"Why haven’t we had another 9/11 yet?"

You mean, of course, aside from the anthrax mailings of Oct 2001?

http://www.potshot.ca/pm/index.php?n=Main.RockefellersAnthrax

http://www.potshot.ca/pm/index.php?n=Main.CiproOrCannabis-WhatsBestForAnthrax?

Perhaps it was because they had more difficulty in pinning 9/11 and the anthrax attack on Arab people than expected.

Perhaps they did not anticipate a 9-11 truth movement to spring up from the dust and ashes.

http://mwcnews.net/focus/politics/5748-why-9-11-truth-has-won.html

Why 9-11 Truth Has Won

Print

Friday, 08 October 2010 15:50
By Allen L. Jasson

The 9-11 Truth Movement has clearly won the fight. The two key facts essential to defeat the official explanation and establish critical need for a new, wider, criminal investigation are the free-fall collapse of three WTC buildings (proving the complete absence of structural resistance) and the presence of thermite in large quantities (as the prime explanation for the absence of structural resistance). These facts have been established irrefutably as a matter of repeatable and verifiable science.

Free-Fall Collapse

It took a high school physics teacher to recognise and then take the necessary steps to prove that the buildings collapsed at a rate approaching gravitational free-fall. He did this using a frame-by-frame analysis measuring the distance fallen between frames and calculating velocity and hence acceleration based on the sampling rate (i.e. the time between frames) of the video. This is probably not publishable work because it’s not new science; it’s really just application of science that’s been established for over 200 years. However, it’s repeatable and verifiable by anyone in possession of the tools and knowledge required to perform the frame-by-frame analysis on the numerous video footage of the collapsing buildings. Indeed, similar work can be seen in many physics textbooks, which use sequences of photographic images of accelerating objects taken at fixed time intervals to illustrate the concepts of acceleration and velocity.

Presence of Thermite

Thermite is a mixture of substances based on Aluminium, Iron and other elements, which, when ignited, burns at temperatures sufficient to melt steel (which is not possible with jet fuel). It can be used to cut steel girders. Nano-thermite is a more technologically refined form in which the particles are of microscopic dimensions (of the order of nanometres) evenly mixed in accurate proportions and which can be used as an explosive. This is now common knowledge but must be stated for completeness.

Prof. Steven E. Jones, who was at the time of his work, Professor of Physicist at Brigham Young University in Salt Lake City showed the presence of substances arising from the action of thermite to melt steel in samples of melted steel obtained from girder fragments taken from the debris of the WTC buildings and used in monuments to commemorate the event. His peer-reviewed and verifiable scientific work has been published in scientific journals as proof of the use of thermite to cut the steel girders and weaken the structure of the buildings. The use of thermite in this way is also corroborated by the observed molten metal pouring from holes in the stricken buildings before and during their collapse and the presence of pools of molten metal in the rubble, still white hot and molten weeks after the collapse. If this were aluminium, even the people who removed it would surely know.

Danish scientist, Niels Harrit, PhD Associate Professor at the Department of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen, has published with others, a peer-reviewed paper in the Open Chemical Physics Journal describing work he did to establish the presence of nano-thermite in four independently sourced and chain-of-custody verified samples of dust taken from the debris of the WTC towers. Its mere presence is significant. Microscopic characteristics of particles in the separate samples were the same, indicating that the particles derived from a common source. Quantitative analysis of the samples extrapolated to the total volume of rubble indicated very substantial quantities of the explosive were present - tonnes of it!

The presence of large quantities of nano-thermite suggests it was used as an explosive as part of a controlled demolition of the buildings. The use of nano-thermite in this way is also corroborated by the many observed “squib” explosions flashing out laterally from the sides of the buildings just below the wave of collapse as it moved down the building, by the many reports by firemen, rescue workers and survivors of explosions seen or heard within the buildings before their collapse and by the fact that thousands of tonnes of steel, concrete and glass were pulverised almost completely to dust in a wave that moved at near free-fall speed down the buildings, ahead of the collapse, ejecting fragments and steel girders sometimes hundreds of feet laterally as it went.

