Amazing How Prescient Bush Is

He just warned us two days ago that attacks would increase in Iraq.

Sure enough they have.

It is almost like Bush knows exactly what the terrorists are up to!

And please-- pay no attention to those those British soldiers dressed as Arabs, caught with explosives.

Experiment of the Day

Fill a large steel pot with a few bricks so it weighs twenty pounds or so, then put it on a grill composed of two hundred wires from wire coat hangers. Have 160 of the wires on the outside but have 40 wires on the interior also supporting the grill. Put a wire and asbestos pad on top of the wires to act as a floor. Now, cut twenty of the outside wires on one side, ten on the inside on the same side and build a pyre out of sticks and newspaper under the pot, soak it with some kerosene then light it. Now see what happens.

Will the pot--

a) suddenly fall stright down as the all wires heat up, weaken and give way at once?

b) will some of the wires weaken and the grill will sag on one side and then slowly droop down into the fire?

c) will the wires hold the weight of the pot just fine until the fire burns out?

I am guessing that it will be (c) or maybe (b), but (a) seems very doubtful.

WAR CRIMES, BITCH

Damn, when do Bush and Cheney go on trial anyway?

Motherfuckers.

From What I Have Heard of This Case

and then reading what DeLay has admitted on TV-- it sounds as if DeLay is guilty as hell.


And it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy...

Spin-Off Blogs

In an effort to be more organized about my 9/11 writing, I have created two new "spin-off" blogs:
WTC Demolition
and
Flight 93 Hoax.

I won't be posting on these blogs regularly-- rather they will be repositories for stories that specifically deal with the demolition of the WTC and the oddities of flight 93.

Nothing to See Here, Move Along

Does anyone else think that this story will quietly go away unless they find some strange foriegner they can blame this on?

Foetuses found at Bogota airport

Colombian police have found the bodies of three human foetuses hidden in statues destined for the United States.

The discovery was made by officers searching for contraband at Bogota Airport on Tuesday.

The corpses were wrapped in plastic and concealed inside statues of Christian icons, which were smashed open.

Colombian police chief Gen Jord Alirio Varon said the four- to five-month-old foetuses could have been intended for use in Satanic rituals.

Gen Varon said the foetuses were found alongside crucifixes and medals.

He said officials are trying to find out who sent the packages, which came from Barranquilla in Colombia and were destined for Miami in the US.

No Blood at the Flight 93 Crash Site

Wallace Miller, the county coroner:

He couldn't believe the scene. He saw the burnt trees, and some debris smoking in the dirt. He saw half a window frame. He saw shreds of that white cloth they put over the headrests.

He saw things in the trees.

He takes off his glasses, cleans them with his T-shirt. "This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."

Miller is talking about the crash scene one year later, after he's done his work as coroner for the crash scene.

Flight 93 was officially a very violent crash. Only parts of bodies and scraps of skin were found as human remains. But the fact is, when bodies tear apart, they produce a lot of blood. It splatters all over (warning, very graphic photos).

There is only one way that the 44 people on the plane produced no blood when the plane crashed and their remains were splattered all over the ground: they were already dead.

Since the "crash site" was clearly fake to begin with, as I have gone over before, the lack of blood is consistent with the human remains being planted after they were "processed" at some other site. What is not clear is if the remains were really from the passengers, or if they were from random people, or frankly whether they really existed at all. We can assume the forensic analysis was faked to "identify" the official passengers.

Weather Control

seems to be all the rage in the conspirosphere these days. Lots of talk about steering hurricanes, particularly with regard to Katrina and Rita.

The idea seems to be that Katrina was steered to hit NOLA, in order to create the catastrophe there, whereas Rita was perhaps steered away from hitting Houston full blast, where it would have seriously fucked with US oil production.

Perhaps the powers that be weren't quite ready for tanking the US economy, one would guess.

I have an open mind about this topic, I think it is possible-- but unfortunately there is no way to really prove anything yet.

However, this bit of evidence is quite striking-- a cluster of five unnatural-looking heat spots that were in the path of Rita around the time it turned away from Houston.

Strikingly, a friend of mine found a similar pattern in another recent hurricane.

What these red spots mean I certainly can't say for sure, but one intriguing idea is that they are regions where the air or water was heated by high-tech energy devices, and that these spots created a high pressure zone that could push the hurricane away from that area, thus steering the hurricane away from a particular direction.

It all sounds very wild and unreal, but nonetheless people have been talking about this technology for quite a while (e.g.Jim McCanney has some interesting and intelligent things to say about weather control and steering hurricanes), and importantly the US Air Force has made weather control one of their priorities.

The bottom line is that I think it is crazy NOT to take very seriously the idea that the weather is being modified to suit the purposes of "the powers that be".

Of Course Mike Brown Lied

today.

Brown is a political hack, in ass-covering mode.

But the larger question is: what exactly was FEMA trying to do in New Orleans post-Katrina?

Why the FUCK were they withholding so much aid from New Orleans?

And why don't the media or politicians want to address this issue?

Are they knowingly covering up a foul deed, very similar to what they did for 9/11?

By the way, the Iraq conflict really did affect the ability of the Louisiana National Guard to respond to the flooding-- primarily by taking much of their equipment away.

Yet another outrage!

How the US Media Trivializes Creeping Fascism

God help us.

Blackmail, Bush Administration Style

It seems like Mike Brown got his job back at FEMA after ratting a bit on Bush:

according to sources within the Enquirer itself, the source for Bush's drinking story is -- an incredibly pissed-off, recently scapegoated head of a federal agency who thinks that BushCo. done him wrong.

Tee hee.

The 9/11 Encyclopedia

I was only dimly aware of this site before but I just revisited it and found what a great resource it is. I've added it to my bookmarks on the side (General 9/11 sites).

Initial Moments of the Collapse of WTC1

You can watch the first few seconds in slow motion here. Load this movie:
911.wtc.1.top.slow.wmv

This movie shows the same scene from a slightly different angle (northwest):
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc1dem6/911.wtc.1.demolition.northwest.mpg

About a week ago, I posted a long article by Wayne Trumpman who analyzed the initial collapse of WTC1. I'm really not clear how he could measure the collapse of the first few floors, when the whole thing seems very different to me.

What I see is, right before the rapid global collapse of WTC1 begins, is a slower phase where the very top of the tower starts sinking down several floors. This is not clearly accompanied by large puffs of smoke until the very end.

What is most odd about this is the way the top ten or so floors of the building simply shrink down without any obvious crumpling of the outer facade. There is hardly even any significant bowing of the outer walls to account for the approximately fifty feet of height lost! It is the damndest thing. I can't quite figure what this means, in terms of how the demolition was done. It certainly is not what you would expect for a fire-induced collapse. It is more like the early stages of the demolition, much like the penthouse of WTC7 starts sinking a few seconds before the whole building goes down.

I Know War Is Hell and All That, But

this is just totally fucked up beyond any hope.

Digby and Billmon have some choice words on the subject.

Oh My God! Killer Dolphins May Be on the Loose!

It may be the oddest tale to emerge from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Armed dolphins, trained by the US military to shoot terrorists and pinpoint spies underwater, may be missing in the Gulf of Mexico.

Experts who have studied the US navy's cetacean training exercises claim the 36 mammals could be carrying 'toxic dart' guns. Divers and surfers risk attack, they claim, from a species considered to be among the planet's smartest. The US navy admits it has been training dolphins for military purposes, but has refused to confirm that any are missing.

Dolphins have been trained in attack-and-kill missions since the Cold War. The US Atlantic bottlenose dolphins have apparently been taught to shoot terrorists attacking military vessels. Their coastal compound was breached during the storm, sweeping them out to sea. But those who have studied the controversial use of dolphins in the US defence programme claim it is vital they are caught quickly.

See, I can believe the US can control the weather, but I really cannot believe that they have killer dolphins. (/sarcasm)

Is John Roberts a Racist?

This article by William L. Taylor is very disturbing and suggests Roberts is, at minimum, extremely insensitive to matters of race. An example:

The issue that has had the most far-reaching implications for civil rights was given the unilluminating name "court stripping." It was part of the continuing legal struggle over enforcing the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education to end mandated racial segregation in public schools. Efforts to implement Brown had stalled until 1964, when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act, which declared school desegregation to be national policy and provided the means for enforcing it. There followed Supreme Court decisions adding legal content to the act, which then led to widespread desegregation of public schools throughout the South.

In 1980, segregationists in Congress led by Senator Jesse Helms responded with bills to prohibit the Justice Department from bringing action in the courts to desegregate schools, and to bar the courts from issuing remedies that would require the busing of students for that purpose. Similar bills were proposed in cases involving school prayer and abortion rights.

A fierce debate followed at the Justice Department and in the Reagan White House. Some lawyers recognized that a great deal was at stake in these bills—that they were an assault on the Supreme Court's role as the final arbiter of what the Constitution means as well as an assault on the separation of powers. David Brink, then president of the American Bar Association, described the court-stripping bills as "a legislative threat to our nation that may lead to the most serious constitutional crisis since our great Civil War," and the ABA House of Delegates "strongly objected" to the bills because they "propose to change the constitutional law by simple legislation, instead of by the means provided in the constitution."

In addition, the Conference of Chief Justices of the States resolved unanimously that court-stripping bills were a "hazardous experiment with the vulnerable fabric of the nation's judicial system." Within the Department of Justice Theodore Olson, then Roberts's superior and a lawyer with impeccable conservative credentials, worried about the advisability of supporting the legislation. Other constitutional conservatives, such as Yale Law School professor Alex Bickel (an ardent opponent of busing), and moderate Republicans, such as former Attorney General Elliot Richardson, as well as Robert Bork (who was to become a model of extreme legal conservatism), expressed concern publicly about the constitutionality and wisdom of court stripping. John Roberts had no such reservations. In memos deriding Brink and others, he claimed that Congress had the power to eradicate busing as a "failed experiment."

In other words, Roberts was much less concerned about an important infringement upon judicial power than about stopping school integration at all costs. This pattern of upholding reactionary views is seen in his writings.

Anti-War Protests

finally getting at least some respect.

Funny how before the war, the media almost completely ridiculed similar folks. Yet the coverage of yesterday's rallies was largely positive.

So-- has the media now had its bloodlust satiated, and therefore they think it is a acceptable to be against the war? Or do they sense popular sentiment is changing and are merely playing to the market? But of course they certainly didn't mind supporting the administration's lies before the war and whipping up public sentiment for an illegal invasion against a country that did not threaten us.

No question about it: the US corporate media is amoral scum.

Bumbling Fascists

Tee-hee:

Interfering with on-going storm preparations wasn't the reason Bush ditched going to San Antonio yesterday. No, that's not why. The reason was a bad visual:

It was too sunny.

Not kidding:

Another White House official involved in preparing Mr. Bush's way noted that with the sun shining so brightly in San Antonio, the images of Mr. Bush from here might not have made it clear to viewers that he was dealing with an approaching storm.

The White House is desperate.

This is funny too:

Laura's got Bush's balls in her pocket. If Skippy wasn't drinking before, he is now.

