling up of cavity with cooler rocks from above. This happens in 95% cases. The remaining 5% usually occur in salt rocks. After that cavity cooling is by convection to the surrounding rocks and by gas filtration through cracks and fissures.
Correcting my own poor choice of words:
The word “decay” is a poor choice because to the uninitiate it could suggest that the unburnt fuel is simply going through the normal decay processes, like alpha or beta particle emission. What’s going on here is a post-explosion fission process which can be simply triggered by neutron capture or spontaneous fission. Note that unless the unburnt fuel is large compared to the pre-detonation fuel (as in an intentional or accidental “fizzle load”) this fission will not be particularly energetic.Regardless of which it is, it adds to the heat produced by all the exothermic decay actions resulting from the original detonation as I state in the immediately preceding paragraph of my post. It wouldn’t be explosive because the fissile material would be “diluted” by the material in which the detonation occurred, so it would just burn as though it were part of a reactor.
To be more precise, Israel and the Saudi Arabia want Iran crushed. Americans would not care about Iran anymore than they would care about Tajikistan absent neo-con propaganda.
When was the last time Iran actually started a truly aggressive war? Maybe sometime in the 18th century under Nadir Shah. When was the last time America started a truly aggressive war? I’ve almost lost count of the wars we’ve started just this century.
So it is Israel and Saudi Arabia that want war with Iran. The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran is Sunni vs. Shia and Arab vs Aryan.
Osama bin Laden was mainly trying to get the American armed forces out of Saudi Arabia, but yes he was also annoyed about Saudi Arabia backing a regieme of ex communists against the Houthies in Yemen.
True, and it is also true there are cabals within these countries struggling for control of government. However, there is a conflict between two separate countries and nation states are living things inasmuch they have emergent qualities over and above the ingredients that go into them. Religion and ethnicity don’t explain the actual enemies or allies that countries fight with (for example Catholic France funded Protestant Sweden against the Catholic Holy Roman Empires, Nazi Germany was allied with Japan in WW2.
Israel and Saudi Arabia are becoming quite friendly. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states generally have lost patience with the Palestinians. Once the Palestinians are sent packing, the steam will go out the open borders lobby in the West. So the West has an interest in getting Israel to kick them out. Destroying Iran, the last remaining military deterrent. is a way to encourage Israel.
Everything is a hoax, eh?
Quite a lot is staged in the true meaning of the word because a lot of people get their ideas from mass entertainment. For example when the vert first mixed martial arts tournaments were held many people expected a Bruce lee style striker would triumph, but the boxers and karate experts were totally unable to defend themselves from the grapplers.
Intelligence agencies and intelligence agents and the armed forces are, like Bruce Lee cinematic unarmed combat, just a lot less effective than TV and Film have brainwashed the world into thinking. In real life no one to be able to do what a character played by Liam Neeson in Taken can bee seen doing. But if they make him an ex CIA agent people believe . In Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now he mentions a test of the abilities of various pundits and who the intelligence agency analysts were the worst of all at making accurate predictions. The CIA failures in the run up to 9/11 were many but it was not a film, was it?
Verily, Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius
Roberts thinks the Skirpal affair was a British false flag. I happen to think the Russian state wanted to tell any Russian thinking of selling out (and the West can offer a Russian much) what to expect. They were trying to kill him along with his daughter.”SMERSH”)iss a portmanteau of the phrase Смерть шпионам (SMERt’ SHpionam, “Death to Spies” but as Stalin andd before him Trotsky knew, if you are serious about deterring people you let them know that you will go after their families. Lenin was left in peace after his brother tried to kill the Tsar, which did not work out well for the Romanovs. The real objective of the Skripal operation was to make it clear that the Russian state will kill the innocent family members of traitors. They knew Skripal’s daughter was visiting him and chose that moment to strike.
Maybe Israel would kill thousands of innocent people in America if pushed into a corner but I just do not think there is any evidence that they are that good, Entebbe was child’s play compared to false flagging 9/11. I’ll give you an example , when the Israeli few their F-16s to destroy Saddam’s nuclear plant they were spotted by King of Jordan! A false flag 9/11 would only be attempted if it was more likely to save Israel than destroy it Even if one accepts that
Bush would have had to order a stand down. Subordinates cannot supplant the big boss so easily , and anyone who disagrees might with profit read Jordan Peterson on lobster dominance hierarchies. Did the French get steamrollered in the Battle of France because of bad leadership and a traitorous cabal, or because they were up against the whole German Army and the French could not cope with the high tempo of the Nazi attack (aided by massive amounts of crystal meth German troops were taking). Even so the German tank drive ran out of steam after 250 miles. There have been no more substantial terror attacks in America after 9/11, why not if the government was in on it and Iran would be easy to false flag?
Per your request, here are four links showing pictures of Mike Harari. The first three are relatively old pictures, so they show a younger Harari than Khalezov knew in Bangkok. The fourth link is really a link to Dr. Kevin Barrett, a former professor of Islamic Studies, and show Harari at an older age. Even a casual comparison of Barrett’s pictures with the pictures I’ve previously cited in Khalezov’s book in my post to Iris (#2305) would show that Dr. Barrett apparently also believes the Khalezov pictures are genuine.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/mike-harari-daring-innovative-mossad-commander-dead-at-88/
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/28/world/middleeast/michael-harari-israeli-agent-likened-to-james-bond-dies-at-87.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/23/mike-harari
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/09/22/harari-dead/
You could have found them had you taken the time to do a search using a common search engine like Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo, etc.
You may call me credulous if you like — you’re entitled to your opinion. In my mind, I presume that when someone (other than a politician, of course) says something he’s telling me the truth as he knows it. If his statements are later shown to be incorrect and he doesn’t correct them at that point the presumption changes and thenceforth, he’s presumed to be a liar. People who make wrong statements but who then correct them are presumed by me to be professionals at least in their approach.
“unburnt fuel is large compared to the pre-detonation fuel”. – very interesting.
What is your diagnosis? Borderline autistic, personality disorder? Or brain damage as result of some accident? I am sorry for you and your family.
If you want some more pictures of our friend, Harari, please take a look at my recent post (#2314) to our other friend, Utu. In this new post, there are links to three photos of Harari at a younger age and some photos of him at his age corresponding to about 2001, plus or minus a few years.
You might also want to take a look at the high-resolution photo in Sparkon’s post #2179. This photo, taken from an airplane or rotary-wing, shows the WTC area after the dust had more or less settled. Some discussion here by other posters has been about some relatively pristine I-beams in the wreckage. There’s another feature in the photo that is at least as interesting to me, if not more so, because it’s almost another smoking gun.
To see the feature, please start at the rectangular area in the center which is what was left of the WTC complex. A smaller, almost rectangular block appears to the right (North) of the main WTC complex. This smaller block is what’s left of WTC7. If you look carefully, you can see its trapezoidal shape. You’ll note that the WTC7 area is bordered by three non-WTC buildings. It’s my understanding that the three buildings are the Verizon building, the US post office building, and Fiterman Hall, part of Manhattan Community College. Fiterman Hall is the one to the right of WTC7 and is the furthest of the three buildings from where WTC7 used to be.
What’s interesting about Fiterman is that it sustained much worse damage than either of the other two buildings. You can verify this visually from the photo or by Google search. [The story cited near the end of my post shows a sanitized (2006) version of the damage.] Why would this building be more seriously damaged? One explanation is that it was hit by debris from WTC7, but this is improbable in view of the relatively smooth descent of WTC7 which was unaccompanied by significant lateral ejection of beams, etc. A more probable and plausible explanation has to do with the placement of the underground nuclear demolition device. To take out an entire trapezoidally shaped building, the zero box has to be somewhere near the center of the longer base of the trapezoid. The zero box being near the center of the trapezoid base would put at least a portion of Fiterman Hall within the area taken down by the nuke.
I don’t think the WTC7 demolition designers had some animus against Fiterman Hall — it was merely collateral damage. Had the demolition been accomplished by conventional chemical explosives, thermite/mate, or even mini nukes (above ground or in the basement of WTC7) damage to Fiterman would have been largely avoidable: Why go to the trouble of putting TNT in Fiterman, for example? With an underground nuke and a trapezoidal target for demolition such surgical precision is not possible.
To give credit where it’s due, Khalezov noted the collateral damage to Fiterman. He cites a story about Fiterman’s demolition which occurred about 5 years after 9/11:
http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_140/worktodemolish.html
If you look at the story, note its reference to “contamination” and Fiterman’s piece-by-piece demolition to avoid spreading the contamination. Hmmm.
Barret is a kook like you by posting the pict from Khalezov of some mug that does not belong to Harari. Look at eyes. Harari did not have blue eyes. Look at ears. Nose is different. Look at proportions of eye distance to forehead chin distance..
The inanity of your comment compels me to wonder if your native tongue is Gibberish or you really are a Dick-and-Janer. The text of mine that you quote (out of context by the way, since I was talking about fizzle loads) should be reasonably interpreted as, say, the unburnt fuel is 80 or 90 percent of the pre-detonation fuel. Your mal-interpretation would try to have me say the unburnt fuel is 800 or 900%. Duh. Does your shill handler pay you by the post?
I don’t claim to be a physicist, but that doesn’t mean that I can’t think like one and use the tools of a real physicist. In this post, I’m posing a Gedanken Experiment to the real physicists in this forum like Heinz and Iris and I’m including Utu also despite his use of pseudo-physics from time to time.
As in all thought experiments all the entities involved in the experiment are assumed perfect except when expressly made imperfect by the designer and all physics laws must be followed despite their inherently empirical nature.