The proven presence of these two forms of thermite is taken to explain the complete absence of structural resistance to collapse of the buildings allowing free-fall descent and implies pre-arranged, controlled demolition. The evidence for controlled demolition is also corroborated by the visible pattern of collapse with apparent implosion and systematic collapse of each of the buildings into its footprint. This pattern has been easily observed and recognised by untrained spectators and is also confirmed by experts in controlled demolition who testify to the difficulty, the time in preparation and expert knowledge and experience required to achieve it.

The Victory for 9-11 Truth

Of course, there is a long way to go yet; merely establishing the facts, even irrefutable and critically deterministic facts such as these, in such a politically intense matter as this is not in itself sufficient. However, the 9-11 Truth Movement has four elements to its case, which must inevitably deliver victory:

1. It has defeated the conspiracy-theory stigma by turning the argument around to show that the official explanation is itself a quite absurd conspiracy theory
2. It has adopted a very clever strategy of offering no theories at all but simply proving the falsity of the official explanation in order to demand a proper investigation
3. It has amassed a vast amount of other evidence combined with highly astute and logical analysis applied by some very capable and articulate champions
4. A great many relevant professionals who possess the technical understanding of diverse aspects of the 9-11 event have put the weight of their professional credibility behind the 9-11 Movement – and the number is growing rapidly.

Despite the daily, universal reach to the minds of ordinary people by a corrupt mainstream corporate media, curiously and intensely committed to the obviously inadequate official explanation, the cause of 9-11 Truth has a massive following not only internationally but also in the US where the insulating power of the mainstream corporate media is supreme.

With all of this inertia, credibility and focus of the 9-11 Truth Movement the now irrefutably established critical facts represent a breach of the dam wall; the flood is imminent and inevitable. Faced with widespread and intense opposition to a foreign invasion the government simply “stayed the course” but faced with general public rage against a system suspected of having committed violence against its own people in a context of widespread economic despair aggravated by anger over financial corruption, just weathering the storm is probably not an option. The flood will come.

And After the Flood

The first immediate casualty of this breach of the wall is the 9-11 Commission Inquiry itself; the question will be no longer if there was a cover-up but why. Interest must inevitably turn to the reasons for resistance to the inquiry, constraints on its terms of reference and power to summon witnesses, the lack of cooperation of some who gave evidence including Bush and Cheney and the obvious inadequacy of its report. The 9-11 Inquiry Commission will itself need to be examined as part of the new inquiry.

Another casualty will be the public trust in the corporate mainstream media. The nature of the WTC event is that once controlled demolition is acknowledged as fact the reality of it seems obvious and self-evident. Given that the necessary investigations to prove it as fact were so relatively straightforward and, from the point of view of forensic criminal investigation, so obvious, why has the mainstream media so vigorously supported objection to it. Is this the event that breaks the spell?

The first and most obvious question to be addressed by the new inquiry will be that of “How did the thermite get there?” Large quantities of it were present; not easily brought into the building and installed for controlled demolition without attracting notice. The first and most obvious person to question is Larry Silverstein, whose on-the-record and apparently careless remark that “We decided to pull it” appears to let slip an inside knowledge and a failure to realise that the time between the plane collisions to the two main towers and the collapse of WTC Building 7 would be insufficient to prepare to “pull it”, which is taken to mean a controlled demolition. There will also be renewed attention to witness reports of a full power-down of the WTC, the first in the life of the buildings, on a weekend shortly before 9-11.

Another aspect of 9-11 that will receive great attention will be the apparent stand-down of national air defence. How is it that the world’s most substantial and at-the-ready national air security facility, capable of responding to a hijacking anywhere in the country within five minutes was delayed in responding more than 45 minutes and failed to intercept any of the four alleged hijackings?