Fourteen Defining Features of Fascism

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

(Source: The Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism, Dr. Lawrence Britt, Spring 2003, Free Inquiry)

It seems to me, a very good case could be made that the US is indeed a fascist state right now. Certainly it was from right after 9/11 to 2004. The wheels might be coming off the fascist Bush regime somewhat right now, but they are still fascists at heart-- and their ability to hold onto their power only cements their status as fascists.

Good Overview on Yet Another Story the Mainstream Media Will Never Touch

That the US and UK are actively inciting the Iraqi insurgency.

It is an age-old strategy: divide and conquer.

I Still Have a Soft Spot for Al Gore

and would happily vote for him if he ran in 2008.

He might even have a good shot a winning.

The Bush Administration Has Disgraced America with Its Pattern of Prisoner Abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan

New allegations of abuse by a credible source.

Something Positive

A new invention-- the H2N-gen: it pumps H2 gas into internal combustion engines, resulting in better fuel efficiency and cleaner combustion (less pollution).

Granite Shadow

I'm not sure what to make of this, but it is worth filing away as useful information.

Granite Shadow is yet another new Top Secret and compartmented operation related to the military’s extra-legal powers regarding weapons of mass destruction. It allows for emergency military operations in the United States without civilian supervision or control.

A spokesman at the Joint Force Headquarters-National Capital Region (JFHQ-NCR) confirmed the existence of Granite Shadow to me yesterday, but all he would say is that Granite Shadow is the unclassified name for a classified plan.

That classified plan, I believe, after extensive research and after making a couple of assumptions, is CONPLAN 0400, formally titled Counter-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Concept Plan (CONPLAN) 0400 is a long-standing contingency plan of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) that serves as the umbrella for military efforts to counter the spread of weapons of mass destruction. It has extensively been updated and revised since 9/11.

The CJCS plan lays out national policy and priorities for dealing with WMD threats in peacetime and crisis -- from far away offensive strikes and special operations against foreign WMD infrastructure and capabilities, to missile defenses and "consequence management" at home if offensive efforts fail.

So what is this, a martial law exercise? And how exactly are they running the game on the streets of DC, as the article says?

Weird creepy shit.

Cool name though: GRANITE SHADOW.

A Superb Compilation of Flight 93 Evidence and Stories

Bravo to John Doe II.

The National Zeitgeist

as documented by political cartoons.

Here, here and here.

If you're looking for something to lighten your mood. Lots of funny stuff there.

Rita Could Cripple Oil Production, Creating a National Catastrophe

and lead to the end the US as we know it?

I don't know. I tend to be much more optimistic about these things than Mike Ruppert and his ilk.

But one thing for sure is that Rita is eerily headed straight for Houston.

Is this merely just bad luck that two massive hurricanes just a few months apart decide to target two major oil production facilities in the US (New Orleans and Houston)? How much bad luck can the Bush administration bring us, anyway?

But with all that has happened over the past five years, and given the fact that weather control technologies exist, we should be very suspicious indeed.

And if these hurricanes are being steered somehow, what is the purpose? Is this some sort of demented peak oil endgame being played out in real life? Or is it time to bring om the rapture?

Formatting Issues

I've noticed on some computers/browsers that the links section to the right doesn't line up at the top and gets pushed to the bottom of the page. In particular, this post seems to have messed the formating up.

I am just not computer savvy enough to try to fix this easily, and don't have the time to try to figure it out.

In any case, if you're looking for links here and don't see them, please scroll down to the bottom of the page.

Thanks!

"We are absolutely convinced that those floodwalls were never overtopped"

Experts still mystified over why the NOLA floodwalls gave way.

But they never will suggest sabotage, will they?

Questioning the Pancake Theory for the WTC North Tower Collapse

This guy says that the top thirteen stories of WTC1 dropping twelve feet down to the 96th floor releases huge amounts of potential energy-- enough to take out all of the supporting columns of the floor below.

He may be right as far as his calculations go. However, seems to me that floor 97 and above could not have simply dropped twelve feet unless there were charges taking out all the supporting columns. If in reality, floor 97 dropped or collapsed because the core columns and outer columns were weakened by fire, and these columns couldn't hold the load of the floor, then there would be a gradual weakening and lowering-- it certainly wouldn't be a free-fall drop for twelve feet. Thus, I think it is impossible that the collapse of this one floor could have started anything like a global collapse.

More importantly, there is simply no way that the top thirteen floors could have dropped all at once. In fact, there is no way in hell that all thirteen floors are going to be detached from the outer columns and the core columns at the same time AND that the core columns are also ALL going to fail at the same time.

I CAN see one floor failing and collapsing (although I would bet that the floor failure would be asymmetrical and the whole floor wouldn't drop). But I can't see one floor collapsing bringing down the whole tower. This makes no bloody sense.

So, does the official pancake collapse model say that the floors collapsed and cascaded down from around the core structure, and that the core initially stayed intact? This could make some sense, although the progressive collapse should have stopped at floors 75 and 76 where there were solid beams holding the floors instead of trusses. The problem is that in videos and photos, we see no signs at all of the core staying intact as the initial floors fall down. Rather there is just an incredibly violent disintegration of the top thirteen floors and a rapid downward explosive global collapse.

Or, does the official pancake collapse model say that the floors collapsed and cascaded down from around the core structure, and that this brought down the core structure at the same time? I think this would have to be the model to account for the video and photographic evidence, but it absolutely makes no sense that the incredibly strong WTC core would collapse from the floor plates that surrounded it falling down.

The truth: the pancake theory is shit, and the only thing that can account for the pattern of the WTC1 collapse is massive controlled demolition.

Interesting Tie-In with Bolton and the Plame Affair

Arianna explains it.

Who Are the Iraqi Insurgents?

Evidence grows that at least some of the insurgency is "synthetic"-- false-flag terrorism sponsored by Anglo-Americans.

Sick motherfuckers.

Some Fun Links

An incredible movie of satellite imagery showing the development and movement of Katrina.

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

A bunch of really cool on-line movies from the Webfairy.

How to get NYTimes "Select" articles for free.

9/11 and Physical Evidence

Truth be told, since I started this blog about 13 months ago, I have come around 180 degrees about physical evidence and 9/11.

Initially, I paid far too much attention to 9/11 disinformation artists like Mike Ruppert, Mark Rabinowitz, John Judge, the people of 9/11truth.org and others who kept telling me to avoid the physical evidence of 9/11 because it was too controversial and not solid proof of anything.

The fact is, the physical evidence of 9/11 is astounding and is MUCH MORE convincing that 9/11 was an inside job, than trivia about the hijackers and forewarnings. Yes these other parts of 9/11 are important, but the physical evidence is all the proof we really need.


Just look at the physical evidence for four key aspects of 9/11:
1) the collapse of WTC2: clearly controlled demolition
2) the collapse of WTC1: clearly controlled demolition
3) the collapse of WTC7: clearly controlled demolition
4) the crash of flight 93: clearly faked

These things alone demolish the official 9/11 story and immediately point to 9/11 being an inside job.

And this is simply leaving out the strange case of the Pentagon as well as "the pod" on flight 175!

What finally convinced me about the physical evidence was two things:
1) communicating with scientists who were convinced by the physical evidence, more than other aspects of 9/11, that 9/11 was an inside job
2) the way so many "9/11 activists" have avoided the physical evidence when it is so damning

The physical evidence is astounding, amazing and utterly convincing, and FUCK the people who say to avoid the physical evidence. The people who tell you to avoid the physical evidence are disinfo agents, pure and simple. They want you to ignore the powerful truth of 9/11-- that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition and that the plane crashes were hoaxes.

Interestingly, my current view of 9/11 actually lets the CIA off the hook, to some extent. That is, if the hijackings were primarily a hoax, then the CIA didn't screw up after all. This is a gross over-simplification, but it makes me wonder if the 9/11 disinfo agents are trying to pin 9/11 on the CIA and away from the military (the more likely culprits in my view). The Able Danger story and stories that hijackers trained with the US military then begin to make a lot more sense.

The FBI had nothing to do with planning 9/11 I believe, but were absolutely critical for the cover-up.

In any case, the key point I have learned is that the physical evidence reveals the horrible and incredible truth of 9/11, and thus the physical evidence needs to be emphasized by activists.

Reason Number 328 the Bush Administration Has Made Me a Conspiracy Theorist

CS Monitor:

Bush suggests lifting the ban on using the military domestically.

By Mark Sappenfield

WASHINGTON - As Washington picks through the lessons learned from hurricane Katrina, there is a growing conviction that the only organization with the skills, expertise, and resources needed to respond quickly to a catastrophe of such magnitude is the American military.

President Bush suggested a larger disaster relief role for the armed forces in his national address last week, and Congress has indicated it will take up the issue this autumn. Though the topic has emerged at other troubled times - most recently 9/11 - Congress has always avoided amending Posse Comitatus, the law that has kept active-duty soldiers out of civilian law-enforcement affairs since Reconstruction.

...

As officials look at what went wrong - and wonder what to do if a future disaster similarly eviscerates local responders - their attention has turned to the military. Clearly, the armed forces are best prepared to deploy quickly to devastated areas, bringing not only a clear command structure, but an array of resources ideally suited for difficult work - from mobile communication systems to troops trained for the most taxing conditions. In his Thursday address, Mr. Bush called the armed forces "the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice."

As of yet, he has simply stated that "a challenge on this scale requires ... a broader role for the armed forces." Yet even before Bush's address, Sen. John Warner (R) of Virginia wrote a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, saying that the Senate Armed Services Committee would be looking into "the entire legal framework governing a President's power to use the regular armed forces to restore public order in ... a large-scale, protracted emergency" - and asking Mr. Rumsfeld to do the same.

This framework rests on Posse Comitatus as well as the Insurrection Act, which together bar active-duty troops from engaging in domestic law-enforcement activities, unless there is essentially an open rebellion.

...

Posse Comitatus goes even further, giving only National Guard units the authority to act as law enforcement, because they are under the control of governors. Active-duty troops are being used in the Gulf relief efforts but only for humanitarian efforts and logistical support. The move to amend Posse Comitatus would likely give them law-enforcement powers.

...

How significantly the military will be impacted by any effort to further incorporate it into disaster response will depend on the shape of future proposals. But the first step would likely be the amending of Posse Comitatus, and civil libertarians, too, worry that any change - however small - could be rash and misguided.

After 9/11, "the government immediately leapt to the conclusion that there was a lack of power," so it passed the Patriot Act, says Timothy Edgar of the American Civil Liberties Union, suggesting that a revised Posse Comitatus could give the military a keyhole to greater power down the road. "Changing the law in a way that threatens civil liberties isn't the answer to a problem of management."

Well, isn't this just astoundingly OUTRAGEOUS?????

After Bush decimated the National Guard with his fucktarded Iraq invasion, now he wants to amend one of the most basic protections we have from dictatorship, by allowing regular active-duty military to carry out law-enforcement in case of emergency!

ARGGGGGGGGGGHHHH!

And I can just see them: slowly they will start relaxing what constitutes an emergency, and before you know it, we have a full-fledged police state.