My experiment would have a WTC tower perched in the middle of a vast flat plane of pure granite (note that I’m assuming a flat Earth). Surrounding the tower is a block of granite in the form of a 4 km cube (i.e. all cube edges are 4 km long). This cube envelops the tower by means of a perfect indentation which is a negative impression of the tower. This impression is perfectly centered about the tower, so that if we used almost transparent granite an outside observer would see the tower sitting in the cube surrounded by about 2 km of granite in all directions except up. This cube I will call “the glove”.
Next, I would place a zero box directly under the tower and centered with respect to the mathematical extension of the tower footprint normal to the Earth’s surface. The depth of the zero box to be specified shortly.
Within this zero box there would sit a perfect 150 kiloton nuke the shape of which was exactly the same as the shape of the zero box. I hope it’s clear that I’m trying to eliminate atmospherics in this thought experiment. The case of the nuclear device would be made from granite.
Since my device is perfect, I know exactly how large the final size (radius) of the cavity will be when the device will be detonated. Accordingly, I will position the zero box exactly this radius plus 1 cm below the surface of the Earth.
With my experiment now set up, I will assume the device is now detonated at time = 0. Within a very short time, the final cascade of neutrons to define detonation is released. Also released as each atom fissions is a flood of photons in the “soft x-ray” part of the spectrum. If I assume the density of the tower is the same as the density of the glove, the outside observer will see nothing much happening. He will, however, feel a seismic shock consistent with the yield of the nuke.
If my observer could see into the cavity (note for the purposes of this paragraph that I’m giving my observer an extraordinary power here) as detonation is proceeding what he would see is the disappearance of the nuke and of the amount of granite converted into the plasma state by the x-ray photons. He would not see any of the fireworks we normally associate with atmospheric nuclear detonations. There would be no fire-ball, e.g.
A short time later, the plasma state would return to the gaseous state, and then to the liquid state. and eventually to the solid state as further cooling proceeded. Presumably the granite that converted to plasma initially would be plastered to the interior wall of our spherical cavity.
As the plasmatic material cooled let us assume that our observer lifts the glove off the tower so that all that lies above the cavity is our original 1 cm layer of granite, which of course gets thicker, as we mentally travel away from our ground zero, in accordance with well-known spherical geometric laws. This situation will not be permanent because the empty but hot cavity has only a 1 cm (plus) roof over its head and a heavy tower over that. If our observer timed the lifting of the glove correctly, no plasma will escape and certainly no x-ray photons will because they’ve already been used up.
Once the weight of the tower plus the weight of the 1 cm granite, expressing the combined weight as a pressure, by bringing in the areas over which this downward force is manifest, exceeds the upward pressure within the cavity, this cavity roof 1 cm thick will collapse (the tensile strength of the granite “arch” will also have to be considered for the arch to fracture). Upon collapse, the tower and the arch will nominally fall into the cavity.
If the detonation produced a blast wave which went up into the still-gloved tower, the tower would of course have been damaged. The damage would also have been visible to our observer as he watched through the almost transparent glove and would be particular manifest after he lifted the glove and the arch collapsed.
With this 1 cm arch in mind, we can now repeat the experiment and lift the glove at different times while moving the zero box. This provides a nice way to parametrize the zero-box depth issue. By constraining the time between detonation and arch collapse we can get a reasonable calculation of what the depth of the zero box was on 9/11. We, of course, have to correct for our “perfection” assumptions like the “density of the towers = density of granite” and others. The point is that absent cracks around the tower footprint above-ground artifacts are nicely contained by enough overhead mass. Obviously, if the experiment involves only a 1 cm overburden, the lack of any significant above-ground mass outside the footprint will be insufficient to contain the hell-fire effects. My 1 cm is therefore clearly unrealistic.
I hope it’s clear that the real point of my experiment is to focus on the basic physical principles and on the key constraints like the 12-second collapse delay, the absence of hell-fire and NOT on irrelevant issues like steel melting. I invite the serious physicists like Heinz and Iris to do a “theme and variations” on my basic experiment to improve it.
It’s possible that this experiment has already been performed using some heavy structure above the zero-box, but more likely with a much lower yield. I defer to Iris since she seems to know many nuclear detonation results.
For me it’s rather clear that the last picture (Khalezov’s one) does not depict the same individual as the first ones. So either Khalezov is wrong or the newspapers are wrong on Harari.
I personnally don’t care, since I think the only important issue with Khalezov is to know if his big-underground-nuke explanation is the right one, and I’m certain one can prove it is.
Maybe he really knew Harari but intentionnally put a picture of someone else (for a reason I don’t know), maybe he knew a man that pretended to be Harari and actually wasn’t (but it’s strange that he couldn’t check this), or maybe he completely invented the whole story for a reason I still don’t know.
But again, going into this is going into psychology, not physics. Which laws are much less universal (and robust) than the laws of physics. That’s why I think that, in order to go ahead in solving 9/11, one should avoid such iffy questions.
Everyone with a brain can see that there is a RUSH to destroy Iran to “complete” the PNAC neocon plan for the “New American Century” that we all remember & of course General Wesley Clark told us about the Pentagon Plan to attack ” 7 countries in 5 years”.
The window of opportunity is closing for the neocons as the exposure of 9/11 as a False Flag “is at hand” as it is known ( Susan landauer ) that even Donald Trump is “looking into it.”.
Ron Unz , the Editor-in-Chief of The Unz Review, ethnically Jewish & no moron initally LIKE MOST accepted the transparently false “Official” 9/11 story until he started to pay attention. Once he paid attention, he realized it was all B.S.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Unz_Review
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/10/06/576232/…
….
“I invite the serious physicists like Heinz and Iris to do a “theme and variations” on my basic experiment to improve it.”
I made the calculations that can be made for your proposal, see:
http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2018/10/10/a-comment-to-the-unz-review-911-thread/
It is a MS word file, if you cannot open it, so I can make it a pdf. Anyway, your experiment cannot solve what you want it to solve: the temperature in the cavity stays constant for a long time and lowering of the temperature is not the reason the pressure lowers and that roof collapses. The pressure lowers most probably because gas escapes through some cracks and volume becomes larger, this cannot be modeled as cracks are quite sporadic things. So, your proposal was not a decisive test. Besides, the formula in the paper Iris referred to is not quite correct: it would give the cooling time as days. The author just did not care to simplify his formula, otherwise he would have seen that it is in some way restricted as a model of the situation.
But instead, I calculated for you the size of the explosive assuming that the hot spots cool in some known time, like 0.5 years. I get a mini nuke size. Enough for the central core as it falls if the roof of the cavity falls and falling of the core starts a gravitational collapse. The size is about 0.04 kt.
I do not need to make any calculation to know this is wrong, because the characteristic cooling time does not depend on the explosive “size” (actually, energy content) but on the thermal resistance between the hot source and the cold sink. That is, on the zero box depth (if you consider conduction as the major cooling mechanism).
The time it takes for your coffee to cool down does not depend on how much coffee you drink (that is, how much thermal energy there is in it initially) but on the thermal resistance between the hot source and the cold sink. Of course, a big bottle will keep it warm longer than a tiny cup but that’s because thermal resistance is different in the two cases, not because thermal energy is different.
And I don’t want to waste my time checking calculations from people who don’t grasp the very basics of physics, that is, that are unable to get a crude understanding of phenomena without writing down a single formula.
I loved your grasp of basic or not so basic physics when you invented the steel pulverizing shockwave traveling in steel columns hundred or more meters up. I am sure your aversion to calculations was of great help.
I forgot to mention that the 9/11 attack “got itself DECLARED AN ACT OF WAR”.
The F.B.I’s “initial working theory on 9/11” was that explosives brought down the towers but that CHANGED after FBI chief Robert Muller ( yes him) VISITED Mr.Cheney at his POAC ( Presidential Emergency Operations Center) on 9/11.
https://www.ae911truth.org/news/481-dick-cheney-and-rudy-giuliani-the-first-government-officials-to-dismiss-the-idea-of-controlled-demolition-on-9-11
Dick Cheney who was the man in charge on 9/11 dismissed the possibility of controlled demolition & undoubtedly had some effect on the direction of various investigations that were just getting underway & he OBJECTED to any 9/11 explosions being investigated & FBI chief “complied” ? .
So once again even though the “rank & file” in the F.B.I. under Robert Muller may have known better it NEVERTHELESS did what it was TOLD to do.
https://www.ae911truth.org/news/481-dick-cheney-and-rudy-giuliani-the-first-government-officials-to-dismiss-the-idea-of-controlled-demolition-on-9-11
Also please note Professor Niels Harrit wrote an article, “The Mysterious Frank Taylor Report”. This 9/11 Document Launched US-NATO’s ” War on Terrorism” in the Middle East,” & the dots between this document and the briefing that Ambassador Taylor gave to the North Atlantic Council were AT LAST connected.
https://www.corbettreport.com/afghanwar/
ALSO on 9/11, hours after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grounded all civilian domestic and international incoming and outgoing flights to and from the United States, a full El Al Boeing 747 took off from JFK bound for Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion International Airport.
….
“The time it takes for your coffee to cool down does not depend on how much coffee you drink (that is, how much thermal energy there is in it initially) but on the thermal resistance between the hot source and the cold sink. ”
The calculation uses the heat transfer equation, k has the value for granite. The result is what you get if conduction through granite is the only cooling way, so it naturally is calculated from the thermal resistance between the hot and the cold sink. Your coffee cup cools by convection and radiation, very little by conduction.
“And I don’t want to waste my time checking calculations from people who don’t grasp the very basics of physics, that is, that are unable to get a crude understanding of phenomena without writing down a single formula.”
If you write like that, then be very, very good in physics.