Stand-down appears also to have taken place within the CIA itself. While Condoleza Rice lamented that no one could have foreseen such an event numerous warnings had in fact, been received of just such a threat. Of course, it’s one thing to receive an abstract warning and another to tangibly identify an actual threat in progress. However, one branch of the CIA lamented that they had indeed identified the hijackers and their intentions and had compiled a file on their activities. Yet when the file was presented to higher authority they were ordered to suspend their investigations. This is certainly an aspect of the event that will attract the interest of the new inquiry.

The 9-11 Truth Movement has established a very large body of evidence and analysis. The wiser factions of the movement have studiously avoided attempts to explain the broad picture of what actually happened on September 11th 2001 or the “how” and “who” but rather, have directed their attention to establishing evidence for or proving critical elements - controlled demolition - refuting the official explanation. This fundamentally accounts for their success.

However, these two critical and deterministic facts, which establish the case for controlled demolition beyond doubt, will create the magnetic field of force that attracts, aligns and solidifies the many other salient facts of the evidence accumulated by the 9-11 Truth Movement into a monumentally persuasive case for some sort of high level, perhaps government involvement.

Only a formal, full, thorough and open investigation with a genuine intention to ascertain the truth can achieve the necessary detail and understanding required to explain exactly what transpired in all of the four alleged hijackings. But the contributors and supporters of the 9-11 Truth Movement are already clear about the current, official explanation; if there is any truth at all to it, it’s far from the whole truth.

After the Oklahoma City bombing, I was personally waiting for the second shoe to drop. 911 was that shoe.


Discrepancies from both "bombings/attacks" are very similar.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/oklahoma.htm

Subject: US Air Force Confirms Multiple Blasts (OKC)

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 97 06:29:31 PDT

Multiple Blasts: More Evidence
by William F. Jasper

A new study analyzing explosive tests conducted by the U.S. Air Force
against a reinforced concrete structure may provide an important key
to understanding the April 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah
Building in Oklahoma City, which took 168 lives. The report, based on
testing data and photographs supplied by the Armament Directorate,
Wright Laboratory at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, lends powerful
support to the arguments of those experts who have challenged the
official government position that a single, large ammonium
nitrate/fuel oil (ANFO) truck bomb parked outside the Murrah Building
was solely responsible for the massive death and destruction.

Led by Brigadier General Benton K. Partin (USAF, ret.), former
director of the Air Force Armament Technology Laboratory and one of
the world's premier explosives and ordnance authorities, critics
have argued compellingly that the blast wave from the ANFO truck bomb
was totally inadequate to cause the collapse of the massive,
steel-reinforced concrete columns of the federal building in Oklahoma
City. This fact, together with much other forensic evidence from the
crime scene, they contend, points inescapably to the conclusion that
additional demolition charges had to have been placed on columns
inside the building. Which means that this terror bombing was a much
more sophisticated operation than the federal authorities admit,
requiring more hands, brains, and brawn than any lone bomber could
supply. If that is true, the other bombers are being let off the hook
by the government's insistence that Timothy McVeigh was the sole
efficient cause and the truck bomb was the instrumental cause of
"the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil."

The new Eglin blast study convincingly proves the fundamental points
set forth by General Partin: That air blast is an inefficient
mechanism against hardened, reinforced concrete structures, and that
"the pattern of damage [to the Murrah Building] would have been
technically impossible without supplementing demolition charges."
Entitled Case Study Relating Blast Effects to the Events of April 19,
1995 Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
(hereafter referred to as the Eglin Blast Effects Study, or EBES), the
56-page report includes photographs and data from the Eglin blast
tests, as well as extensive technical analysis of those tests,
conducted by construction and demolition expert John Culbertson. The
study relates the Eglin parametric data to the Murrah Building and
presents a serious challenge to the federal prosecutors' official
bombing scenario. The report also contains letters from engineers and
technical experts who have reviewed the study for The New American.