These lunatics must be stopped.

Shorter Wayne Trumpman

This guy.

Key points from his analysis of the WTCI collapse.***

1) plane damage and fire damage could not have caused the initial floor collapse.

2) the collapses of the first few floors had enough energy to take out the steel supporting columns of the floors below but not enough to pulverize concrete and expel such a large volume of smoke and dust.

3) the author proposes that the high explosive HMX was used to bring down WTC1.

4) the explosive was placed around key support columns, perhaps every other column, on perhaps 9 floors of the building. "The entire WTC 1 did not have to be wired. In the previously mentioned JL Hudson building demolition, 1,237 kg of explosives was used on 9 floors. The building was pre-weakened so small charges could be used. How much explosive would have been used without this pre weakening? Twice as much? That is 2,474 kg. The WTC 1 had over twice as much floor space. So if the JL Hudson building was the same size as WTC 1, that would require about 5,616 kg of explosives. That is 624 kg per floor."

5) the heat of fires within the WTC1 set off some of the pre-placed HMX explosives-- accounting for the premature explosions before the main demolition that were witnessed by many people inside the building.

6) "I believe far more explosives were used on the WTC 1 than would be typically used in controlled demolition. Keep in mind that a building the size of WTC1 had never been taken down before. This level of uncertainty would prompt the use of an overkill amount of explosives. There would be concern of collateral damage to surrounding real estate from miscalculation. The parties using explosives probably wanted to make sure that the building did a "pancake" collapse to support an official story. In addition, the charge detonation needed to be masked. If a normal amount of charges was used, the low number of detonations would easily stand out in video footage. But an overkill amount of charges, especially placed near concrete, would produce loads of clouds where little stands out (I note that adiversion of fire and smoke was also helpful in masking charge detonations)."

I think this last point is a particularly good insight, but the whole piece is essentially a tour-de-force. I think it is very sad that an amateur scientist (Mr. Trumpman) can do more detailed and better calculations than the government NIST team. NIST doesn't even bother to show calculations for how the collapse occurred.

***Note, this paper appears in an incomplete form at several Indymedia sites; it apparently was censored! People seem to be very afraid of the idea that the WTC was blown up-- why I don't know! It is fucking crazy that even Indymedia is afraid of this topic.

That Is One Hell of an Aneurysm

No wonder the man is so messed up.

Yikes!

A Great, Must-Read But Loooooong and Very Detailed Analysis of the Collapse of WTC I

I think this guy has figured it out!

Source.

THIS PAPER IS NOT COPYRIGHTED

WTC 1 COLLAPSE - THE FIRST MOMENTS

By Wayne Trumpman
9 September 2005
Version:0.4

 

This paper analyzes the first moments of the WTC 1 collapse on 9-11. Phenomena are documented that is impossible to explain by a natural gravity collapse and point to the use of high explosives. Discussion focuses on the top 13 floors, 110-98, and the collapse of floors 97, 96, 95, and 94. Features of the fires,the behavior of collapse, and the produced clouds are looked at in detail. It would be helpful for you to review the NIST final report before continuing since this paper assumes you have some knowledge of the WTC1 collapse. You can find this on the Internet for free. See the References section at the end of this paper for internet links.

 

INTRO

WHAT HAS BEEN RULED OUT

Although a widely promoted theory in the Mainstream Media, airplane impact and jet fuel fireball did not cause the WTC 1 to collapse. They have been attributed to SOME dislodging of fireproofing on SOME columns, and SOME damage to the building structure, but that is as far the government or any body of repute will venture to assert. This leaves only the possibility for collapse being either random office fires or some other cause.

 

FIRE ANALYSIS

FIRE DATA

Below is a compilation of fire statistics. Raw data came from picture charts in a 2005 NIST report. The limited photographs I had access to appear to corroborate the data. I want to point out that in the original report data there are errors such as contradictions between the composite fire charts (of all time periods) and individual time period charts. Where there was a contradiction I relied on the individual time period chart.

FIRE COVERAGE

Floors 98-94 By Window
Composite of All Time Periods, By Building Side,By Floor
Building Side Area: 58 * 5 = 290 windows
Building Total Area:290 * 4 = 1160 windows

EAST
Floor	Total Burned	Not Burned	Burned Out	Burning at Collapse
98	57	1	7	50
97	50	8	39	11
96	57	1	57	0
95	21	37	21	0
94	48	10	45	3
Totals	233	57	169	64
Percent	80%	20	58	22
NORTH
Floor	Total Burned	Not Burned	Burned Out	Burning at Collapse
98	52	6	49	3
97	37	21	37	0
96	41	17	34	7
95	22	36	10	12
94	34	24	31	3
Totals	186	104	161	25
Percent	64%	36	55	9
SOUTH
Floor	Total Burned	Not Burned	Burned Out	Burning at Collapse
98	58	0	34	24
97	58	0	40	18
96	52	6	29	23
95	29	29	24	5
94	15	43	7	8
Totals	212	78	134	78
Percent	73%	27	46	27
WEST
Floor	Total Burned	Not Burned	Burned Out	Burning at Collapse
98	58	0	19	39
97	58	0	58	0
96	44	14	44	0
95	52	6	12	40
94	54	4	27	27
Totals	266	24	160	106
Percent	92%	8	55	37
Grand Totals	897	263	624	273
Percent	77%	23	53	24

FIRE COVERAGE
Floors 98-94 By Window
By Floor, ByBuilding Side, By Time Period
Numbers signify fires burning during time period

Time Periods:
A - 8:47 am to 9:02 am
B - 9:04 am to 9:18 am
C -9:20 am to 9:34 am
D - 9:36 am to 9:58 am
E - 10:00 am to 10:18 am
F- 10:20 am to 10:28 am

Floor Area One Side: 58 windows
Floor Area Total: 58 * 4 = 232 windows

FLOOR 98
	A	B	C	D	E	F
East	21	12	10	28	33	50
North	0	0	5	40	16	3
South	0	0	16	30	37	24
West	0	0	0	47	58	39
Total	21	12	31	145	144	116
Percent	9%	5	13	63	62	50
FLOOR 97
	A	B	C	D	E	F
East	21	12	10	13	14	11
North	28	26	4	0	0	0
South	2	12	27	26	25	18
West	30	58	32	47	0	0
Total	81	108	73	86	39	29
Percent	35%	47	31	37	17	13
FLOOR 96
	A	B	C	D	E	F
East	0	27	26	18	29	7
North	14	12	11	17	7	7
South	24	26	27	28	17	23
West	0	6	19	27	2	0
Total	38	71	83	90	55	37
Percent	16%	31	36	39	24	16
FLOOR 95
	A	B	C	D	E	F
East	4	2	6	14	0	0
North	10	0	0	0	6	12
South	2	11	19	22	2	5
West	0	0	0	0	45	40
Total	16	13	25	36	53	57
Percent	7%	6	11	16	23	25
FLOOR 94
	A	B	C	D	E	F
East	22	18	30	26	3	3
North	5	13	26	18	5	3
South	0	0	1	3	0	8
West	0	0	0	29	26	27
Total	27	31	57	76	34	41
Percent	12%	13	25	33	15	18
Totals	183	235	269	433	325	280
Percent	16%	20	23	37	28	24

The government fire data only represents fires that were visible through the windows. However, since random office fires are "random", it would be acceptable to infer that interior fires unseen, if they existed,were similar. Most of the oxygen available to fires was at the building perimeter. When the collapse occurred the air volume from the floors were all smoky. Any interior fires that were able to thrive in these fire unfriendly conditions would not outperform fires that were seen. With this reasoning the paper treats 2-dimensional fire data as representative of 3-dimensional fires. To understand the logic, imagine a fictional WTC 1 with all its windows on the front face. All 232 windows of a floor would be on one building side. This fictional building would be very wide to accommodate the windows. The depth of this building will have to be shallow in order to make the building the same volume as the original WTC 1. Because of the rearrangement of windows, each window now conveniently represents an equal size building area. So when a fire is seen in a window,this repesents the volume of 1/232 of a floor. This is howthe 2-Ddata is turned into 3-D data. Because it is probable that the interior of the building had less fires than the perimeter, the resultsof going from 2-D to 3-D creates a bias where more fire is represented than what existed in reality. This paper accepts this bias as its intention is to keep analysis on the conservative side.

So what does the data show? When tracing behavior of fire over time,I estimate there were over 30 fire groups. These were made up of one or more individual fires, or were sections of a larger fire. Fires were dynamic- they started, moved around, and burned out. Fires wormed their way throughout the building looking for fuel (office materials). Fires did not stay in one place longerthan about 45 minues, and typically did not stay in one placelonger than 30-45 minutes. No fires on a single floor ever covered more than 63% of the floor at any one time, and on average only covered 25% of a floor. The south side area of the building (floors 98-94), where collapse initiated, had the second smallest burn area, 73%. At collapse only 27% of the south side area was burning. Fires peaked during the time period 9:36 to 9:58 a.m., when fires covered a maximum of 37% of the building area (floors 98-94, all building sides), then diminished until the collapse at 10:28 a.m. Only 24% of the building area was on fire when collapse occurred.

Floor 97, the floor where collapse initiated, had no more than 47%of its area on fire at any one time. It only had 13% of its area on fire at thetime of collapse. 13% of the floor never had fire. The other 74% was burned out. Fires on floor 97 did not burn longer than about 45 minutes.

What the data shows is that it is very unlikely that fires caused floor 97 to collapse. But it was the first floor to collapse. The 30 or so firegroups were not as widespread as thought, they were not singularly large, they did not burn consistently, equally, or long enough, or hot enough. Fires had to be able to do all these things and more in order to cause a near simultaneous symmetrical collapse. Otherwise the collapse would not occur, or not be simultaneous, or be asymmetrical at best. In addition, Underwriter Laboratories (UL)ran tests on the WTC steel and concluded columns could have easily withstood 45-minutefires (this is an industry standard minimum fire-rating time). None of the fires lasted longer than about 45 minutes.

I want to point out that the government fails to do this basicanalysis eventhough it created the data. This fire data establishes: 1) where fires burned;2) for how long; and 3) the temperature (color of flames and smoke). It is irrefutable picture data. But the government chooses to establish extent of fire based on hypothetical models and speculation. Comments about its "modeling" will be made later in this paper, but let me give an example of the speculation used. In its final report the government asserts multiple times that fires weakened and "bowed" columns. On page 148, "The south perimeter wall was first observed to have bowed inward at 10:23 a.m. [5 minutes before collapse] The bowing appeared over nearly the entire south face of the 94th to100th floors. The maximum  bowing was 55 in.[1.4 m] on the 97th floor." Take a look at the picture onpage 33 of the final report. This the government's best evidence. Can you corroborate the government's findings about "bowing"? Of the 59 columns of thesouth face, one can only see about 16 columns that appear to be "bowed". And this "bowing" phenomenon is only seen on 3, maybe 4 floors (98-95), not the 7 floors asserted. The government's overstatements amount to 800% reality. Why? In addition,it cannot be determined beyond speculation that the steel columns were "bowed" and not be an aberration, such as optical distortion from fire and heat, from picture enhancement, or from the aluminum facade covering the columns. In these pictures and others there are places where the aluminum facade has been removed exposing the steel columns underneath. The exposed steel columns are ALL straight. If exposed steel columns were straight, how can it be asserted that deformed aluminum facade is an irrefutable indicator of bent columns? This is nonscientific. In addition, if columns were bent as much as 1.4 meters spanning 7 floors and across an entire building face, where is the evidence of structural fatigue and failure caused by the 40,000+ tons of building above? How can load bearing columns bend significantly but horizontal floors maintain their position and rigidity during thesame fire? In addition, the fires that burned in the "bowing" area were all young, less than 6-25 minutes old. Can random office fires less than 25 minutes old be able to make floors systems sag and bend steel columns with intact fireproofing? Science says no way. For one of the largest public safety events in history, this type of substandard research by the government is a mistake. The Americanpeople deserve better than this.