“I loved your grasp of basic or not so basic physics when you invented the steel pulverizing shockwave traveling in steel columns hundred or more meters up. I am sure your aversion to calculations was of great help.”
Thanks utu. I never know if you are good or bad, or both. The calculation that you called mathematical masturbation (sic!) is in the link after I simplified the formula from the paper in 2241. If you want to get the amount of heat that is needed before the system is in the steady state, that is, corresponding to your formula, you just have to integrate the 1/r temperature dependency and dQ=cm dT. This energy may be a relevant part, I did not calculate it as I essentially answered to Contrarian III.
There are other heat sinks, like gas escaping, so I just made the simple example calculation to show how much is removed by conduction. It shows why the cavities can stay hot so long. But I still do not think WTC1&2 came primarily down by nuclear, only the the central core maybe. If it was only nuclear, why WTC7 was not, and why the building straightens.
So how is it that thermal resistance depends on explosive yield? Or in other words how can you deduce the yield without doing any assumption on thermal resistance?
I agree with that, I chose a simple case anyone can understand but it was actually not a good one.
However, I still claim that thermal resistance and thermal capacity determine the cooling time.
See here an example in electronics for instance:
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/smdpack.pdf?fileId=db3a304330f6860601311905ea1d4599
I don’t understand this sentence.
In the heat transfer equation there is the power P=Q/t in watts. If the explosion produces energy E (in Joules), then this energy can be transferred in the time E/P (in seconds). This is the time it would take for the heat to be removed from the hot spot if the only way is conduction through granite.
Finally the cavity does cool and one cannot for too long use the equation where the cavity temperature is set to 600 Celsius and then the heat transfer equation gives 1/r dependence for heat outside the cavity. But this takes a long time.
But as long as the cavity is in a constant temperature 600 Celsius (as is stated in the reference Iris gave, it is supported by empirical data) and as long as the temperature in r to infinity is also constant, the temperature will be constant as as a function of time and depend only on the radius r. It is in a steady state, no place gets hotter nor cooler, and this gives the dependency 1/r for the temperature.
I ignored the ground temperature and took the temperature as zero Kelvin in infinity, but it does not much change if we set it to 4 Celsius. It is also constant and the system is in a steady state.
Clearly, the time to cool depends on the yield t=E/P.
“Or in other words how can you deduce the yield without doing any assumption on thermal resistance?”
But I do make the assumption on thermal resistance: in the calculation I assume the cavity cools by conduction through granite. Granite has a specific k value, between 3.5 and 2 W/mK.
There can be and for sure are other ways of cooling: If the roof of the cavity collapsed, it formed a tunnel through which hot gas could escape and cool by convection. There most probably were water currents in the rock, they also cool by convection. These must be estimated in some way. I can suggest one way: If we assume that an explosion had the power 0.0436 kt, then the radius is only 9.5*0.35=3.3 m. That can be too small for collapsing the central core. If so, we must assume that heat escaped in other ways, which certainly would have happened. But then one should estimate how much heat escaped and in what way to finally get to a possible scenario. For instance, one can start from a realistic estimate how large the cavity had to be for the core to fail. Then we get the radius, can calculate the yield from (R/9.5)^3, then subtract conduction and what remains is convection and radiation.
“However, I still claim that thermal resistance and thermal capacity determine the cooling time.”
Where do you imagine is the difference. Thermal resistance of granite is k. The cavity stores heat (energy) as hot gas. The size of the cavity depends on the yield. Therefore the size of the cavity determines how much energy there is, it is the thermal capacity.
As for the sentence that a building straightens up after having leaned, I have not checked if this is so, the claim is form 911 people and is based on videos: the building, like also the antenna, was leaning but it straightened. By gravity what leans continues to that direction. To straighten it, you need timed charges. Thus, there are some arguments supporting timed charges. Also WTC7 seems to fall too symmetrically for anything but timed charges.
I had no problem with calculations. They were irrelevant to what I was demonstrating. That’s why I use the metaphor of mathematical masturbation. I calculated what was the upper limit of temperature at 100m or 200m away from the shot point in granite. For this I did not need to know that temp distribution would be like 1/r or whatever which what you calculated under the assumption that the temperature in the shot point would be held constant, which as we know is not the case because temperature in the shot point is also decreasing because of cooling and the initial condition of the profile is the step function of r.
That you do no recognize Heinz and Contrarian characters for what they are and respond to the idiotic bait “I invite the serious physicists like Heinz and Iris” makes me doubt your judgment and your ability to asses what is really happening here.
I sure understand that from an energy and a power you can infer a time. But that was not my point, since the power depends on thermal resistance. The heat flow (power) from hot source to cold sink depends on thermal resistance just as current intensity depends on electrical resistance and voltage difference.
No, it doesn’t.
That’s not thermal resistance (in K/W), that’s thermal resistivity (in K.m/W) (or conductivity in W/(K.m)). Be careful not to confuse mK (millikelvins) with m.K (meters times kelvins), that’s why I prefer to write K.m instead.
Again, no, you don’t understand the basics. Granite has no thermal resistance, only a specified granite thickness has. Thermal capacity is not either “how much energy there is”, since a thermal capacity is expressed in J/K. It’s a ratio between thermal energy and temperature difference.
Understand the basics first, perform calculations only second. Otherwise you will end demonstrate whatever you want.
Thank you for making it clear. However if you read Khalezov (who cites NIST documents) you will understand easily what kind of architectural difference between WTC7 and the other buildings can explain the difference and make it look “straightened”. Basically, it’s because the facade of the first 6 or 7 floors was “hanging” like a curtain rather than supporting the upper part and anchored into the ground, and was consequently not much affected by the shockwave.
Hi Contrarian;
Apologies for the late reply; everyday life is so busy and hectic.
Your expose is correct. The phenomenology of underground nuclear explosions was considered well known in the late 60’s, with 2 main categories identified:
– A- Explosions with crater formation.
– B- Contained explosions , with cavity, then chimney formation, folowed by cavity’s roof collapse.
These 2 categories share in common the successive effects born by the milieu, depending on is closeness from the explosion chamber (the zero box). Broadly, these efffects are:
1- Vaporised rock
2- then melted rock
3- then crushed rock
4- then fractured rock
5- then elastic area, submitted to a seismic shock only.
The article I previously attached (below) describes both types of explosions; A in chapter III, and B in chapter IV. The drawings are self-explanatory and match your description.
https://www.google.dz/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/35/095/35095014.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiHva__3_zdAhUOUBoKHaojAbcQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw3hTBRyuXw-pATxXseHbS9o
You have a good understanding of the problem, and were right to believe that a nuclear explosion was the likely cause of the WTC towers collapsing
The most direct and undeniable evidence of a nuclear explosion was the intensity (high temperature) and the persistence (over 100 days) of the thermal footprint photographed over the WTC. A third parameter is that the hot spots remained fixed, and did no move to nearby locations, as would occurr to a natural fire once the available fuel is consumed
I did not want to enter into sterile discussions with foolish people who think that thermal energy from a nuclear explosion can be dissipated within seconds, so I commented only on the 600C benchmark used to modelise the steady state.
In reality, Heinz was right in mentioning much higher temperatures in the thousands of degrees , just after the explosion, that would result in molten steel being found at Ground Zero.
The thermal equations drawn up by the French scientists were meant at assessing when it would become safe/possible to carry out civil works on the explosion site: the focus was on the later stages of the cooling process, not on the earlier ones where temperatures would have been higher.
The second, indirect but undeniable proof of a nuclear explosion is the time elapsed between the seismic shock and the cavity’s roof collapsing, bringing down the tower: no other scenario can explain such causality.
Having stated the basics, we can look at the specifics.
These photos of Ground Zero published by “Veterans Today” provide visual evidence of the occurrence of a nuclear explosion:
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/06/04/the-real-manhattan-nuclear-testing-district/
1- The hole in the middle of the collapsed tower cannot be explained by a fire. How would a fire burn below-ground foundations? Where would the necessary oxygen come from?
Conversely, such hole perfectly matches the collapse of the cavity’s roof after an underground nuclear explosion.
2- The recognisable striated pattern at a shallow depth at Ground Zero indicates that the material, rock or concrete, has been heated to melting point (above 1000C) before cooling down under the same appearance as lava.
3- Firemen at Ground Zero, cooling down a pit where there is clearly no fuel left to burn. Where was the heat coming from but underground?
No, the pict you have attached is of WTC6 so it is not ” in the middle of the collapsed tower.” The hole is not deep (8 floors) and goes only to the street level as you can see on other picts of WTC6. You can better see it here:
The cavity and it collapsed roof is only in your head, woman. Calm down. Drink a glass of wine and take some valium.
Iris strikes again! She’s good. I love the smoking gun inferences she draws. Keep it up.
I’m not sure of the date or provenance of your first picture, but the other two are right out of Khalezov’s book, by way of Duff, who published even more of Khalezov’s pictures without attribution, on the veteranstoday site. The two drawings – not pictures, on veteranstoday with the vertical blue bars, are right out of Khalezov. I can give you the page numbers in his book if you want.
Khalezov attributed the two pictures in turn to Silverstein Properties who probably took them in or about Sept. 2008 when the second version of WTC was being built. Shill geologists hired by Uncle said that this rather volcanic-looking rock is proof of the ice that covered Manhattan many millennia ago. What Duff did not mention is that the volcanic rock was located right by the eastern edge of where WTC2 once sat.
You know more about structural practices than I do, but before the original WTC2 was sited (in the 60s), wouldn’t the engineers first do enough soil checking to make sure they weren’t building at the edge of an unstable boulder? During the building of the new WTC, the workmen were covering this geological wonder with concrete. Was it to ensure stability or to serve as a sarcophagus for any further radiation?