The blast effects tests conducted by the Wright Laboratory at Eglin
Air Force Base involved a three-story reinforced concrete structure 80
feet in length, 40 feet in width, and a total height of 30 feet. The
Eglin Test Structure (ETS), according to the EBES, "while not as
large as the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, has many
similarities and therefore provides an excellent source for
data." The study continues:

The ETS is similar to Murrah in its basic layout with three rows of
columns in the long axis and a series of narrow bays in the short
axis. The ETS was constructed of six-inch-thick concrete panels
similar to the six-inch-thick floor panels of Murrah. In addition,
a series of 14-inch square columns supported the panels in the
corners of each room and at the edge of the floor panels. This
configuration bears a similarity to the Murrah building's
system of columns, T-beams and floor panels.

While noting the similarities in structural layout of the ETS and
Murrah, the EBES also makes note of the major differences in
construction methods and overall structural integrity between the two
buildings, stating that the ETS "must be considered an inferior
structure in terms of strength and blast resistance," and that
the ETS "is actually more indicative of some structures to be
found in third world countries and is not representative of concrete
structures to be found in the United States." The Murrah
Building's floor panels were reinforced "with approximately
five times the amount of steel" used in the Eglin
structure's panels. An even greater contrast is found in the
columns and beams, where "the steel fill in the Murrah Building
was much higher than the ETS, in most cases by a factor of 10 or
more." The study also observes that "while the ETS did not
use stirrups in its columns and beams, the Murrah Federal Building
did, thereby increasing strength to a level far above the ETS."

Additionally, the ETS lacked a roof panel, which "reduces the
overall rigidity of the structure, and in particular the third story
wall panels, making the third story more susceptible to damage from an
explosive device." Finally, since concrete develops strength with
time, the relatively fresh concrete of the ETS must be considered
weaker than the mature strength of the Murrah Building's
concrete.

All of the foregoing is of particular significance since, as the Air
force tests demonstrated, air blast alone was singularly ineffective
in causing major damage to the ETS. And if air blast could not effect
catastrophic failure to the decidedly inferior Eglin structure, it
becomes all the more difficult to believe that it was responsible for
the destruction of the much stronger Murrah Building.

Three different explosives tests were conducted on the Eglin Test
Structure. The first test used 704 pounds of Tritonal, which is
equivalent to 830 pounds of TNT, or roughly 2,200 pounds of a properly
prepared ammonium nitrate/fuel oil (ANFO) mixture. The Tritonal was
contained in a light aluminum case and was placed outside the
structure at ground level 25 feet from the vertical surface of the
40-foot side wall. This test most closely parallels the truck bomb at
the Murrah Building and provides important parametric data for
assessing blast-wave damage at the Oklahoma City site. Besides being
external to the ETS, the aluminum casing provided a container similar
to the light shell of the Ryder truck. Like the truck bomb, the
Tritonal test attempted to effect damage to the concrete structure
with an air-couple blast wave without the help of heavy shrapnel.

By contrast, the second and third tests used steel-cased warheads
detonated inside the ETS. The second test used a standard Mk-82
warhead (equivalent to 180 pounds of TNT) placed within the first
floor corner room approximately four feet from the exterior wall. The
third test involved a 250-pound penetrating warhead (having an
equivalent explosive weight of 35 pounds TNT) which was placed in the
corner of a second floor room approximately two and a half feet from
the adjoining walls. As the photographs from Wright Laboratory
graphically show, these two explosive devices, although much smaller
than the Tritonal device, effected far greater damage to the ETS. This
disproportionate destruction was largely a function of three critical
factors: distance, mechanical coupling of the blast wave, mechanical
coupling via shrapnel, and contained pressure (due to being confined
within the structure).

As General Partin has taken great pains to emphasize, the inefficiency
of a blast wave through air is dramatic, particularly outdoors,
where the blast energy is dissipated in all directions with its
pressure and destructive force falling off more rapidly than an
inverse function of the distance cubed (distance expressed in radius
units). This means that the blast wave from an explosive device which
yields a maximum blast pressure of one-and-a-half million pounds per
square inch at the center of the device will have dropped off to under
200 pounds per square inch by the time it has traveled 20 radii. This
makes air blast alone very ineffective against hardened concrete
structures, such as heavy, steel-reinforced columns.