It has been asserted that the WTC 1 weighed 200,000 tons. This figure is inferred from a 2002 FEMA report and corroborated by data about other hi-rise buildings built around the 1970s such as the Sears tower and the Hancock building. I want to point out that the government's providing of basic architectural informationabout the WTC has been piece-meal at best. NIST mentions in a 2005 presentation that the WTC 1 had 100,000 tons of steel. In a 2004 presentation NIST asserts that the 47 core columns had a factor of safety of about 2.25. The 236 perimeter columns had a factor of safety of about 5.0 (it has been asserted that the higherfactor of safety for the perimeter columns was to handle wind loads). It has been asserted that the core columns, the main load bearing columns, carried 60% of the building load, and the perimeter columns supported 40% of the building load. This was a big building, like a rock in Lower Manhattan for 30 years.

COLUMN STATISTICS
Type	Column Count	Factor of Safety	Load Bearing
Core	47	2.25	60%
Perimeter	236	5.0	40%

The factor of safety is based upon the dead load (building materials) of the building and the intended live load (people, office furniture, and similar). The dead load of a floor was 1,818 tons. The floor area was rated 40-150 psf (1.9-7.18 kPa), dependingon what the area was going to be used for. Higher load ratings generally were for areas that would support larger than normal loads such as mechanical equipment. Below are floor load estimates based on a review of WTC data contained in a 2005 NIST report. This report contained select scanned images of original WTC specification documents. Because of contradictions in the NIST final report this paper relied on the original WTC specification documents. Data was incomplete so inferences had to be made. The load rating for columns in the perimeter area was 50 psf. The load rating for the core area was up to 100 psf. This comesout tobe an estimated 75 psf average for an office floor. The load ratings for floors 110-94 average out to be about82 psf (3.9 kPa) per floor. On average, a floor's design live load was 1,488 tons. The estimated total weight of a floor, dead load plus live load, is 3,306 tons. Add the factor of safety and the building structure could handle multiple times this load. It is estimated that the average factor of safety for a floor was 3.35. This means a floor could handle a total of 11,075 tons before failing. To visualize, imagine 5,500 2-ton cars stacked in a square about 1/3 of a cityblock.

FLOOR LIVE LOAD RATINGS
Floor	Rating
110	75 psf
109	150
108	75
107	100
106	100
105	75
104	75
103	75
102	75
101	75
100	75
99	75
98	75
97	75
96	75
95	75
94	75

CALCULATION:
200000 / 110 = 1818 tons = 1818000 kg
CALCULATION:
200* 200 = 40000
40000 * 82 = 3280000 lbs = 1487783 kg = 1488 tons
CALCULATION:
1818+ 1488 = 3306 tons
CALCULATION:
60 * 2.25 = 135
40 * 5 = 200
135 +200 = 335
335 / 100 = 3.35

The perimeter columns essentially had enough reserve capacity to carry 200% of the WTC 1 design load. Thecore columns could carry 135%. For floor 97 to collapse, the equivalent of 55% of the core columns and 80%of the perimeter columns would have to fail. That means on average 26 core columns and 189 perimeter columns would have to fail. 75% of the total columns would have to fail. This indicates that the WTC 1 design had lots of redundancy. This was no house of cards. Could fires burning on only 13% of floor 97 cause 75% of the columns to fail simultaneously? Science says no way. Add the fact that the steel was certified ASTM E119 and at least a majority ofthe columns still had fireproofing. Add the fact that fires burned atmost about 45 minutes. Add the fact that on floor 97 at the time of collapse nofires existed on the north and west faces, that 45 minute fires existed on the east face,and that less than 25 minute fires existed on the south face; and one can see the impossibility of 200+ columns being harmed catastrophically by heat of fire.

In fire, the behavior of steel is as follows. It heats up. It weakens. It fatigues. It fatigues more. Failure is gradual. Steel does not go from undetectable, immeasurable fatigue to catastrophic failure like a flick of a light switch. This is corroborated by documented fires of other hi-rise buildings throughout history and by lab tests with steel, including the tests the government has done for  its "modeling". Do you have a piece of steel rod and a welding torch? You can try this experiment (please exercise safety). Warm up the steel hot with the torch. Note how stiff the steel is. Now heat it up so it glows orange hot in the middle- put over 2000 C on it. Note how stiff the steel is- it bends. Now let the steel cool so it is only hot again. Note how long it takes to recover from being orange hot. Did it take 30 seconds or less? Now note how stiff the steel is. Feels the same as it was at the beginning of the experiment,does it not? This is very similar to what was happening to steel columns in WTC 1 as the fires burned then burned out.

It is a well known fact that steel  is an excellent conductor material. The WTC 1 had a 100,000 ton steel frame. This was like a giant heat sink. When fires heated up steel columns, heat got drawn away from the heat source by the cooler parts of the building frame. A portion of the fire heat is not going to stay local. Add the fact that on average fires did not cover more than 25% ofany one floor. Add the fact that fires lasted at most about 45 minutes and one can seehowsteel members as part of a giant 100,000 ton heat sink were not heating up like the isolated steel pieces in laboratory tests as part of the government's"modeling". What this shows is that the steel in the WTC 1 easily withstood the 45 minute fires as the effective damage by fire was of a shorter duration.

The government has asserted weakening by fire is a primary cause of collapse. From its "modeling" the government concludes fires MAY have heated columns 500-600 C and made them weaken and bow. But NIST commissioned UnderwriterLaboratories (UL) to conduct tests on the recovered physical WTC steeland UL found that most columns did not reach 250 C. This corroborates that the building was acting as a giant heat sink, or that fires did not reach 500-600 C temperatures. The government has repeatedly asserted since 2002 that the recovered steel adequately represents the two towers. The government contradicts itself. It is unable to explain why its hypothetical modeling is superior to physical data. The government goes so far as to avoid discussion of this data in its final report and most of its public presentations. It is quite unscientific to ignore irrefutable data that contradicts the theory you are trying to peddle.

However, it does not matter what temperature the columns heated. It could have been 1100 C, 1500 C, pick a temperature. It also does not matter if the columns bowed. They could have twisted, bent, fatigued, expanded, shortened, changed properties, or whatever. The columns could have lost their safety factor. They could have lost ALL theirfire-proofing. It does not matter. The fact is those columns were able to handle the FULL building load during fire when they were at their weakest state. After the fires burned out, the columns cooled. When heated steel cools, it regains strength. There is nothing "magic" going on here. Since columns had a factor of safety of at least 2.25 this means that column strength during cooling was above 100% of the building load. Those columns had reserve capacity. 87% of the columns on floor 97 were either untouched by fire or were cooling when the collapse occurred. So how could all these columns fail symmetrically and simultaneously by fire? Science says no way.

If a column's strength fell below 100% of the building load then it would have started to fail. It is averaged that 80% of the perimeter columns had to fail in order for what is documented to be caused by a natural gravity collapse. In the picture data, do you see 189 bent perimeter columns at floor 97? No. Can you observe changes to the building structure from all this failing such as widespread misalignment of floors? No.

In summary, fire could not have weakened the necessary number of columns to failure to create what has been documented. This refutes a natural gravity collapse theory. The government has been unable to reconcile the irrefutable data.

 

COLLAPSE ANALYSIS

Below is a summary of the WTC 1 collapse sequence by time instance. Keep in mind that each instant during the collapse occurred for only afraction of a second. It would be helpful for you to review available videos of the WTC1 before continuing as it will allow you visualize the descriptions in this paper. You can find these on the Internet for free. See the References section at theend of this paper for internet links.

COLLAPSE SEQUENCE

Building is motionless with smoky fires.

Collapse sequence begins.

Tower antenna moves slightly east and south.

First Row of explosions at floor 97 is seen.

Upper building above floor 97 moves downward, Second row of a dual set of explosions at Floor 97 are seen.

Upper building moves downward, clouds expanding.

Floor 98 impacts floor 97, clouds expanding.

More explosions, upper building moves downward in unison, cloudsexpanding.

Floor 97 impacts floor 96, expulsion of clouds, clouds expanding.

Floor 96 impacts floor 95, expulsion of clouds, clouds expanding.

Collapse continues...

Below are select observations from video of the WTC 1 collapse.

OBSERVATIONS

Individual floors collapsed in a demolition-like manner. All columns collapsed in near-unison and all four corners of the building fell in near-unison.

There was no detectable fatiguing or bending of perimeter columns prior to collapse. What one sees is a motionless building rigidly retaining its shape, then suddenly goes into catastrophic, out-of-control collapse. There is no in-between state that would be typical of steel in fire.

The building's first point of collapse appears to be from the south side of the building.

Columns on floor 97 did not bend prior to the observed explosions.

Only floor 97 collapsed in the first moments.

Floor 97 has dual rows of explosions around its perimeter at the top and bottom of its columns.

When the upper building impacted and collapsed lower floors,upper building floors did not buckle.

There was no significant pause in collapse when the upper floors impacted floor 97, then floor 96.

I want to point out that if you analyze the collapse videos, it is going to take more than a cursory look to confirm some of the findings, such as the dual rows of explosions. I also want to note that in this paper I make a distinction between a collapsing and a falling floor. A collapsing floor refers to a floor's columns failing and the impact of upper floors. The floor above that is causing the collapse would be considered a falling floor. Example, floor 97 was the first floor to collapse. But floor 98 fell to create the observed collapse. The WTC1 collapse had two parts: 1) a falling part; 2) a collapsing part. Keep this in mind and you will not become confused by the discussion which will sometimes refer to floor 97 or floor 98 when talking about the samesection of thecollapse.

FALL MEASUREMENTS

It is estimated that each floor of WTC 1 was 3.8 meters high. For floor 98 todrop to floor 97 would have taken at least 0.88 seconds in the bestcase scenario- this is free fall in a vacuum. For comparison, it would have taken 9.2 seconds for 110 floors to fall in a vacuum. Below are the best-case fall times for floors 98 through 95.