I also wonder if the workmen hosing off the “boulder” were informed that it might be radiologically hot. It’s true that 7 years may be a lot of half-lives for some decay products. My WAG about this “volcanic rock” is that it was a side-squirt of some of the cavity’s contents making its way through a crack or fissure in the granite not quite above the zero-box. If I’m right, the origin of this volcanic rock is “within 12 seconds prior to the collapse of WTC2” for its birth.
As an aside, where was the rest of this volcano that migrated during the last age to Manhattan? The nearest natural vulcanism to Manhattan that I know of is by Iceland. Nuclear volcanos can occur anywhere, of course. Finally, what is the light blue vapor close to the center of your second picture – steam? As another aside, I have a post coming which I think explains the various pictures of Harari.
Iris and Contrarian III, let me disagree with you!
Photo 1 shown by Iris is WTC6, not WTC1 or WTC2. However, I do consider this gigantic hole to be much more easily explainable by a side-effect of cavity roof collapse (under WTC1) than by parts of WTC1 falling on WTC6. In other words, I think it’s because WTC6 was very close to WTC1 that part of the foundations also sinked into an unwanted collapse chimney, a secondary and unwanted one. I can’t prove it, it’s just that it looks much more probable to me.
Photos 2 and 3 are usually depicted as remains of the “nuclear cavity”. I disagree strongly with that for very simple reasons:
– first, they were taken under WTC4, not WTC1 or WTC2. What was WTC4? A rather small building (I don’t remember its height, but really not a skyscraper), which was replaced by a much taller one. So it is absolutely logical that these genuine geological remnants were found (no need of “shill geologists”) because the new building hat to be anchored in the bedrock unlike the former one.
– second, if you admit the global picture which is not exactly Khalezov’s but Khalezov with a deeper zero-box and a collapse chimney, then no cavity should be visible.
It’s OK to question the official narrative, even scientific papers since some “scientists” have done a lot to discredit themselves (Bazant…) but before talking about “shill geologists” please consider your own explanation and check if it’s really consistent with the data.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228393172_50_Ka_till-filled_Pleistocene_plunge_pools_and_potholes_found_beneath_the_World_Trade_Center_site_New_York_NY
When I redo your calculation with the 1/r dependency, which holds at least for 5.5 hours according to the formula in comment 2241 paper, I get for the heat stored in the granite like
dm=g 4 pi r^2 dr
delta T (r)= C/(4 pi k r)=4 pi k R T0/(4 pi k r) = R T0/r
where R is the radius of the cavity and T0 is the temperature of the cavity, 600 Celsius, C is the constant power conducting through every sphere surface of the granite
Q=int_R^R2 c g 4 pi r^2 R T0 = 2 pi c g R T0 (R2^2-R^2)
where R2 is the radius when the temperature is T2=4 Celsius, as C=4 pi k T0 R=4 pi k T2 R2
R2=(T0/T2)R=3.1R, I set it to R2=3R
which gives
Q=c g (4/3)pi R^3 12 T0
but here we have to use T0=600 Kelvin, not 872 Kelvin, as this is addition from the base level
Q=1.575 10^10 x^3 cal
where R=x meters.
As the total energy is y 10^12 cal where y is the size of the explosive in kilo tons of TNT, and
R=z y^(1/3) where z is typically 9.5 or 7.5 or so on, is the cavity radius
we get
y 10^12 >= 1.575 10^10 z^3 y
from which z=<4
So, it is so that all energy is eventually absorbed by the granite when the granite heats. For some time, at least 5.5 hours, the cavity temperature stays at 600 Celsius, but then it starts to cool, as z is in practice larger than 4 and the only solution is that the cavity temperature drops. If we set z=9.5, then the cavity temperature must be 600/13.5=44 Celsius.
It is much as you reasoned, though you had this error of assuming that a sphere of stone rises to the same temperature, the temperature has a gradient. But in a rough sense you are right, the cavity must eventually cool. The heat is spread to the granite, and finally the integral is not stopped to R2 (at R2 there still is a small heat gradient), the integral is infinite as all heat that there is finally escapes.
So, the calculation I made with the cavity temperature fixed to 600 Celsius is only as good as the assumption that the temperature of the cavity stays at 600 Celsius. It is good for some time and when it is so, we get the 1/r gradient, but after some time the temperature of the gravity drops. If the drop is slow, we still get the 1/r gradient, though with C=4 pi k R T having a smaller T, so the conducted heat can be integrated from this power.
"That you do no recognize Heinz and Contrarian characters for what they are and respond to the idiotic bait “I invite the serious physicists like Heinz and Iris” makes me doubt your judgment and your ability to asses what is really happening here."
Here you are certainly correct. I am not the best judge of human nature. Iris made very good work with JFK, so she is fine, and Contrarian just asked if an observation of Iris could be used to calculate the explosive depth. Calculating a possible depth for a nuclear explosive does not mean supporting a nuclear devise theory. I calculated what follows from the claim that the cavity stays at 600 Celsius. If so, cooling by conduction takes a really long time. These are all assumptions, some correct, some wrong. One has to evaluate where they lead.
I think a correct end result is that the formula in 2241 may be correct. The cavity stays 5.5 hours in 600 Celsius, but then starts to cool slowly. Cooling by conduction results in 1/r temperature dependency outside the cavity (assuming perfect spherical form), but finally all energy would be dissipated by conduction to the stone.
“Shill geologists hired by Uncle said that this rather volcanic-looking rock is proof of the ice that covered Manhattan many millennia ago.”
This is just more despise for the public.
As you rightly stated, where is the ghost volcano that would have produced only such small, localised amount of lava?
When the WTC was designed, one of the problems to overcome was that the ground had been flooded for centuries. A special bund-like construction nicknamed the “Bathtub” had to be built to protect the excavation on which the Towers were built up.
The ground had to be dug up down to approximately -23 metres (minus 23 metre), to reach the bedrock. Sky-scrappers require to be anchored to the deeper, bedrock layers of the ground, because they are too tall and too heavy.
There are photos available of the “Bathtub” structure, which show its depth:
As you can see below, the excavation protected by the Bathtub comprised the Twin Towers, and was lozenge-shaped:
The were no “volcanic rocks” inside the Bathtub, down to a depth of circa -23 metres, when the Twin Towers’ construction commenced. The footprint was completed emptied and the soil moved and used to constitute Battery Park City.
These striated “volcanic rocks” were therefore formatted between 1966 and 2001. Another prodigy as per the Tel Aviv geological school of thought.
And to be clear (and make utu understand* changing his mind is normal in science): I understood only recently that the “glacial potholes” were indeed genuine ones, and not “proofs of the rock melting because of underground nukes” like Khalezov and so many others think. So don’t be rude with yourselves, Iris and Contrarian III, you’re doing a very good job.
(*) actually I don’t think understanding is the issue with utu.
“The thermal equations drawn up by the French scientists were meant at assessing when it would become safe/possible to carry out civil works on the explosion site: the focus was on the later stages of the cooling process, not on the earlier ones where temperatures would have been higher.”
In every equation one has to make some assumptions, but let us assume the equation correctly describes the temperature in the center of the cavity after the initial stages. I very much doubt that I would make any mistake in two changes of integration parameter and one partial integration, (but please check it if in doubt,) so the French formula is essentially (the second part is small)
temperature in the center= 2 Qi normal cumul. distribution from 0 to deviation R/sqrt(4 alpha t)
The drop starts at about 3 standard deviations
At 2 standard deviations it is already 2.3%
at one standard deviation t=R^2/4alpha = 89265 s = 24 hours
it is 0.3413/0.5=0.68, so 400 Celsius
at 1/2 standard deviation is 48 hours, it is 0.1915/0.5=0.38, so 230 Celsius.
At 0.1 standard deviations t=10 days and temperature is (0.0398/0.5)*600=48 Celsius.
This is the cooling speed from the French formula. Naturally, if we replace 600 Celsius by 1,200 Celsius as the starting value, or use an even higher starting value, the temperatures go up. This does change the cooling time.
And it is also true that the heat stored in granite will equal the heat produced by the explosion if we assume that the cavity stays at 600 Celsius for a long time, because this results in 1/r temperature dependency and as I calculated in my last post to utu, it gives a value that is of the same order as the heat produced by the explosion (actually larger, meaning the cavity cannot stay at 600 Celsius).
I think we have to accept that the explosion alone cannot keep the temperatures high for 100 days, but will keep it for a few days. Or the initial temperature in the formula is not 600 Celsius, it is higher.
To continue this: “I think we have to accept that the explosion alone cannot keep the temperatures high for 100 days, but will keep it for a few days. Or the initial temperature in the formula is not 600 Celsius, it is higher.”
Which is to say that if the French formula is correctly estimating the center temperature of any heat source, hot spots can last for 100 days if the initial temperature is about 3000 Celsius, but if the initial temperature is 600 Celsius, as in office fires, the hot spots should have cooled in a few days, which is the common experience. The equation is linear with respect to the initial temperature Qi.
As for what caused the initial temperatures to reach 3000 Celsius, I have no suggestion. It can be thermite, conventional explosives or nuclear explosion, large or small.
Temp=2Qi normal(R/sqrt(4alpha t))+ a small term
Set:
Qi=3000
R/sqrt(4alpha t)=0.04
Then normal(R/sqrt(4alpha t))=0.0160 so Temp=96 Celsius, still a bit hot
t=8,640,000 s= 100 days
alpha=0.007 as in the paper, or it can be a bit different
Then:
R=0.04*sqrt(4 alpha t)=0.04*492=19.6 m a rather small cavity
To go further one should estimate the required cavity size.