The photograph from Wright Laboratory of the first test involving the
external Tritonal explosion confirms this very important principle of
blast effects. The six-inch-thick concrete wall panels on the first
floor were demolished by the air blast, though the reinforcing steel
bars were for the most part left in place. The 14-inch columns
remained unaffected either by the blast pressure wave or the stresses
produced by the pull of the reinforcing steel in the wall panels as
they broke up. Damage to the second floor wall panels is considerably
less than that to the first floor walls, and very little damage can be
seen to the third floor wall panels, even though there is no ceiling
to provide stability.

A detailed pressure map matrix for the entire vertical face of the ETS
was prepared for the EBES, providing a one-foot grid which gives the
maximum potential blast pressures for any given point on the face.
According to the pressure map, the vertical face in the first test
experienced a range of maximum blast pressure from 34 psi (pounds per
square inch) to 174 psi (page 32). Maximum blast pressure on the
six-inch-thick wall panels for the first floor ranged from 74 psi to
174 psi. Wall panels on the second floor had a maximum blast pressure
ranging from 53 psi to 141 psi. The third-floor panels had blast
pressures of 34 psi to 84 psi, yet experienced no damage even though a
significant portion of the panels was subjected to pressures exceeding
the 70 psi yield factor for the six-inch-thick walls.

Computing the blast pressure for the Ryder truck's estimated
4,800-pound ANFO bomb, the EBES determines that the radius from the
center of the device that would manifest a pressure of 70 psi or more
would be 42.37 feet. It can therefore be expected, explains the study,
that within a radius of 42.37 feet from the
center of the explosive, any six-inch reinforced concrete panel
positioned so as to have a major face perpendicular or nearly
perpendicular to the travel path of the blast pressure wave from the
explosion would be damaged. The study notes that the floor
panels in the Murrah Building were of the same thickness as the ETS
panels and, starting with the third floor, had a similar positional
relationship to the device as the panels in the Eglin test.
Accordingly, the EBES found: A limited area of the third and
fourth floors of the Murrah Federal Building immediately adjacent to
the position of the Ryder truck would be affected. On the third floor
a roughly circular shape extending into the building and approximately
40 feet down the north face of the building from the center point of
the explosive, which was located some 14.5 feet north of the north
face of the building. This circular area contained approximately 1,250
square feet of six-inch panel.... The fourth floor panel that
experienced 70 psi and above was limited to a roughly circular-shaped
pattern of approximately 400 square feet.

The conclusions of the Eglin Blast Effects Study are compelling and
carry stunning implications. With the ETS having significantly less
integral strength than the Murrah Building, the EBES conclusions have
a built-in margin of error that, if anything, overstate the extent of
damage to be expected at the Murrah Building. Moreover, the
computations for the Ryder truck bomb also are overly generous.
=93Because ANFO is also a low-energy explosive (approximately 30%
that of TNT) and due to the inherent inefficiency of eight barrels
forming the explosive assembly [according to the government's
estimates], it is doubtful that the device produced blast pressures
close to the calculated maximum potential blast pressure, the
study asserts. This being the case, it is doubtful that the
radius of damage even approached the 42.37 foot range as calculated
herein.

Finally, the EBES concludes:

Due to these conditions, it is impossible to ascribe the damage
that occurred on April 19, 1995 to a single truck bomb containing
4,800 lbs. of ANFO. In fact, the maximum predicted damage to the
floor panels of the Murrah Federal Building is equal to
approximately 1% of the total floor area of the building.
Furthermore, due to the lack of symmetrical damage pattern at the
Murrah Building, it would be inconsistent with the results of the
ETS test [number] one to state that all of the damage to the Murrah
Building is the result of the truck bomb.

The damage to the Murrah Federal Building is consistent with damage
resulting from mechanically coupled devices placed locally within
the structure....

It must be concluded that the damage at the Murrah Federal Building
is not the result of the truck bomb itself, but rather due to other
factors such as locally placed charges within the building
itself.... The procedures used to cause the damage to the Murrah
Building are therefore more involved and complex than simply
parking a truck and leaving....