FREE FALL SPEED OF FLOORS
Floor 98	with Floor 97	with Floor 96	with Floor 95
0.88 sec	1.25	1.53	1.76

CALCULATION:
distance = (1/2) * gravity * time^2
time = SQR(distance/ 0.5 * gravity)
time = SQR(3.8 / 4.9) = SQR(0.776) = 0.88 sec
time =SQR(7.6 / 4.9) = SQR(1.55) = 1.25
time = SQR(11.4 / 4.9) = SQR(2.33) = 1.53
time= SQR(15.2 / 4.9) = SQR(3.1) = 1.76

Below are measured fall times for the same floors taken from video. I took 12 good readings then discarded the lowest and highest value, and averaged. I simply used tape, pencils, a stopwatch, and my eyes. I placed narrow strips of tape on the monitors creen along the vertical edges of the building in the videos. I then marked the floor locations on the tape. I then replayed the collapse repeatedly, taking notes and measurements. The government has also done low-tech analysis of pictures to get data. Anybody can do this and it is credible.

MEASURED FALL TIMES OF FLOORS
Floor 98	with Floor 97	with Floor 96	with Floor 95	Video Used
0.85 sec	1.33	1.71	1.91	wtc1-demolition-2.avi
0.86 sec	1.31	1.68	1.99	wtc1-demolition-4.avi
Averaged
0.86 sec	1.32	1.70	1.95

The upper 13 floors took about 0.86 sec to reach floor 97 and 1.32 sec to reach floor 96. What these times show is that the WTC 1 collapse resembled the behavior of free fall the first few floors. If the times are reasonably accurate, it shows that the building was "pulled down" in its first moments of collapse. This faster than free fall slowed once the upper floors met resistance with the lowerstructure.

Because of the behavior of steel as its weakens over time by fire, a slow-motion progressive fatigue of floor 97 should have occurred. Here is an experiment you can do. Take two books the same size and stand them on their ends. Take a third book and lay it flat across the two standing books. These represent two columns and a floor. Now slowly push against the books until they go into collapse. Did you notice how the collapse started out slow then accelerated? This stage of fatigue before failure is missing from the WTC 1 collapse at floor97. Now take two of the books, stand one vertical, and balance the other across the top to make a 'T'. This is a floor and column. Now quickly, remove the vertical book. Did you notice how quickly the top book fell? That is what floor 98 did on 9-11.

There is no video data showing a fatigue period of the columns. Steel does not simply snap and buckle suddenly in a fire. Here is an experiment you can dowith a steel rod and a torch (please exercise safety). Hold the rod in one hand vertical and press down on it- this is a WTC column. Now take the torch and heat the rod simulating fire. What happens? Did you observe a snap-of-the-fingers "pancake" failure? No. How then does one explain the hundreds of steel columns in WTC 1 doing it? If you think it can be explained by the large weight of the upper floors, think again. Increased weight merely causes steel to fatigue sooner when weakened by fire- but the steel would still have a distinct period of progressive fatigue before failure.

Here is a riddle for you. I have a building with 110 floors. Columns have a factor of safety of at least 2.25. For some reason floor 97 collapses, at which time floor 98 and the other upper floors impact floor 97 with enough force tomake floor 96 collapse. This collapsing behavior continues to the next floors. It is known that each one of the lower floors can handle more building load than any of the upper floors. Why did floor 98 not buckle when it impacted lower floors?

I just pointed out a problem. When two objects of different strengths smash, science says the weaker object will yield. Floor 98 did not buckle whenit hit the lower structure for at least 8 floors. To overwhelm these lower floors requires the mass of the upper building section. So when floor 98 allegedly hit these lower floors to apply the energy of that falling mass why did the columns of floor 98 not absorb some of the impact?

There is another problem. The WTC 1 collapsed "pancake" style at floor 97 but the columns had varying load capacities. The perimeter columns essentially had enough reserve capacity to carry 200% of the WTC 1 design load. The core columns could carry 135%. There is a large variance of load capacities between columns, over 30% difference. How could columns with such differing load capacities fail at the same time by random office fires? Science says no way.

There is another problem. The first point of collapse was the south side of the building. The government has made this admission. As will be shown later in this paper, the lower floors did not provide much resistance to the collapse. What this means is that there was no significant counterforce to stop a circular momentum. So why did the 40,000+ ton upper building not continue to topple over in the south direction during the WTC 1 collapse?

A "truss theory" promoted by the Mainstream Media attempts to explain awaysome of these impossibilities. The theory basically says that fire made floors sag and this caused inward pulling of columns and made them buckle easily. Fire also caused weak bolts to break and this initiated the collapse. Besides this theory ignoring certain facts about the WTC towers and its general lack of evidence, there is also a problem with its logic. If weak bolts broke to cause the collapse, how is it that these same weak bolts were strong enough to pull on the hundreds of massive steel columns and make them bow? How can weak bolts withstand fire, but entire floor systems droop and sag? How can weak bolts during fire be strong and weak at the same time?

In summary, the WTC 1 did not collapse as science predicts it should have. This refutes a natural gravity collapse theory. The government has been unable to reconcile the irrefutable data.

 

CLOUD ANALYSIS

Below are selected observations from video of the WTC 1 collapse.

OBSERVATIONS

Five main types of clouds are seen: 1) dark grey sooty firesmoke; 2) grey fire smoke; 3) light grey, dirty concrete dust; 4) whitegrey dust; 5) pulverized debris (mixture of building/office materials).

At floor 97 there are two chains of fast explosions along the 200+ steel perimeter columns, starting from the south face of the building, and moved in both direction around the building to the front.One chain of explosions went off at the top of floor 97, the second at the bottom of floor 97. There appears to be equal delay between each individual explosion.

Explosions are occurring before any observable signs of collapse.

Explosions originated from inside the WTC and expelled cloudsoutward. The hundreds of closely spaced steel columns created a "comb"effect of the expelled clouds. Explosions look like they occurred every several columns. After expelling a few meters, the explosions blended together into one continuous cloud.

Explosions can be seen going off on the west and east sides several floors ahead of the collapse in video where the camera looks at the north face head on. This unique view allows one to see building area that is masked by expelled clouds in other videos. Explosionsoccur on floors 90 and below, even though the collapse point wasseveral floors above. These lower floors suffered no damage from fire or plane impact.

Clouds of concrete dust are expelled before floor 98 impacts floor 97. These clouds are denser than smoke and have the same color of pulverized concrete created later in the collapse.

What can be observed suggests explosives, does is not? This is irrefutable picture data. Take a look at it with your own eyes. I want point out that since concrete clouds were being expelled before floor 98 impacted floor 97, this means concrete was not being pulverized by impacting floors, but by some other force.

I want to point out the importance of the clouds. Fires filled the building with smoke. This marks the otherwise invisible air- like a color dye in water. So when the floors collapsed, using thermodynamics and other physics, one can determine how much air volume existed inside floor 97 when collapse initiated. If there is an abnormality between what is measured and what should be, this would indicate use of explosives because explosives creates over pressure. It is impossible for a floor to create more air volume than what science will allow in a natural gravity collapse.

The government has asserted that the volume of air of a single flooris "approximated as 200 ft [61 m] × 200 ft × 12 ft = 480,000 ft3". This gives us 13,592 cubic meters. A researcher estimated that the air volume of the entire building was 1.5e6 cubic meters. From this we get 13,636 cubic meters of air per floor. This corroborates the government data. Below are estimated air volumes for floors 97-94.

AIR VOLUME OF FLOORS
floor 97	with floor 96	with floor 95	with floor 94
13,592 m^3	27,184	40,776	54,368

Since not much more clouds came from the crash hole in relation tothe clouds expelled from the perimeter of the building, it is reasonable to conclude that similar amounts of clouds were being ejected from all sides of the building. This even distribution of clouds is corroborated by picture data from different camera angles. This is also corroborated by the government's own assertions in various reports.

Below are measured cloud volumes at different points of the collapse. Note that clouds were not perfect circles and therefore adjustment has to be made to get an easy-to-work-with diameter number.

MEASURED CLOUD DIAMETER
floor 97	with floor 96	with floor 95	with floor 94	Video Used
7.6 m	13.3	21.9	27.6	wtc1-demolition-2.avi
9.5 m	17.1	21.9	26.6	wtc1-demolition-4.avi
Averaged
8.6 m	15.2	21.9	27.1

Looking at the picture data the clouds expanded outward like an explosion. For simplicity we will treat the average volume of the clouds along each buildingside like a cylinder. Below are the estimated volumes of the clouds along theperimeter ofthe building at different points of collapse.

CLOUD VOLUME OF FLOORS
	floor 97	with floor 96	with floor 95	with floor 94
Original Vol	13,592 m^3	27,184	40,776	54,368
Measured Vol	14,632 m^3	45,736	94,876	145,280
Diff	1,040 m^3	18,552	54,100	90,912
Floor 97 Diff	1,040 m^3	17,512	35,548	36,812
Percent Increase	8%	128	262	271
Floor 97 Vol	14,632 m^3	31,104	49,140	50,404

CALCULATION:
cloud volume = 4 walls * wall length * cross area of cloud
4* (63 * (8.6/2)^2 * 3.14) = 4 * (63 * 18.49 * 3.14) = 4 * 3658 = 14632
4* (63 * (15.2/2)^2 * 3.14) = 4 * (63 * 57.8 * 3.14) = 4 * 11434 = 45736
4* (63 * (21.9/2)^2 * 3.14) = 4 * (63 * 119.9 * 3.14) = 4 * 23719 =94876
4* (63 * (27.1/2)^2 * 3.14) = 4 * (63 * 183.6 * 3.14) = 4 * 36320 =145280

The numbers tell a story. That during the collapse of floor 97, large overpressure developed. This compressed air was expelled by the collapsing floor but not yet fully expanded. It then expanded as the collapse continued, first rapidly,then slowing down. The numbers indicate that by floor 94, the air volume of floor 97 was mostly but not finished expanding.

We have enough information to estimate how much overpressure existed at floor 97. We can visually measure the cloud volume of floors 97-94 from picture data. Since most of the cloud volume of floor 97 was created by floor 94, to keep analysis simple and on the conservative side we will assume that the air volume is 50,404 cubic meters as measured at floor 94.

Air turbulence plays a significant role in the creation of clouds.It has been asserted that one takes about 1/3 off to account for expansion by air turbulence. We end up with 33,603 cubic meters.

We need to consider air volume produced by heat caused by the collapse itself. As each floor fell, it created energy. This energy had to: 1) overwhelm the floorbelow it; 2) make this floor accelerate at the documented speed; 2)pulverize a majority of the concrete of the floor; 3) create large volumes of air. Our first step is to determine the energy of the collapse at each floor. We then will subtract the energy sinks that absorb this energy.

From the free fall calculations and measured fall times we are able to approximate the velocity of floors falling.