There is no error! I was not calculating what the temperature will be at r=100m and r=200m but I was calculating the upper limit, the upper bound of the temperatures there. Is it really that hard to understand? I calculated that temperatures at 100m or 200m will never exceed certain values. And the values turned out to be low enough to prove that steel melting at 100m or 200m is impossible which is what I wanted to prove.
What is there no to understand? I also wrote a comment for you #2266 which I think explains what was my general line of argument.
You are not helpful. I understand your autistic need to show off with your calculations which I have no time or need to verify because they do not contribute anything to the discussion. And in the future when you come up with some calculations of something whether it is a number Jews killed or impossibility of Evolution devote some energy to present it that it would be understandable, where the notation is explained and assumption are spelled out. Otherwise you are wasting your time and only deepen your frustration of being isolated and not understood.
Finally your solution 1/r is correct for sphere within a sphere case with boundary conditions: inner sphere T1=const and outer sphere initial temperature is T2<T1. The assumption T1=const is not valid in out case because the inner sphere will be cooling as well, so the solution to the heat transfer problem will be different.
I am really impressed that the hand waving science can lead somebody to a reasonable opinion. Did you change the handwaving from clock wise to the counter clock wise? Whatever you did keep it up. You may eventually un-hand wave (1) pulverization of steel and (2) melted steel w/o a contact to the melt zone.
“Finally your solution 1/r is correct for sphere within a sphere case with boundary conditions: inner sphere T1=const and outer sphere initial temperature is T2<T1. The assumption T1=const is not valid in out case because the inner sphere will be cooling as well, so the solution to the heat transfer problem will be different."
Yes, it is wrong in this respect, but it is simple to correct it. Assuming that the French formula for the temperature of the center is correct, it is (ignoring the small second term) just a constant times the normal distribution. T(t)=2Qi normal(R/sqrt(4alpha t)), the power of heat conduction is C(t)=4 pi k R T(t). Just integrate it over t from 0 to infinity, numerically it is quite easy as the normal distribution is tabled.
"There is no error! I was not calculating what the temperature will be at r=100m and r=200m but I was calculating the upper limit, the upper bound of the temperatures there. Is it really that hard to understand?"
You calculated what heat is stored in a ball of granite. However, there was a cavity filled with gas, not granite. This cavity, being filled with gas, is in the same temperature. Thus, the border of the cavity is in the same temperature, which is calculated in the French formula of comment 2241. After that cavity there is granite, but it will not be in the same temperature, the temperature drops as 1/r because the surface grows in a ball as r^2 when the radius grows. In your upper bound at r=100m or r=200 m you assume that the whole ball is in the same temperature and therefore you get a small value to the temperature, like 60 Celsius. But it is not an upper bound. If the cavity is R=50 m, and the cavity temperature is T=600 Celsius, then at R2=100 m the temperature is T2=T*(R/R2)=300 Celsius. This is so because the heat power through every ball surface is the same
C=4 pi k T R = 4 pi k T2 R2. As the cavity is cooling slowly, as the French formula shows, the temperature outside does stabilize to 1/r, but if does not reach far, as that would need more energy than there was.
"You are not helpful. I understand your autistic need to show off with your calculations which I have no time or need to verify because they do not contribute anything to the discussion. And in the future when you come up with some calculations of something whether it is a number Jews killed or impossibility of Evolution devote some energy to present it that it would be understandable, where the notation is explained and assumption are spelled out. Otherwise you are wasting your time and only deepen your frustration of being isolated and not understood. "
I hope the explanation why your solution gave a too low temperature value for r=100 m and r=200 m is now explained in a simple way. I am not frustrated for not being understood, I taught university students so many years that I am quite used to it. The calculations are not a show off, that is the normal way to solve problems in exact fields of science. These are very simple calculations, should I like to make a show off, you would not understand anything of those calculations.
” I understand your autistic need to show off with your calculations ”
So, utu, here you have an example of modern theoretical physics that you see what is the difference between very simple calculations I put to these comments in unz and something more difficult:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1011.3962.pdf
and this is fluid dynamics, also physics
https://ejde.math.txstate.edu/Volumes/2010/93/jormakka.pdf
Since you like to differentiate and integrate solve the following, more realistic, problem of heat transfer by convection in solid spherical body.
The solid sphere of diameter R and r<R.
At time t=0
Temperature for x<rr is T0<T1
The profile of temperature T(x, t=0) in the sphere for t=0 is a step function: T(x, t=0)=T0 for xr.
Determine the function T(x, t) for t>0.
There is no heat transfer by any means beyond x=R.
At which time the function T(x, t) can be approximated as k(t)/x for x>r, where k(t) is time dependent coefficient? How good is this approximation?
By showing off with your publications you think that this disproves the hypothesis that a chief motive behind you presenting irrelevant calculations here was a show off? Au contraire.
Good that you are publishing something even in low impact electronic journals. Still you got 5 to 6 citations in 8 years. Not much but at least somebody has read you.
If “There is no heat transfer by any means beyond x=R.”there is no heat sink at the borders. The system reaches the same temperature. The sphere is solid, so heat transfer is conduction. The condition “Temperature for x<rr is T0<T1" is unclear. The condition "The profile of temperature T(x, t=0) in the sphere for t=0 is a step function: T(x, t=0)=T0 for xr."is unclear. This problem is incorrectly posed and cannot be solved. If you wanted to say that at t=0 the inner sphere of radius r is at the temperature T0 and outside the sphere the temperature is T1r it can be approximated by k(t)/r for a short time as it approaches a constant since there is no heat sink. I have not calculated the goodness of the approximation and I do not see what you need it for.
Those papers I tried to write so easy that any 2nd year physics or mathematics student could follow them because the problems they treat were very difficult (millennium problems). If you knew physics you should have been able to read them, so I made no show off with them, they are easy to follow. But you are a troll and trolls do what trolls do. And you are a nasty troll. I think there is no reason to follow this site any longer.
“Which is to say that if the French formula is correctly estimating the center temperature of any heat source, hot spots can last for 100 days if the initial temperature is about 3000 C”
Hi J2. Great to find you in this thread; thanks for the scientific insight which much enhances this discussion.
Just for clarity: the 600C steady state temperature in/around the explosion chamber was of course measured by the French scientists several weeeks after the initial explosion. It is clearly stated in the article. The initial temperatures are indeed in the 1000’s.
The discussion about this point started because Utu believed that “the temperature at the outer of the explosion cavity could not even boil an egg” and could not melt steel. As a way to end a sterile discussion and give him a grasp about the thermal aftermath of a nuclear explosion, we asked hime to read and understand the “600” number on top of the curve. With kind regards.
So correct it and you will see right away why you are getting wrong results. This formula T2=T*(R/R2)=300 does not apply! Because it assumes there is no temperature drop in the cavity as if the cavity was an infinite source of heat. And it is not. It is cooling as it gives away heat to the outer shell. However you can find some R2 >R for which T2 will be 300K at some point of time but this R2 will be much much smaller than 100m.
Simply there is not enough heat in 600°C cavity (R=50m) to raise the temperature at R2=100m to 300°C. The volume of R=100m outer shell is 7 time larger than the volume of R=50m cavity. Wake up! Don’t you check your results against common sense? Never developed such habit doing theoretical calculations, right? Lucky you.
OK, assume the density of the gas and specific heat and do the calculations. Calculate
∆t=Q/(V(R2)*rho2*c2)
where rho2 and c2 are density and specific heat of solid granite and V(R2) is volume of sphere (R2=100m). This is how I did get my ∆t.
And now calculate taking into account your objection that cavity is not a solid granite:
∆t1=Q/(V(R)*rho*c+(V(R2)-V(R))*rho2*c2)
where rho and c are density and specific heat of the melt cavity. And R=50m and R2=100m.
∆t1 is maximum when rho*c=0. So let suppose there is a magic substance in the cavity that has rho*c=0. Then ∆t=0.875*∆t1 meaning that I underestimated the temperature increment by 12.5% under the assumption of magic substance in the cavity has no density nor specific heat. Obviously the assumption is wrong because rho*c>0. How much larger than zero?
Within few minutes condensable gases condense and you have molten rocks and hot rocks that fall from the roof. The only gas left is the ‘non-condensable” gas which for granite is mostly CO2 and some H2O. The pressures are 100-200 atm and temperature is 2000-1500°C. You can estimate rho*c for this scenario with some assumption on ratio of solids to gas weight.
Now go back and do your homework. You are a pest who wasted too much of my time. So watch out before you come here with another nonsense.
The problem is correctly posed. It asks for determination of the two dimensional function T(x, t) with a starting condition that T(x,t=0)=T1 for x<r and T(x,t=0)=T2 for r<xT2.
The problem can be solved but apparently you can’t. Apparently you are one of those who solve problems they can not the ones they should. Very convenient. I did not know you were also a weasel.
The solution of problem you solved is not applicable in this case. That’s why you are ending up with wrong conclusions. You have assumed that the cavity is an infinite source of heat, you idiot.
I use your picture of WTC6 as an opportunity look into the question of the volume of the debris. Often we hear that there is not enough debris. That it evaporated or it was sucked into the black hole or crater made by the nuclear device. Some asked “where did the towers go?”. Let us try to find out.
Let’s estimate the debris volume. First start with what we know:
Tower dimension (above the ground)= 1362ft x 208 ft x 208 ft.
Tower above the ground volume: 1.66859e+06 m^3
Steel per tower (estimates vary): 90,000 tons
Concrete per tower (estimates vary*): 200,000 tons.