Mike Smith, a civil engineer in Cartersville, Georgia commissioned to
review the Eglin Blast Effects Study, states:

The results of the Blast Effect Test One on the Eglin Test Structure
present strong evidence that a single Ammonium Nitrate and Fuel Oil
device of approximately 4800 lbs. placed inside a truck could not have
caused the damage to the Murrah federal Building experienced on April
19, 1995. Even assuming that the building had structural deficiencies
and that the ANFO device was constructed with racing fuel, the
air-coupled blast produced from this 4800 lb. device would not have
damaged the columns and beams of the Murrah Building enough to produce
a catastrophic failure.

Robert Frias, president of Frias Engineering of Arlington, Texas,
after examining the EBES, concluded: The Murrah Building would
still be standing and the upper floors would be intact had the truck
loaded with explosives been the only culprit. Moreover, Frias, a
practicing engineer for over 40 years and a registered engineer in
Texas, New Mexico, and Louisiana, stated: Explosives had to have
been placed near, or on, the structural columns inside the building to
cause the collapse that occurred to the Murrah Building.

Likewise, Alvin Norberg, a licensed professional engineer in Auburn,
California with over 50 years of engineering experience on over 5,000
construction projects, writes that evidence from the ETS data
verifies that the severe structural damage to the Murrah
Building was not caused by a truck bomb outside the building,
and that the collapse of the Murrah Federal Building was the
result of mechanically coupled devices (bombs) placed
locally within the structure adjacent to the critical columns.

Kenneth Gow of Whittier, California, with over one-half century of
engineering experience in the aerospace industry, writes in his
evaluation of the EBES: The Eglin Test Structure report ...
further reinforces the conclusion that a substantial portion of the
Murrah Building damage was by internal explosions.

The full EBES report is available for $25.00 postpaid from The New
American, P.O. Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54913.


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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZNQq7XBLwc&feature=player_embedded

Chemical Engineer Mark Basile – The first scientist who found thermite in the World Trade Center dust discusses in depth his process of discovery using the scientific method.

This interview is some raw footage of one of the world class experts appearing in architects and engineer’s upcoming hard hitting documentary “9/11:Explosive Evidence – Experts speak out”

Chemical Engineer Mark Basile discusses his discovery of thermite in WTC dust

Danish chemist giving an interview on that he and a group of scientists found nano-thermite (!) in dust from WTC 911.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXYF5i_Slj8

Even yer ol' go to guy, Chomsky, doesn't believe this shit.


All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...

-The Bush Administration, who failed at everything they ever did. Yet all of them and the people below are helping him cover up the largest mass murder in US history... Some of them like Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neil have come out for less.

-The NYC Fire fighters who know more about building collapses than most, if not all, of them. It's their LIFE to know. Literally! Yet they don't call for an investigation into the MASS MURDER of over 300 of their brothers... Why? (The twisting of these peoples’ statements for donations and DVD sales sickens me.) We have uncovered the myth about a gag order imposed on all fire fighters. Only 9/11 conspiracy sites say this. ONE person who sued Bush for not taking action before the event is ordered by the court not to speak to the media about the case. This is not imposing a gag order on the whole fire department as some of these sites claim. They are lying to cover up this mass murder by the government or the building owner. Why? They don't even know...

Conspiracy theorists bring up an article in Fire House magazine which says the fire department wanted to stop the steel from being sold in order to test the fire proofing and other non-bomb/controlled demolition related investigations. They twist the article’s context to make it seem like the firefighters questioned the idea that fire brought down the towers.

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=
OnlineArticles&SubSe%20ction=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=
25&ARTICLE_ID=131225

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&
SubSection=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=130026

Many of these men and women come from the military, yet we are to believe they are so afraid they rather die in the government’s next mass murder than come out and expose this.

-The courts for imposing a gag order [SEE above]

-The NYC Police department who lost over 20 lives. They didn't ask for an investigation. Motive? None...

-The NYC port Authority who lost personnel. Motive?