FLOOR VELOCITY AND FALL TIMES
At Floor	Falling Floors	Free Fall Time	Free Fall Velocity	Measured Fall Time	Estimated Velocity
97	13	0.88 sec	8.63 m/sec	0.86 sec	8.8 m/sec
96	14	0.37	12.2	0.46	9.76
95	15	0.28	14.95	0.38	11.06
94	16	0.23	16.82	0.25	15.47

CALCULATION:
distance = (1/2) * gravity * time^2
time = SQR(distance/ 0.5 * 9.8)
time = SQR(3.8 / 4.9) = SQR(.775) = 0.88
time = SQR(7.6 /4.9) = SQR(1.55) = 1.24
time = SQR(11.4 / 4.9) = SQR(2.33) = 1.53
time= SQR(15.2 / 4.9) = SQR(3.10) = 1.76
CALCULATION:
v = SQR(2 * 9.8 * h)
v= SQR(19.6 * 3.8) = SQR(74.48) = 8.63 m/sec
v = SQR(19.6 * 7.6) = SQR(148.96)= 12.2
v = SQR(19.6 * 11.4) = SQR(223.44) = 14.95
v = SQR(19.6 * 14.44)= SQR(283.02) = 16.82
CALCULATION:
0.88 / 0.86 = 1.02 * 8.63 = 8.8 m/sec
0.37/ 0.46 = 0.80 * 12.2 = 9.76
0.28 / 0.38 = 0.74 * 14.95 = 11.06
0.23 /0.25 = 0.92 * 16.82 = 15.47

We want to determine the energy that was absorbed by the building. We can do this by taking the kineticenergy (KE) of free fall, the maximum theoretical energy,and subtract the measured kinetic energy. The difference is the amount of energy that was used to overwhelm the columns, break up the structure, pulverized concrete, make accelerated combustion, and other.

KINETIC ENERGY COMPARISON
At Floor	Falling Floors	KE Free Fall	KE Measured	KE Diff
97	13	445 kwh	462 kwh	-17 kwh
96	14	923	612	311
95	15	1436	842	594
94	16	1983	1758	225

CALCULATION:
3306 tons = 3306000 kg
3306000 * 13 = 42978000 kg = 42978 tons
3306000 * 14 = 46284000 = 46284
3306000 * 15 = 49590000 = 49590
3306000 * 16 = 52896000 = 52896
(for free fallKE is same as PE)
fall of one floor at various heights
PE joules = xx kg * 9.8 m/s2 * xx m
PE = 3306000 * 9.8* 3.8 = 123115440 joules = 34 kwh
PE = 3306000 * 9.8 * 7.6 = 246230880 = 68
PE = 3306000 * 9.8 * 11.4 = 369346320 = 103
fall of13 floors at various heights
PE joules= xx kg * 9.8 m/s2 * xx m
PE = 42978000 * 9.8 * 3.8 = 1600500720 joules =445 kwh
PE = 42978000 * 9.8 * 7.6 = 3201001440 = 889
PE = 42978000* 9.8 * 11.4 = 4801502160 = 1334
PE = 42978000 * 9.8 * 15.2 = 6402002880= 1778
total energy of falling floors
889 + 34 = 923 kwh
1334 + 68 + 34 = 1436
1778+ 103 + 68 + 34 = 1983
CALCULATION"
KE joules = 1/2 * m * v^2
KE= 0.5 * 42978000 * (8.8)^2 = 21489000 * 77.44 =1664108160 joules= 462 kwh
KE = 0.5 * 46284000 * (9.76)^2 = 23142000 * 95.26= 2204506920 = 612
KE = 0.5 * 49590000 * (11.06)^2= 24795000 * 122.32 = 3032924400 = 842
KE = 0.5* 52896000 * (15.47)^2 = 26448000 * 239.32 =6329535360 = 1758

If the numbers are reasonably accurate, they show that a lot of energy from the falling floors continued with the collapse and were not absorbed by the building. In fact, at floor 97, no energy was absorbed at all. This means that at floor 97 there should have been no overwhelming of columns, no pulverizing of concrete, and no accelerated combustion. But picture data shows substantial energy was transferred to ALL floors. This contradiction between what is observed and what is calculated has been pointed out by other researchers and cannot be explained by a natural gravity collapse. One researcher created a paradox to describe what was happening: How could floors provide both extreme high resistance and extreme low resistance at the same time?

We want to estimate how much energy it took to overwhem the columns of afloor. Using the Work-Energy principle we can estimate the average impact force of a falling floor. We are going to create a situation where the impact stopped so we can isolate the impact force. In reality, the collapse continued after impact. This does not effect the final outcome of the calculations, but allows easier computation. A floor would not have zero elasticity so we are going to use an arbitrary 0.01 meters for the distance traveled after impact. We find that the falling of 13 floors one story creates a force of 160,050,072,000 newtons.

CALCULATION:
average impact force * distance traveled = change in kineticenergy
average impact force = change in kinetic energy / distance traveled
F = 1600500720 / 0.01 = 160050072000 newtons

Now we need to turn this into a pressure. We need to know the cross section area of the building columns. In a 2002 report FEMA asserts "The core columns were box sections fabricated from A36 steel plate and were 36 inches[91.44cm] x 14-16 inches [35.56-40.64 cm] with plate thickness from 3/4 inch[1.91cm] to 4 inches [10.16 cm]. Above floor 84, rolled or welded built-up I-shaped sections were used." FEMA also says perimeter columns were "14-inch by14-inch [35.56 cm]".

I want to stress that the government's providing of basic architectural design information about the WTC has been very poor. This withholding ofinformation has been taken to the extreme by the government's refusal to release the WTC blueprints and locking down information under nondisclosure agreements. It has been asserted that the government is doing this as a anti-terrorism "security" measure. But what security risk is created by releasing dataon buildingslong gone and which will never be built again?

Below are estimates of I-shape beams for floors 97-94. The difference in dimensions and thickness for floors 97-94 were less than a centimeter,so for simplicity of analysis an averaged column is calculated. There was a total of 2.28 square meters of steel for the core columns and 4.71 square meters for perimeter columns. Total area of column steel is about 7 square meters. To simplify calculations we will assume that maximum impact occurred on the columns before impact contributed to other aspects of the collapse.

COLUMN DIMENSIONS
Column Type	Width	Depth	Thickness	Cross Section Area
Core	91.44 cm	36.29 cm	3.07 cm	484.69 cm^2
Perimeter	35.56	35.56	3.07	199.49

CALCULATION:
40.64 - 35.56 = 5.08
5.08 / 110 = 0.05 cm
13 * 0.05= 0.65 cm + 35.56 = 36.21 cm
14 * 0.05 = 0.7 + 35.56 = 36.26
15 * 0.05= 0.75 + 35.56 = 36.31
16 * 0.05 = 0.8 + 35.56 = 36.36
36.21 + 36.26 +36.31 + 36.36 = 145.14 / 4 = 36.29 cm
CALCULATION:
10.16 - 1.91 = 8.25
8.25/ 110 = 0.08 cm
13 * 0.08 = 1.04 cm + 1.91 = 2.95 cm
14 * 0.08 = 1.12+ 1.91 = 3.03
15 * 0.08 = 1.2 + 1.91 = 3.11
16 * 0.08 = 1.28 + 1.91 =3.19
2.95 + 3.03 + 3.11 + 3.19 = 12.28 / 4 = 3.07 cm
CALCULATION:
((2* 36.29) * 3.07) + (91.44 - (2 * 3.07)) * 3.07) = (72.58 * 3.07) +(85.3 * 3.07)= 222.82 + 261.87 = 484.69 cm^2
((2 * 35.56) * 3.07) + (35.56 - (2 * 3.07))* 3.07) = (35.56 * 3.07) + (29.42 * 3.07) = 109.17 + 90.32 = 199.49 cm^2
CALCULATION:
484.69* 47 = 22780.43 cm = 2.28 m^2
199.49 * 236 = 47079.64 cm = 4.71 m^2

Now let us calculate impact pressure of the falling floors. For 13 floors falling one story this is 22,864 MPa.

CALCULATION:
impact pressure = impact force / impact area
IP = 160050072000/ 7 = 22864296000 N/m2 = 22864 MPa

Below is information on ASTM A36 steel used in calculations. Steel strength is similar in compression and tension. To overwhelm ASTM A36 steel incompression would take on average 475 MPa.

PROPERTIES OF ASTM A36 STEEL
Tensile Strength, Ultimate	400 - 550 MPa
Tensile Strength, Yield	250 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity	200 GPa
Compressive Yield Strength	152 MPa
Bulk Modulus	140 GPa
Shear Modulus	79.3 GPa

We need to account for weakening by heat. Earlier it was calculated that the average air temperature on a floor with fire was 148 C at the time of collapse. Using a general steel strength versus temperature chart, one finds that the steel would have lost about 2% of its strength if it was heated to this temperature. Adjusting our figure we get 466 MPa.

We also have to account for weakening by the plane impact. In a 2004 presentation NIST asserts from its "modeling" that in the "Realistic Case", 3 core columns were severed, 10 were damaged. In this same presentation the "Realistic Case" for the perimeter columns was 34 severed columns and 5 damaged.

CORE COLUMNS
Columns	Damage
3	Severed
4	Heavy Damage
6	Moderate Damage
PERIMETER COLUMNS
Columns	Damage
34	Severed
3	Heavy Damage
2	Moderate Damage

CALCULATION:
2/3 * 3 = 2
1/3 * 2 = 2/3
2/3 * 4 = 2 2/3
1/2 *6 = 2

NIST used a three-level damage rating: Severed, Heavy Damage,Moderate Damage. We will assume severed equals 100% damage, heavy damage is 2/3, and moderate damage is 1/3. We find that the equivalent of total severed perimeter columns is 36. We find that the equivalent of total severed core columns to be 8. Now we need to determine average severed columns per floor. From a building damage chart in a 2005 NIST report I count the following severed perimeter columns:

SEVERED PERIMETER COLUMNS
Floor	Severed Columns
97	13
96	15
95	15
94	16

On average, about 15 perimeter columns were severed per floor. This is about 40% of the total severed perimeter columns. Using this percentage we can scale and estimate how many severed columns per floor. We find that the equivalent severed column average is 16 for the perimeter and 3 for the core per floor. This means the perimeter was weakened 7% and the core weakened 6%. This corroborates that the impact of a Boeing 767 at high speed did not cause overwhelming structural damage to the WTC 1. The average weakening of a floor comes out to be 6.4%. Adjusting our steel figure we get 435 MPa.

CALCULATION:
40 * 7 = 280
60 * 6 = 360
280 + 360 = 640 / 100 = 6.4%
CALCULATION:
475* 0.02 = 9.5
475 * 0.064 = 30.4
475 - 9.5 - 30.4 = 435 MPa

We have enough information to determine how much energy it took to overwhelm the floor columns. Since we calculated an average column's dimensions,the result will be the same for all floors 97-94. It took about 9 kwh to overwhelm the columns of a floor. Not much energy compared to what the collapse created per floor, 200+ kwh. I wanted to walk through calculating how much energy the columns could handle because I observed in my research that people mistakenly believe columns would have resisted the collapse significantly. It is true, they can support large loads. But they cannot handle that same weight dropped from a height. If you have ever dropped a book on your bare foot, you know that the normally benign book becomes painful when it falls. Likewise, the upper floors created a lot more energy when moving.