(*) some of this concrete was used for structures underground.
Density of steel: 8050 kg/m^3
Density of concrete: 2400 kg/m^3
Volume of steel: 11180.1 m^3
Volume of steel as fractions of tower volume: 0.67%
How much is 0.67%? It is less than volume of one floor which is 0.96%.
Volume of concrete: 83333 m^3
Volume of concrete as fractions of tower volume: 4.99%
How much is 4.99%? It is a volume of 5 floors.
________________________________________________
We also know that there were 6 levels underground. The underground levels constitute more than 6% of tower volume because the levels had taller ceilings than the office floors in the building.
We have just calculated that total steel and concrete constituted 0.67%+4.99%<6% of tower volume.
In theory with compact packing it would be possible to store all the materials used to build the tower in its 6 underground levels.
Compact packing do not occur but instead we observed the spread of debris beyond 208 ft x 208 ft footprint. If the footprint of debris was increased by 50% on each side the footprint area increased by factor of 2.25. Let suppose that 25% of debris ended up in the underground levels. Let assume that 25% of concrete turned to dust and floated away. How thick layer of debris we should expect on 208*1.5 ft x 208*1.5 ft footprint?
Steel layer thickness: 0.92 m (100% packing factor)
Concrete layer thickness: 5.18 m (100% packing factor)
Total thickness: 6 meters (100% packing)
Many assumption went into these calculations and they can be refined. Particularly the packing factor and how much concrete was "dustified" and perhaps that more debris ended up in the underground 6 levels space and that the footprint spread was larger than 50% on each side. But the numbers are in the ball park? Do we have to invoke nuclear bomb crater or unknown death ray machine? Absolutely not!
I will appreciate if somebody verify the arithmetic operations here.
More precisely, 178 days, which is almost 6 months. “several weeks”, indeed.
The problem that for you “is incorrectly posed and cannot be solved” was posed and solved by Lovering in 1935. You can read about it in this 1964 paper by Philip
http: //adsbit.harvard.edu/full/1964AuJPh..17..423P
and also this paper by Brown
http: //adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1965AuJPh..18..483B
THE PROBLEM IS POSED AS FOLLOWS:
The Lovering’s solution when the sphere and the medium are made form the same material is given in a close form as the equation 7.5 on page 428. When media are different solutions are expressed as series.
The case I posed is slightly different because the medium is not infinite but a finite sphere. But I think Lovering’s solution could be adopted as a starting point if somebody wished to follow it. When you look at it you will notice that there is 1/r factor in one segment of the formula but the dependence on r is much more complicated via exponential and erf functions. The Lovering equation captures the fact that the sphere is cooling and has a finite amount of heat available your simplistic approach did not capture. However, Lovering’s formula is not valid for times t close to 0, I think.
The second paper it is suggested that for large r and t the temperature is approximated by Gaussian of r where its width (standard deviation) is proportional to square root of time t.
I am not interested in this problem and never was. You have forced it on me and I wasted quite a lot of time.
Nuclear demolition does NOT invoke a large volume crater, only a small subsidence crater will trigger the collapse by lowering the central core a few meters. That’s NOT about creating enough volume to “hide” the remnants.
“The discussion about this point started because Utu believed that “the temperature at the outer of the explosion cavity could not even boil an egg” and could not melt steel. As a way to end a sterile discussion and give him a grasp about the thermal aftermath of a nuclear explosion, we asked hime to read and understand the “600″ number on top of the curve. ”
That was exactly as you say. It is why I tried to show utu where his calculation went wrong, just to get you people over that useless dispute but utu is a troll and trolls do not admit mistakes. I do not have the book that you apparently have read, so I cannot comment on whether there was a cavity or not, but of the thermite hypothesis, I never took seriously the claim in the Danish paper that the red chips were energetic, as that was through a questionable test, but the spectrum showing components of thermite seemed more convincing. How does the book, or you, explain the spectrum of the dust?
utu, this is the last time I will answer to you. You are too mixed up for any meaningful discussion.
You posed the question as:
The solid sphere of diameter R and r<R.
At time t=0
Temperature for x<rr is T00.
There is no heat transfer by any means beyond x=R.
The question that Lovering solved is as
A sphere of radius a, of uniform temperature T10 is suddenly exposed at time t=0 in an infinite medium of uniform temperature T20. Temperatur within the sphere is T1(r, t) and within the medium is T2(r, t). Find function T1 and T2.
You notice the differences. Lovering has an infinite medium, so it has a heat sink to the infinity, but you have “There is no heat transfer by any means beyond x=R.” meaning R is finite and there is no heat sink at x=R as there is no heat transfer from there.
Then you mix things up by writing “Temperature for x<rr is T0r valid. The solution k/x is a steady state solution with a source of heat at r is constant and the sink of heat at R is constant. Obviously you do not have these steady state conditions valid in your question. In a local area for some time you will have k(t)/x but I am not interested in solving a totally unrealistic problem just for you, especially as you imagine it is the Lovering solution that solves a different problem.
You cannot formulate a problem in a consistent way, you cannot solve the problem you think, you cannot see that the solution that you have is for another problem. What is the sense of discussing physics with you? Take some valium and sip some whisky, relax man, you are not a researcher level physicist.
There is something very strange in this site. I copied from the comment 2348 the sentence by utu:
“Temperature for x<rr is T0<T1"
and added what is rr? what is T1? So, what I wrote is exactly
"Temperature for x<rr is T0<T1" what is rr? what is T1?
That is, utu's problem statement is unclear.
but in the comment 2360 this place reads:
“Temperature for x<rr is T0r valid.
I did not write as it is written in the comment 2360.
So, I must conclude that either Ron Unz has some software bug in comments after 2300, or there is a conspiracy with utu and Ron Unz. Draw your own conclusions, something is wrong in this site, software or something else.
“Hi J2. Great to find you in this thread;”
Just to say goodbye to you Iris, thank you, this thread and all threads. You found my blog, so if you need my help in solving some logical or mathematical problem in a particular conspiracy theory, do not hesitate, send me an email, happy to help you any time. But this site is infested by trolls. High time to find another site.
How should one know what a nuclear demolition invoke when you, the chief proponent of it, refuse to spell out the scenario how it was done? I asked you several times to be specific about the size of the device and its depth. It should be consistent with your new claim here: “only a small subsidence crater” and “lowering the central core a few meters.” The hypothesis of nuclear demolition is kept alive in your mind only by its vagueness. I think we have already disposed of your earlier claims that of Khalezovian pulverization and steel melting outside the melt zone.
“So, I must conclude that either Ron Unz has some software bug in comments after 2300, or there is a conspiracy with utu and Ron Unz. Draw your own conclusions, something is wrong in this site, software or something else.”
The person commenting under the moniker Utu posted nonsense of unbelievable creativity on this thread. What he wrote was actually so idiotic that I long came to the conclusion that he was doing so deliberately, to exasperate people, pull their legs, fill the thread with sterile controversies and personal duels that divert attention from the important subject at stake: 9/11.
The sort of absolutely monumental “pearls of knowledge” Utu posted to Heinz was for instance, in 2221:
” As you can see the temperature is even lower than my pervious estimate. You won’t be even able to melt paraffin at the outer edge of the crushed zone. And you, poor man, wanted to melt steel.
Melting steel is out of question. Rocks do not melt in the crushed zone. And your arguing about the melting point of steel is really pathetic. Poor weasel.”
Despite such statement which simply defies common sense, let alone Physics, Utu got an “Agree” from Ron Unz in 2227. We couldn’t believe it when we saw it: isn’t Mr Unz background precisely in Physics?
Who can “Agree” with a commentator basically stating that there is NO conservation of energy?
I can’t be sure what is happening on this site, but three things are certain:
– Israel trolls can hack the Unz Review and Ron Unz’s moniker.
– Utu is a troll.
– The individual posting under “Utu” is very spiteful , and will resent it and seek revenge if he feels humiliated in a discussion, even if he had been humiliated under another moniker.
Hi J2;
The genealogy of the discussion from my recollection is as follows:
– Contrarian III posted very intelligent and well-synthetized comments about a book by a Russian called Khalezov, exposing nuclear explosions as possible cause of the WTC collapses.
– Heinz further posted well-informed and very valuable comments on the same thesis.
– Khalezov’s book is available on the Internet (best link posted by Contrarian somewhere higher up in the thread):
http://www.911thology.com/
– I had no knowledge of this thesis: 9/11 is such an obvious false flag that I never was interested in researching it. However, the commentators above were so interesting that I felt compelled to do some research. I found that Khalezov’s thesis had transpired in the French-speaking world and was endorsed by Physics academics with impeccable credentials.
– Some other UR commentators, on the contrary, consider that “Khalezov is a kook (a mad man)” and that whoever believes his thesis is an idiot. In particular, they dismissed the most undeniable smoking gun of a nuclear explosion: the persistent and elevated heat measured at Ground Zero for over 100 days. They came up with bizarre “science”, such as temperature dropping to ambient almost immediately after a nuclear explosion.
– A way to debunk the nonsense over the temperature was to post the French official article, where the experimental temperature used to assess the cooling period (after which civil works would become possible) was proved to well match the 600C baseline.
– The creation of a cavity and subsequent collapse of its roof after a nuclear explosion in granitic ground is not a personal opinion. It is a well-known pattern, identified under experimental conditions and described in many official French articles:
https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/35/095/35095014.pdf
– Contrarian and Heinz are much more knowledgeable about the radioactivity aspect, too. May be one of them can answeryour question relating to the spectrum of dust, which I hadn’t have the time to research so far.
With kind regards.