-All the people in the Pentagon who have not called for an investigation. Many who are liberal and centrist. They did or said nothing while people supposedly trucked in airplane parts to cover the crime. Why? Again, no answer...

-The more than 1,600 widows and widowers of 9/11 who would rather have investigations of the decisions which led to the terrorist getting away with this. They don't want to waste time investigating the mass murder of their loved ones. Even the Jersey Girls. Why? They say it's the money... [note: Whenever killing someone, pay off the relative. They won’t say anything.]

-The media (This one I almost believe) who doesn't follow up on the biggest mass murder and conspiracy in American history. It seems no one wants a Nobel prize for journalism. Not only the American media but foreign press like the BBC and Al Jazeera. Why? No answer here either...

-The photographers from around the world who took pictures of the towers which clearly show bowing of the perimeter columns. These photos support the NIST hypothesis that the sagging trusses lead to the collapse. Some photos also show the core intact shortly after collapse which also not only support the NIST hypothesis but discredits the "Controlled demolition" account.

-Popular Mechanics who debunked these sites are also helping Bush commit the biggest mass murder in history.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

-PBS Nova since they created a documentary explaining in detail how and why the buildings fell. None of it said bomb.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

-Everyone in the NIST who covers up the largest mass murder in US history. This independent organization doesn't have a moral person in hundreds of employees because not one has come out exposing this so called "Conspiracy". In fact, the hundreds of scientist who signed onto the report are willing to not only lie for Bush but cover up the largest mass murder in American history. Some suggest only a handful can do the job but that's simply impossible. The team in charge of the computer modeling has to be in sync with the team of structural engineers and so on. There are hundreds involved in this investigation and every team has to work with other teams using the same evidence and specifications.

-NY Governor Pataki because he sold steel from the WTC for the construction of the USS New York. If the argument is the government sold the steel in order to cover up the crime then Pataki is one of the criminals.

-The NY city scrap yards because they also sold steel to China before all of it was tested. Bush would have needed to call them up and tell them to sell it before they could have investigated every beam. A task which would have taken years and years not to mention millions more. Ironically the republican Mayor Bloomberg could not be involved since he asked the scrap yards not to sell the steel on behalf of the firefighters.

-EVERY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IN THE WORLD who doesn't write a paper for a mainstream peer reviewed journal saying the towers were brought down and could not have fallen due to fire. If laymen can prove things just by looking at videos and reading interviews out of context, then all those structural engineers MUST be working for Bush right? Even the ones in other countries. Why? The answer they give is that the engineers don't know about Jones’ work. So in all this time no one has e-mailed Jones' work to any structural engineer?

-Structure Magazine who published a report saying the collapse of WTC 7 may have been due to one column failing.

-The liberals who don't believe the towers were brought down. (Like me) They're helping a neo-con cover-up the largest mass murder in this nation’s history. Why? No clue...

-The CIA

-The FBI

-FEMA

-The American Society of Civil Engineers who have produced peer reviewed papers showing how what Conspiracy Theorists say is impossible is possible.

-NORAD

-The FAA who saw planes which conspiracy theorists say never existed.

-The Silverstein Group who they say got together with Bush to blow up the building for insurance money.

-Silverstein's Insurance Company who didn't question the collapse and paid out over 2 billion to Silverstein. Why? Conspiracy Theorists say the insurance company just wants to pass on the bill to the public but they already fought Silverstein in a number of law suits concerning the amount.

-American Airlines (Pentagon)

-United Airlines (Pentagon)

-Logan, Newark and Dulles Airport for losing the planes

-Scientists and engineers who developed the remote control plane technology

-Installers of the remote control devices in the planes (Pentagon)

-Remote controllers of the planes (Pentagon)

-Scientists and engineers who developed the new demolition technology and carried out practical tests and computer models to make sure it would work.