CALCULATION:
435 / 22864  = 0.02
445 * 0.02 = 9 kwh

How much energy did it take to pulverize the concrete? Using an asserted 60/40 steel to concrete ratio, we find that the WTC 1 had 66,667 tons of concrete. Other researches have made estimates upwards to 90,000 tons. Let us take a middle of the road figure of 78,000 tons. This works out to be 709 tons per floor.It has been asserted that the majority of the concrete in the WTC 1 was turned into dust. We will assume conservatively that 40% of concrete was pulverized. Using an asserted 1.5 kwh/ton it takes 426 kwh to pulverize the 284 tons of concrete per floor that is documented as dust.

One finds that of the 2,836 tons of concrete of floors 97-94, 26% was pulverized. Does this match what is documented in the picture data? No. Documented are voluminous amounts of concrete clouds being created. This required energy to BOTH pulverize the concrete AND expel it into clouds. Where is this energy coming from?

AMOUNT OF CONCRETE PULVERIZED
At Floor	Falling Floors	KE Available	Concrete Pulverized	Percent of Floor
97	13	0 kwh	0 tons	0 %
96	14	302	201	28%
95	15	585	390	55%
94	16	216	144	20%

CALCULATION:
709 * 4 = 2836
CALCULATION:
311 - 9 = 302
594 -9 = 585
225 - 9 = 216
CALCULATION:
28 + 55 + 20 = 103 / 4 = 26%

The purpose of this series of calculations was to determine how muchenergy of the collapse contributed to air volume. We were unable to get that far. We ran into a problem of not having enough energy to pulverize concrete as documented. Enough concrete was pulverized at floor 95, but what about the other three floors? Picture data shows that concrete was pulverized at floor 97 and that large amounts of concrete were pulverized at floors 96 and 94.

After you subtract energy for other aspects of the collapse, there is really nothing left over to contribute to air volume. From the fire data it can be inferred that 73% of the building area (floors97-94) was burned out or burning at the time of collapse. Even if accelerated combustion occurred, there was not much fuel available on these floors. In addition, most of the available oxygen that would be used for combustion was expelled when floors collapsed.

But for sake of discussion, let us say the extra 159 kwh ofenergy at floor 95 created heat to expand the air. The government asserts fires MAY have been 500-600C. At the time of colapse, fires only burned in 24% of the floors, 98-94. I will use 21 C as the ambient air temperature. The average temperature per floor with fire works out to 148 C.

CALCULATION:
246088 - 36913 = 209175
CALCULATION:
550 * 24 = 13200
21* 76 = 1596
13200 + 1596 = 14796 / 100 = 148C

Below is information on air. The makeup of air has been generalizedto keepanalysis simple.

PROPERTIES OF AIR
Makeup	80% N2 (28 g/mol), 20% O2 (32 g/mol)
Average Atomic Weight	28.8 g/mol
Average Heat Capacity	0.24 cal/g

We first determine the weight of air inside floor 97 at ambient temperature.Then we figure out heat created by the kwh energy. Then we figure out the air volume caused by this heat. We use gas laws and its derivatives. We find that159 kwh created 7,022 cubic meters of air volume. Subtract this from our unaccounted air volume and we get 26,581 cubic meters. Subtract off the original air volume of floor 97 and we get 12,989 cubic meters. We still have almost an entire floor volume of air that is unaccounted for. In addition, we now have an unexplainable for the large amounts of pulverized concrete clouds that there was no energy for. Where is the energy coming from?

CALCULATION:
13592 m^3 = 13592000 L
PV = nRT
(1 atm) * 13592000L = n * 0.08 * (273 + 21) K
13592000 L = n * 0.08 * 294 = 13592000 = n *23.52
n = 577891 mol
577891 * 28.8 = 16643261 g
CALCULATION:
159kwh = 136715391 cal
grams air * heat capacity * number degrees = calories
16643261* 0.24 * T = 136715391
3994382.64 * T = 136715391
T =  34 K
PV =nRT
(1 atm) * V = 566327 mol * 0.08 * (273 + 148 + 34) K
V = 566327 * 0.08* 455
V = 20614303 L = 20614 m^3
20614 - 13592 = 7022 m^3
33603- 7022 = 26581 m^3
CALCULATION:
26581 - 13592 = 12989 m^3

I want to note that in this paper I am not trying to create a detailed, exhaustive model of the WTC 1 collapse. This will have to be done. But this does not prevent me from pointing out obvious facts to you using a simpler model. I docover the major factors of the collapse and make estimates conservatively to account for margin of error and to cover for factors not considered. I have not been paid for my time to do this research. The government has paid $16 Million of your money to a bunch of hack scientists to use fantasy modeling and illlogic to prove impossibilities. That is deception. If the government cares to pay volunteer researchers like myself what it has paid to these hack in-house "scientists", a detailed thermodynamic model of these explosions could be developed.

Floor 97 contained about 33,603 cubic meters of air at the moment of collapse. That is a factor of almost 2.5 times the normal volume of air inside floor 97. This finding corroborates the work of another researcher who measured the entire cloud volume created by the WTC 1 collapse, not just of a single floor as I am doing. In his research he estimated the building cloud volume expanded over 3.4 times. Considering analysis of the entire building introduces more error than analyzing the first floor of collapse, his estimates are credible. It begs the question: Where is all this air volume coming from?

Let us pause for a moment. This is simply a phenomenal amount of air volume. To visualize, a floor of the WTC is about 1/3 of a city block. As one researcher put it, you don't need a wall of degrees to be an expert in common sense. Could a gravity collapse somehow explain this? Science says no way. There is no phenomenon in a natural gravity collapse that can account for this large volume of air. It is artificially produced. What phenomenon can produce this amount of air?

It may be argued that air pressure inside the building was higher because of fire. The WTC 1 generally had an open-floor plan. There was a large crash hole. Many windows were broken. This is like a big bag of air with holes in it. If pressure built up in the building where is it going to go? It will follow the path of least resistance and go out the holes. Substantial pressure would not be able to build up.

It may be argued that the additional air volume was created by the core collapsing first. Take two paper plates and push them together. There is only so much air between those plates, it doesn't mater if you push the plates in the middle. There has to be another force, such as intense heat to expand the air to the volume documented.

It may be argued that floor 98 was actually the first floor to collapse and the upper floors contributed air volume. There is no supporting evidence for this. No columns at floor 98 bent. Floor 98 did not buckle for at least 8 floors of the collapse. In addition no clouds were expelled as floor 99 allegedly fell- there was a whole floor of air volume from floor 98 that would havebeen expelled. This is not documented in picture data.

It may be argued that the impacting upper building pulverized concrete and created additional clouds. It has been calculated earlier in this paper that the energy of a natural gravity collapse did not pulverized much concrete. In addition, pulverizing concrete is not the same thing as creating clouds. This takes additional energy that was not available naturally.

In summary, the amount of air that existed in floor 97 at collapse defies what science predicts. This refutes a natural gravity collapse theory.The government has been unable to reconcile the irrefutable data.

 

DISCUSSION ON EXPLOSIVES

Science has pointed out several phenomena, from fires, to behavior of collapse, to air volume, that point to the use of explosives. In addition, picture data reveals the signature of explosives. But you don't know me. Do not take my word for it. I have done my best to provide the necessary data and to describe the logic and methods I used to arrive at my conclusions. I encourage you to replicate the analysis in this paper and come to the conclusion yourself.

I want to point out that a building demolition is normally difficult to reverse engineer. This is because of a number of factors, the main ones being: 1) building typically falls all at once making modeling complex; 2) not much explosives is used and so its over pressure may not stand out from the rest of the collapse; 3)air volume changes during collapse would be difficult to measure.

But the WTC 1 collapse is a unique situation. The building did not fall all at once, but floor by floor. Lots of explosions were observed indicating use of a large quantity of explosives (large over pressure). And air volume changes can be measured with reasonable accuracy. This is because there was fire, fire creates smoke, and smoke marks the air- like a color dye in water. Many experts in the fields of physics and explosives have not realized that analysis of the WTC 1 collapse is feasible because they are blinded by the faulty assumption that no demolition can be credibly reverse engineered.

I want to point out that the WTC 1 had massive steel columns. The building used 100,000 tons of steel. Large columns would have required large demolition charges. To corroborate, this is what a well-known demolition company, Controlled Demolition Inc (CDI), had to say about a demolition of the JL Hudson building,a structure about 1/2 as massive as WTC 1:

"Columns weighing over 500 lb/ft, having up to 7.25 inch thick laminated steel flanges and 6 inch thick webs, defied commercially available shaped charge technology. CDI analyzed each column, determined the actual load it carried and then used cutting torches to scarf-off steel plates in order to use smaller shaped charges to cut the remaining steel. CDI wanted to keep the charges as small as possible to reduce air over pressure that could break windows in adjacent properties."

 

WHAT EXPLOSIVE TYPE USED

Below is a list of some high explosives that may have been used onWTC 1.

Explosive	Melting Point
TNT	81 C
PETN	140 C
RDX	205 C
HMX	285 C

Some researchers have asserted that a thermite compound was used.Thermite is an incendiary "explosive". It very well could have been used in other parts of the building such as on the core columns near the foundation. Since one form of thermite uses iron oxide/aluminum, it appears that its use might avoid casual detection- no signs of a bursting force, by products are aluminum and iron that would blend with the steel and aluminum of the building. Because of its non-explosive nature, thermite would not leave a telltale seismic signature.

But for the areas of the building I analyzed, it is clear that high explosives were used and not an incendiary type. The dual rows of explosions documented indicate this. The large cloud volume indicates this. Because thermite melting is a slower reaction than explosives, one would not have the necessary control to guarantee a quick, near simultaneous, symmetrical collapse as is documented.

In my research, I have concluded that HMX, or an explosive with similar properties, was likely usedto pull down WTC 1. HMX is a military grade explosive that has been in wide use since the 1940s. It can survive 270 C+ heat without premature detonation or failure. Add fireproofing and it can handle higher temperatures. This explosive has high brisance, excellent for cutting thick steel. RDX, a less powerful cousin of HMX, has been used on steel bridges. A consultant of Controlled DemolitionInc (CDI) once said "RDX, which creates 3 million pounds of pressure per square inch, will slice [steel]... like a "razor blade through atomato." "HMX also creates large amounts of air volume and has a shock wave that shatters concrete.

 

WHERE CHARGES WERE PLACED

I am not a demolition professional but I can point out the obvious. Basically one answers the question: If WTC 1 was pulled by explosives, where would the charges be placed to create what was observed?

Picture data points out that explosives were used at floor 97. The dual rows of explosions indicate columns were being compromised top and bottom. This explains the sudden fall of that floor with no stage of progressive fatigue before failure. Video indicates that the next few floors were wired similarly. One can see explosions on these floors. Compromising these floors would ensure that the upper building mass would build momentum so that further explosives would not be necessary except on the core columns to help keep the collapse centered so the building would fall into its footprint.