FWIW. I’m only a quarter of the way through reading the comments, made more difficult by the troll-fest this subject has and always does become. I retain an open mind, but over the years suspicion has turned to certainty.
So excuse me if this has been covered.
Ron Unz has done a good job on the who/what and the why.
How? Cannot be ignored.
I’m sure many here are aware of the comprehensive theses of Dimitri Khalezov. I’m going with those until (though unlikely) a better explanation comes along. Roughly summarised, it goes like this:
Two or possibly three – the heat signatures suggest three – deep sub-surface nuclear explosions account perfectly for the phenomena observed in New York, the collapses, pulverisation and the aftermath conditions.
Not ‘mini-nukes’ which are defined anything from 0.1 to 10 kilotons equivalent TNT, but larger devices, up to 150 kilotons which are ‘legal’ in the US for demolition and civil engineering purposes.
Consent to build such large structures in a dense city environment was conditional on also submitting plans for their removal when the buildings reached the end of their useful life.
The use of such also accounts for the presence of micro-spheres from superheating of iron and aluminium and other materials, including what appear to be uncombusted thermite/thermate products.
Lava-like rock formations, residual heat rising from these rocks when all combustible materials were removed, and the man-made cooling pools all confirm such a hypothesis.
Pentagon: Clearly a missile strike, with no payload, neither conventional explosive or nuclear. His account of Donald Rumsfield wandering around on the Pentagon lawn, knowing the missile-strike was incoming and would be a dud, when everyone else senior was cowering in the deepest bunker expecting armageddon, is very telling.
I can discount Fred Reed’s half-pissed DC retiree drinking buddy fishing on the Potomac saying he seen a plane, like the little chap from Fantasy Island. He might have done, but didn’t see it strike the building.
A less convincing but less important, though quite possible part of Khalekov’s presentation is that this missile was a ‘granit’ type, of Russian manufacture, flash-ROM-coded with its target and route/approach, liberated from the stricken submarine Kursk by party or parties unknown.
I should add too that I don’t completely discount the possibility of thermite/thermate and nano-technology variants of the same, plus conventional explosives, to cut away and then blow sideways the entire support structure of the building across several floors. Some pictures circulating early in the public investigative movement clearly showed columns core or more probably perimeter ones cleanly cut diagonally top to bottom which could have resulted from pre-positioned cutter charges, there was even splatter from the cutting material used, so these were not welded joins from manufacture which failed from shear forces, though oxy-acetylene cutter/burner torches could have been used, leaving similar looking residues. It was evident that these photos were taken in the immediate aftermath before even work to make the site safe for further exploration could been planned much less undertaken. Such demolition however does not account for the extreme pulverisation of building materials or contents.
The only similar destruction of similarly constructed but less tall steel-framed buildings I have seen extensively photographed was the simultaneous multiple demolitions of the Red-Road apartment buildings to the north-east of Glasgow city-centre two or three years back. Other than the absence of such vast and dense pyroclastic clouds, accountable for as they had been stripped of contents, almost down to just the bare frames, and clad with netting and polythene to contain the dust and debris, and the failure either through error/malfunction or by design, perhaps due to the proximity of neighbouring buildings, of the upper section of one building to be completely destroyed, the collapses and aftermath looked so eerily similar that it is reasonable to conclude the methods used were similar to those of the WTC buildings in 2001.
It did not occur to you that perhaps your beliefs are not what is common sense? That it is you who is outside of the world of common sense?
I have estimated the value of temperature increase (its upper bound) at R=100m and R=200m from the shot point of 150 kt device in granite. The results of 600°C in the melt cavity in the Shoal (13 kt) test 6 months after the explosion that you found in the French report do not contradict it.
Look at Figures II, III, IV and V in the report and see what temperatures were at 20-30 meters distance away from the shot point at different times after the test.
The cavity has approximately radius of 15m. The spherical shell between 15m and 30m outside the cavity has volume seven times larger than the spherical melt cavity. If all the heat from the melt cavity at temperature 600°C moved to that spherical shell the temperature of the shell would not increase by more than 125°C (600+273 divided by 7). The spherical shell between 15m and 40m has volume that is 18 times larger than the cavity, so if all heat went to that shell the temperature of the shell would increase by no more than 50°C (600+273 divided by 18).
This is just an elementary physics that I am sure you had in lycée or even the vocational school if you did not qualify for the lycée. Presumably they have good schools in the French speaking world. So what is holding you back? All that money the state spent on your education went for nothing?
Thanks for the information, Iris, I will read Khalezov’s book.
It’s long, but it’s worth reading. Take it with a pinch of salt, but read it. Not only for 9/11.
There’s quite a story about the Granit which sailed into the Pentagon. Khalezov considers it a critical part of making 9/11 happen the way it did: The USG had to believe that the USA was under nuclear attack without making that obvious to John Q. Public. Stealing a loaded Granit was necessary to put the USG on a nuclear war footing on 9/11.
Let me add a few nuggets about the Granit. Until Sept. 10, 2001, the Granit was a “secret” weapon, no photograph of which was available outside Russia. On Sept. 10, Jane’s published a picture of it with some details about its performance. Our Russian friend thinks this was to remind the USG what a Granit was all about and tell it what it looked like. Recognition of the Pentagon “intruder” one day later was therefore instantaneous.
Russia was anxious to cover up the loss of the Granits and its nukes; loss of the Kursk and its sailors was bad enough for the new president, Putin, who had been in office about 100 days when the Kursk sank. The Kursk was an “unsinkable” ship, much as the Titanic was, but the Kursk really was well-built. It took sabotage to sink it, although the Russian admiralty finally blamed the sinking on an accident resulting from poor quality control.
If you take a much deeper look into the Kursk, you can probably figure out how it was sabotaged and who relieved the Kursk of almost its entire complement of Granits. I did an analysis and narrowed down the probable saboteur to three people, in order of probability of guilt. [My final conclusion was that two people were the saboteurs.] Khalezov didn’t want to touch that issue. A best friend of his was murdered because of his curiosity into the Kursk sinking. The issue of who relieved the Kursk of its Granits leads directly to the USG. Divers from two US submarines, Memphis and Toledo, pulled the missiles out of their canisters and took them away to Norway to put them on a surface warship which then departed for place(s) unknown. Somebody in the US Navy was aware of the sabotage plan in advance. I can tell the whole story of my analysis but it’s waaaaay off topic here.
The most interesting part of the Granit story is that it makes clear that the “who” of 9/11 was not Israel, not Mossad, not CIA, but a transnational group — the top of which Iris has called “the Cabal” and the foot soldiers of which Khalezov has called the “good guys”, the freemasons. [Khalezov doesn’t distinguish the hierarchy. ]”Good guys” should be looked at as a translation of “good old boys” which doesn’t translate well into Russian.
I read the article and downloaded the book but one important notice said that the book is not free, so I deleted it without reading. Maybe there is a free version, I will see. Anyway, from the article I have some comments:
1) no planes theory seems well justified
2) I do not think steel can be pulverized by the shock wave. I found one calculation claiming that to break the structured of one floor about 600 MJ is needed, as if would be nearly 100 floors, this alone would require some 60 GJ. Most of 150 kt (150*4.16*GJ) could not be in the shock wave. I think that steel can form round spheres only in a very high temperature, but this would not be the case with a shock wave.
3) WTC1 falls by 6.3 m/s2 acceleration, compatible with a gravitational fall, so the building is not turned to dust by a shock wave.
4) If explosives made the holes for the planes, similar explosives can break the steel structures, though the book claims they could not.
5) the antenna is an interesting case, I think it melts when some of it hits over 3000 Celsius temperature and what looks like pulverization is burning of something on it.
6) I am not convinced about the cavities, they may be geological formations from ice
7) there seems to have been an underground explosion, but whether it was over 100 kt, I cannot say
Based on these, I think a mini nuke taking down the core + explosives/thermite destroying the peripheral steel structures and a gravitational fall of the floors still may fit all data better.
” I did an analysis and narrowed down the probable saboteur to three people, in order of probability of guilt. [My final conclusion was that two people were the saboteurs.] ”
This is extremely interesting. If it is no trouble/risk to you, can you please kindly expand on this?
Khalezov has asked people to pay for his book, but per his statement fewer than 0.1 % of the number of copies downloaded have resulted in any money arriving in his hands. If you wish to remain anonymous, paying him is problematical, even with the several ways he offers. I’ve downloaded it and read it with some care, some parts a few times because of the intertwining of parts of the narrative.
I feel I have a moral obligation to pay him, but absent an anonymous conduit I consider it a free book. How do you even get the message to him that his payment options do not recognize the political realities of living in a deep surveillance society? If he lived in a country which had a semi-honest post office, sending him cash would work — for Thailand, that’s not realistic. I’d suggest you take a pragmatic approach and re-download it. By now, he has recognized that his business model is poor.
Also as Heinz aptly put it, read it for more than 9/11.
No there is no free version but I’ve read it anyway. But you can read it first and make a donation later, which is what I plan to do.
1) Yes but there’s a big mistake in steel thickness.
2) Be careful with that, it’s not a matter of energy only. The calculations you’ve found deal with slow deformation of steel that is, “normal” conditions where it requires a lot of energy before rupture. Extremely brutal shockwaves can make materials look brittle even if they are not in “normal” conditions.
3) Agree, but I don’t think Khalezov claims any building is “turned into dust”, just that a lot of dust is produced.
4) Yes but you need a lot of them and it makes a lot of noise.
5) I don’t really understand what you mean.
6) Yes they are, and first they are in the wrong place ! Khalezov is wrong on this.
7) I can’t say either but I can say it was not much less because of the amount of heat released, which one can estimate thanks to IR thermography.