-Installers of the demolitions devices in the three buildings

-People who worked at the company(s) the installers used as cover

-Airphone etc employees who said they got calls from passengers (Pentagon)

-Faux friends and relatives of the faux passengers or just the faux relatives who claim to have been called by their loved ones or just the psyops who fooled relatives into thinking they really were their loved ones. (Pentagon)

-People who detonated the buildings"

-anyone who thinks the conspiracy is a diversion to take liberal activist focus off of real crimes.

Even conspiracies with a few people are doomed. Look at Enron and Watergate. The more people you involve, the more likely the conspiracy will fall apart. The amount of people needed for this conspiracy could fill one of the towers. It's absurd to think this many people could keep a mass murder for Bush secret for this long. Absurd...

Update:

A common excuse for no one coming out who was part of this so called 9/11 conspiracy is they fear death. If you analyze the argument carefully you realize they are debunking themselves. Why would even people in the military be more fearful of exposing this than the common conspiracy theorists behind a computer monitor? Either they don't believe what they're saying or they actually think they are more fearless than the thousands of others who would have had to be "in on it". As if people in the CIA or FBI couldn't figure out how to get the message out if they wanted to without exposing who they are. People, dates, places, memos and other evidence could easily be disseminated to the public without exposing who they are. The only reason they claim the people are paralyzed with fear is because they have too in order for the conspiracy story to work.

Noam Chomsky on 9/11 Conspiracy theories



Update:

More from Noam Chomsky

"...I am not persuaded by the assumption that much documentation and other evidence has been uncovered. To determine that, we'd have to investigate the alleged evidence. Take, say, the physical evidence. There are ways to assess that: submit it to specialists -- of whom there are thousands -- who have the requisite background in civil-mechanical engineering, materials science, building construction, etc., for review and analysis; and one cannot gain the required knowledge by surfing the internet. In fact, that's been done, by the professional association of civil engineers. Or, take the course pursued by anyone who thinks they have made a genuine discovery: submit it to a serious journal for peer review and publication. To my knowledge, there isn't a single submission."

"I think this reaches the heart of the matter. One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work. How do you personally set priorities? That's of course up to you. I've explained my priorities often, in print as well as elsewhere, but we have to make our own judgments."

"...I don't see any reason to accept the presuppositions. As for the consequences, in one of my first interviews after 9/11 I pointed out the obvious: every power system in the world was going to exploit it for its own interests: the Russians in Chechnya, China against the Uighurs, Israel in the occupied territories,... etc., and states would exploit the opportunity to control their own populations more fully through "prevention of terrorism acts" and the like. By the "who gains" argument, every power system in the world could be assigned responsibility for 9/11."

"I think the Bush administration would have had to be utterly insane to try anything like what is alleged, for their own narrow interests, and do not think that serious evidence has been provided to support claims about actions that would not only be outlandish, for their own interests, but that have no remote historical parallel. The effects, however, are all too clear, namely, what I just mentioned: diverting activism and commitment away from the very serious ongoing crimes of state."

http://blog.zmag.org/node/2779

Larry, keep it simple man.

The damage at the Pentagon
is not from a #757.

That makes it a 'conspiracy'

just look at the pentagon damage.......

EDIT: Honestly all this stuff about the twin towers
and building #7 is a diversion from the truth to be found at the
Pentagon.

Many video have been stolen & the Fed's hold lots of
evidence debunking their case.

The Pentagon case is easier to prove as fake.

There's 11 suspected Mossad agents involved in this:
Suspected hit squad in Mahmoud al-Mabhouh killing

Do you think any of them are talking?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/...91&index=12

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=argonium79#p/u/1/Nbak9KOINgo


Zelikow's Key Role in 9/11 Cover-Up
From: argonium79 | October 18, 2010 | 4,893 views

Loading...
In an interview on the Fox Business Network, a retired U.S. int. officer accused the official in charge of the 9/11 Commission of a cover-up of intelligence failures leading up to the terrorist attacks on Sep 11, 2001.

Appearing on the political talk show Freedom Watch, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and the author of Operation Dark Heart, a much-hyped new book on the war in Afghanistan, spoke about his mid-Oct 2003 encounter with Dr. Philip Zelikow, then executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States.