“…According to the news reports, there were emergency power generators atop the buildings with diesel fuel tanks to gravity feed them. This was the party line on the afternoon of September 11…”
That’s not the way emergency generators in buildings work. They have a small tank of fuel in the building by the generator called a “day tank”. The mass of the fuel will be outside the building or in a secured location usually underground. The fuel pump that pumps fuel to the small tank next to the generator is always tied by code to the fire alarm system. The pump turns off in case of fire.
A pinch of salt? What about a salt mine?
You keep dancing around Khalezov. Sometimes admitting that there is crap in there but refusing to commit. You keep pushing him like a dope dealer knowing perfectly well the dope is tainted and possibly poisonous. I ask you to separate the wheat from the chaff in Khalezov story but you refuse. I ask to be specific about the size of the nuclear device and its depth to accomplish the demolition but then your reflex is to call me a troll. The reality does not go away. It is persistent and forces you to face it. I am the reality here and yes for the deluded and dishonest it may feel like trolling. But the reality is not going away. This its trolling nature. So far you demonstrated you are a dishonest coward.
How big was the nuke and how deep underground was it placed? I know it is very difficult for you to be put on the spot but you need to commit. If you make the depth too low like 77m of Khalzeov you will end up with unconfined explosion and vaporization and melting of half of the building if not more and debris flying upwards but if you go deep to be in the agreement with the external evidence you will not get the steel melting. An this is your problem. That’s where I got you. Because you nee steel melting explained. Because it might be your only tangible evidence of something unusual. But high temperature and steel melting could have been caused by something else. Some conventional explosives or a mini-nuke. But no, you want to have a big one because of Dimitri Khalezov gospel and yet you are telling to take with pinch of salt.
We know there was no pulverization of steel which is impossible. You were pushing it very strongly earlier in the thread. Coming up with all kind pseudo science hand waving. We know that there was no steel dust even though you ‘saw’ it in a video as a dark plume with your X-ray vision. That was your evidence which you took form Khalezov. Everything you got came form Khalezov. Some people get victimized by one book. Only under scrutiny you backed off and reluctantly admit that here and there he needs to be taken with pinch of salt. So why were you pushing pulverization and steel dust? Why didn’t you do a little bit of critical research to see how shock waves in metals behave and what it take to cause damage? Why didn’t you look at energy if shockwave available at 100m or more for the shot point? Why it did not occur to you but instead you kept pushing the canonical version fo Khalezov gospel but when you are confronted with counterarguments you back off like a weasel. But then as if nothing happened you keep pushing the same tainted dope.
You re a dishonest coward.
“…Only a controlled demolition can produce free fall. End of story…”
If you look at all the evidence, and there’s a lot, this is the root of why 9-11 is a false flag. Building 7 fell the same speed as a rock dropped in free air. Since things falling in a gravity field only have two variables, the force of gravity and the resistance medium that the object is falling in. We can readily see the problem. All masses fall exactly the same speed as the Apollo Moon mission video showed when they dropped a feather and a hammer and they hit the Moon at the exact same time. The only thing left is the resistance medium the mass is falling in. In this case a building and a rock dropped in air. Since the building fell EXACTLY the same speed as the rock in air this means the building was held up by, “air” alone. Well we all know the building wasn’t floating in the air. The only possible possible explanation is that there was no support at all. There was no steel columns, no masonry, no nothing holding the building up after it started falling. It must have been demoed in some way.
I don’t know why nano-thermite is controversial. It was found in the dust. It would be reasonable to assume they used the nano-thermite to melt the columns so they would lose support. Nano-thermite not giving off a huge blast like traditional explosives would hide the fact that the building was demoed. Looking at what happened I assume that they used the naon-thermite to melt the columns then smaller explosives to blast the columns apart.
Typical Heinzian confabulation and hand waving. In times of rapture it may actually work.
You keep repeating this lie.
Yes. This is why it is very easy to reject the official story. To believe the government’s story of 9/11 you have to believe that momentum transfer at free-fall acceleration is possible. The official narrative can be rejected because it contravenes the known laws of physics.
WYC7 is the gateway drug to the rest of 9/11.
This “confabulation” is known for decades by materials scientists:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/ductile-to-brittle-transition
End of troll attempt to look competent.
PS: confabulation and affabulation are different words with different meanings.
“5) I don’t really understand what you mean.”
In the article there is a video where the South Tower top antenna seems to vanish to the air, like it was pulverized. The antenna is metal, maybe aluminum. Khalezov in the article states that the antenna disintegrates under its own weight, i.e., is pulverized as stone in the pressure zone of an underground explosion. I think there is some other explanation. It could be that the antenna melts and something in it (metal or paint) possibly burns or it shakes and that is what gives the impression.
I still add one argument for explosives higher up in the building: the steel beams flying horizontally. It could theoretically be a gravitational effect: hit from above compresses steel beams and when the pressure is released, they jump outside the building like springs, but the natural explanation is that they are blown outside by explosives. I cannot understand how an explosion 77 m underground could cause this effect.
Arguments for an underground explosion:
– shaking of the video 12 s before the fall, one eye witness telling of shaking of her flat, the very
probable need to take the central core down before the collapse, the antenna falling first
– use of the word ground zero
So, it is probable there was an underground explosion, that is, below the ground level, and arguably it may have been nuclear, but possibly small
Arguments against a shock wave disintegrating the building:
– fall with 6.3 s/m2 is consistent with structures being broken by the kinetic energy of a gravitational fall assuming one floor is demolished
– steel beams thrown horizontally with a high initial speed
– air puffs either from explosives or from pancaking floors, I think pancaking floors is OK
Heat energy for melting steel and keeping something like hots spots of 2000 Celsius for 100 days must be something producing 3000 Celsius or more, but it can be other than 150 kt nuclear explosion. It need not have a single heat source.
@Contrarian III
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/#comment-2570512
Thanks for your reply. The only doubt about the Granit I harbour is that is it would have a functional warhead, though disabled by whatever multiple safeguards, there’s still a theoretical risk of it going off due to a cascade of malfunctions, especially in the hands of a ham-fisted new keeper not in posession of all the documentation and not having benefited from hands-on experience and training. I’d have hoped and very much preferred that the warhead would have been replaced with something inert but weighing the same so as not affect its flight characteristics. Even then the result of it arriving smoking at the Pentagon in that ultra-safe condition would still have the result of putting the fear of $deity into the big-wigs.
I read the Khalekov documents three or more years ago, when they first appeared on the VT site, so only recall the gist of the contents and haven’t retained the full fiendishness and detail of the whole plot. It has stayed with me since as the case is most compelling and for me as good as put an end to further consideration of the How. In the interim it seemed to have fallen off the radar, and I’d maybe stepped back a bit from the abyss that is the online sphere, but obviously it hadn’t gone away and is still a hot matter.
The point I hoped by make by contrasting what was seen on September 2001 in NY and afterwards, with conventional professional controlled-demolition, is that they are not even remotely similar in outcome, instead many things inexplicable and far out of the ordinary took place, three times, on that day in NY, or have become evident as the cleanup progressed.
Controlled demolition and all that that entails, however shocking, bloodthirsty and callous, is the default explanation for many who immediately, instinctively discarded the absurd plane impacts and fire explanations, spoon-fed on that day 17 years ago and thereafter, or adopted by many more who have since come round to that position, as the official ‘plebeian’ story stretched then broke the bounds of credibility
But even controlled-demolition as it is generally understood is inadequate, there is so much that it does not and cannot explain.
I’m relishing this discussion and the science, but will refrain from further commenting as anything I could contribute pales besides the many excellent comments I’ve read since jumping in half-cocked stating the bleeding obvious and things which were already being debated furiously and even sometimes eloquently.
Have at it folks!
Are you referring to videos 2 and 4 in Khalezov’s article here?
http://www.911thology.com/nexus1.html
If so, there is no “antenna” turned into dust (and anyway only the north tower had one) but a part of the central core, which looks affectively “dustified” after all the building has come down.
Khalezov’s “style” is a bit “black and white” instead of “shades of grey”, so don’t take him literally. He tries to make things simple but very often he oversimplifies, according to me. I don’t agree with this for instance:
No, a part of the tower was reduced to dust, not ALL of it.
You give a good explanation, which would deserve to be refined but at least I can’t say now that it’s impossible without classical explosives.
I can’t understand how this is an argument against a shock wave: as said earlier, shock wave does not mean “entirely reduced to dust” but heavily weakened. Some resistance can remain which is consistent with this acceleration value.
As you said earlier, there are other explanations than classical explosives for steel beams being ejected, and for air puffs also: no matter which is the technique, if a tower comes down it will expell the air it contains. You don’t need a specific mechanism for that, like “floors pancaking”.
I haven’t read anywhere that 2000°C were measured after 100 days but anyway the question is not the most important one to me: it’s rather the amount of heat generated (ground surface was still warmer than normal 5 months later), which requires a huge amount of combustible material (whatever it is) if you exclude nuclear energy. Going nuclear propels you in another dimension, as you probably know from your high school physics lessons, even if you’re not a professional scientist.
Well, this comment-thread has reached an astonishing 400,000 words and since the page is becoming far too large for convenient loading, I’m closing it.
Anyway, it looks like most of the last few hundred comments are by seemingly insane people who exemplify why 9/11 conspiracy activism has rarely gotten anywhere. Glancing over it, I get the impression that they’re apparently debating the theory that the World Trade Center was destroyed by nuclear weapons stolen from a Soviet submarine or something like that.
I suppose there’s no great harm in allowing mentally-ill individuals access to the Internet, though it’s a shame they clog up comment-threads with their nonsense.