It appears charges were staggered every few columns. This is because of the behavior of the clouds being expelled. The columns of floor 97 were acting as a "comb". Clouds were not evenly being expelled every column, but every few columns. It appears that charges were placed inside the building where the floor joists and trusses connected to the perimeter wall. This would explain why pulverized concrete existed before any floors had impacted yet. Thiswould also duplicate the "truss theory" promoted by the Mainstream Media (minus the "bowed" columns). It would also have created a quick overpressure inside the building. This overpressure would have been pushed out as the floors collapsed. This overpressure then equalized into the oversized clouds seen in video. The reason this high pressure was not readily detected when the first floor collapsed was because the perimeter charges exploded inward, most of the pressure went towards the center of the building. This overpressure was then pushed outwards by the collapsing floors. It takes a while for an air volume of a city block to expand. It is not going to happen like a small balloon popping in your hands.

Use of HMX explosive can explain the occasional, random, and abrupt "overpressures" that occurred during fires. The government acknowledges this phenomenon but is unable to credibly explain it. What was likely happening is that temperatures in some parts of the building were exceeding the melting point of fireproofed HMX and this caused some charges to prematurely detonate, like bullets in a campfire.

It appears explosives were placed at the core columns lower down in the building. There were the pools of melted steel found at the column foundations. In addition to other witnesses, the President of Controlled Demolition Inc (CDI) made the admission when his company uncovered the melted steel during WTC clean up. To corroborate, WTC maintenance personnel witnessed large explosions in the below ground levels on 9-11, even getting severely burned by them. This information is public record. These lowerlevels of the building were undamaged by either fire or plane impact.

Another indicator is the artificially accelerated fall of floor 97. It collapsed faster than free fall speed. If the core columns were compromised lower in the building, the resulting additional weight of the building structure above this failure point would "pull" floor 97 faster than free fall. This is corroborated by how the collapsing building acted as a "funnel" to the upper structure to keep it centered. The south tower collapse clearly shows this behavior of self-centering. The upper building did move around during the collapse, but it did not stray too far from its footprint. In controlled demolition,to keep a tall building centered one makes sure the core of the building collapses first. Granted, the core columns of WTC 1 had a smaller factor of safety than the perimeter columns, but the inside of the building would have to be substantially compromised ahead of the collapse to get the "funnel" effect. Otherwise the upper structure would have likely slid around randomly during the collapse and toppled off to the side before the 90+ floors reached the ground.

Another indicator is that when WTC 1 fell, several floors ahead of the collapse jets of white clouds were expelled through one or more windows. This phenomenon cannot be explained by simple collapsing of floors. It may be argued that pressure from the upper crushing floors created those hundred foot white cloud "jets"- like an "air pump". But most of any compressed air was going out to the building sides or upwards when floors collapsed and then broke up. This was the path of least resistance. Regardless, this would not explain the expelling of white clouds. This phenomenon is occurring in parts of the building that are undamaged and did not have fire. The collapse is still several floors above. How could impacted floors give birth to white smoke- especially at floors 97-94 which had sooty fires-that made its way down to these lower floors in a split second and then expel at high pressure hundreds of feet from windows? Take a lookat the videos yourself. However, HMX detonating at a number of the 47 core columns would create clouds from concrete and other building materials such as drywall, and would cause local overpressure that would break select windows and expel the white clouds at high velocity.

 

HOW MUCH EXPLOSIVES WAS USED

I believe far more explosives were used on the WTC 1 than would be typically used in controlled demolition. Keep in mind that a building the size of WTC1 had never been taken down before. This level of uncertainty would prompt the use of an overkill amount of explosives. There would be concern of collateral damage to surrounding real estate from miscalculation. The parties using explosives probably wanted to make sure that the building did a "pancake" collapse to support an official story. In addition, the charge detonation needed to be masked. If a normal amount of charges was used, the low number of detonations would easily stand out in video footage. But an overkill amount of charges, especially placed near concrete, would produce loads of clouds where little stands out (I note that adiversion of fire and smoke was also helpful in masking charge detonations).If evidence was discovered by persons with a conscience this would havelikely prompted an investigation into the use of explosives, the security breaches at the WTC and of its blueprints, other parties involvement with 9-11, and more. A critical look at coincidences would be made, such as president George Bush's involvement with WTC security, why whole floors of the WTC towers were quarantined off several weeks before 9-11 for "maintenance", why FEMA and the FBI repeatedly refused to investigate for explosives, and why the government has put certain citizens undergag orders to keep them from speaking publicly what they know about 9-11. A massive connecting-of-the-dots would occur with a sincere criminal investigation. Perhaps the plan was to compromise the building core first in hopes that this would cause a "natural" collapse. With the building's high redundancy design, it was questionable whether this would be enough. The back up plan was to compromise select floors. But I digress. Some things to think about. Let us continue with the analysis.

For floor 97 we have 20,011 cubic meters of unaccounted air. How much ofthe high explosive HMX does it take to create this? Below is information about HMX used incalculations.

HMX DETONATION PROPERTIES
Reaction Equation	C4H8N8O8 --> 4CO+ 4N2 + 4H20
Gas Production	1 mol HMX/12 mol gas (40.56 mol gas/kg)
MolarMass	296.17g/mol (3.38 mol/kg)
Explosion Temperature	4077K (3804C)

CALCULATION:
33603 - 13592 = 20011 m^3

According to the government fires 500-600 C MAY have existed. Only 13% of floor 97 was on fire at time of collapse. The average air temperature is estimated to be 90 C. Expanding gas from explosives can be modeled as an adiabatic process,a gas expanding so quickly no heat is transferred to the surrounding air. We have enough information now to start plugging in numbers. For simplemodelingwe will use the Ideal Gas law PV = nRT. Plugging in the appropriatenumberswe find that one kg of HMX creates 14,407 liters of gas volume.

CALCULATION:
13 * 550 = 7150
87 * 21 = 1827
7150 + 1827 = 8977/ 100 = 90C
CALCULATION:
PV = nRT
T = 273 + 4077 + 90 = 4440K
(1atm) * V = 40.56 mol * 0.08 * 4440 K
V = 14407 L

It took 1,389 kg (1.4 tons) of HMX to create the unaccounted air volume.This is an above normal quantity of explosives used in controlled demolition. But keep in mind what has been documented in the picture data. The camera doesnot lie. And keep in mind that in controlled demolition explosives are not used on every floor of a building. The entire WTC 1 did not have to be wired. In the previously mentioned JL Hudson building demolition, 1,237 kg of explosives was used on 9 floors. The building was pre-weakened so small charges could be used. How much explosive would have been used without this pre weakening? Twice as much? That is 2,474 kg. The WTC 1 had over twice as much floor space. So if the JL Hudson building was the same size as WTC 1, that would require about 5,616 kg of explosives. That is 624 kg per floor. What this shows is that the 1,389 kg number is a large number, but not unbelievably large. It represents an overkill amount of explosives. It comes out to be about 5 kg of explosive per column. Recall earlier in the paper where it is discussed why lots of explosives would have been used. Then go look at the videos and see the explosions, the massive amounts of clouds, the premature pulverization of building material, and other that cannot be explained by a natural gravity collapse. As it is said, a picture is worth a thousand words.

CALCULATION:
20011m^3 = 20011000 L
20011000 / 14407 = 1389 kg
CALCULATION:
1389 / 283 = 4.9kg

 

CONCLUSION

Why has no person of conscience done this analysis yet?

Keep in mind that this is a DRAFT version of a paper. A rigorous peer review is necessary before anyone firmly accepts this paper's findings. A careful frame-by-frame analysis of videos, a more detailed modeling of the fire, collapse, and clouds,should be done to confirm measurements and observations.

The findings are beyond astounding. If this paper proves its accuracy, then it is undeniable that explosives were used to pull down WTC 1. This radically changes the perspective of 9-11 and everything associated with it. I leave the discussion of the implications to YOU the reader.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A thank you to other researchers whose efforts have provided the stepping stone for this work. And a thank you to those with a conscience who have step forth and raised the red flags and prompted me to look at 9-11 beyond skin deep. I concur.

"Just because the gun and bullet was not recovered from a crime scene does not mean it cannot be established that a particular weapon was used. A bullet hole is a bullet hole." -Anonymous

 

SELECTED REFERENCES

Government Documents
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1Draft.pdf
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/ 
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/ 

WTC Videos and Pictures

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/
http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/#stills
http://globalresearch.ca.myforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=523

 

THIS PAPER IS NOT COPYRIGHTED

 

Professor of Physics Thinks the WTCs Were Taken Down by Controlled Demolition

This is a letter he wrote to his academic colleagues and that he e-mailed to me. He is interested in feedback on it.

"Dear colleagues:


I hope you have taken the minute required to actually look at the fall of WTC 7:

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html

http://tinyurl.com/7drxn


To summarize from previous emails, the reasons I believe WTC collapses to be due to controlled demolition are:

1. My own analysis of the "pancaking" floors model (the FEMA/NIST model) combined with Conservation of Momentum considerations gives a much longer time for the fall (over 10 seconds) than that which was actually observed for WTC-7 (about 6.3 seconds, just over the free-fall time of 6.0 seconds). I find no evidence in their reports that government researchers (FEMA, NIST, 9-11 Commission) included Conservation of
Momentum in their analyses.



2. The fact that WTC-7 fell down symmetrically, onto its own footprint very neatly, even though fires were just observed on one side of the building. A symmetrical collapse, as observed, requires the simultaneous "pulling" of support beams. By my count, there were 24 core columns and 57 perimeter columns in WTC-7. Heat transport
considerations for steel beams heated by fire suggest that failure of even a few columns at the same time is very small. Adding in the Second Law of Thermodynamics ("law of increasing entropy") leads to the conclusion that the likelihood of near-symmetrical collapse of the building due to fires (the "government" theory) -- requiring as it does near-simultaneous failure of many support columns -- is infinitesimal. Yet near-symmetrical collapse of WTC-7 was observed. (If you still
haven't gone to the links above to see the actual collapse for yourself, please go there now.)

Note that the 9-11 Commission report does not even deal with the collapse of WTC-7. This is a striking omission of highly relevant data.


3.Squibs (horizontal puffs of smoke and debris) are observed emerging from WTC-7, in regular sequence, just as the building starts to collapse. (SEE: http://tinyurl.com/7drxn)

Yet the floors have not moved relative to one another yet, as one can verify from the videos, so air-expulsion due to collapsing floors is excluded. I have personally examined many building demolitions based on on-line videos, and the presence of such squibs firing in rapid sequence as observed is prima facie evidence for the use of pre-positioned explosives inside the building.



4. The pulverization of concrete to powder and the horizontal ejection of steel beams for hundreds of yards, observed clearly in the collapses of the WTC towers, requires much more energy than is available from gravitational potential energy alone. Explosives will give the observed features. Other scientists have provided quantitative analysis of the observed pulverizations, and I can provide references if you wish. Here we are appealing to the violation of Conservation of Energy inherent in the "official" pancaking-floors theory-- a horrendous violation, forbidden by principles of Physics. (What is going on for the FEMA/NIST researchers to make such striking errors/omissions?)



5. I conducted simple experiments on the "pancaking" theory, by dropping cement blocks from approximately 12 feet onto other cement blocks. (The floors in the WTC buildings were about 12 feet apart.) We are supposed to believe, from the pancaking theory, that a concrete floor dropping 12 feet onto another concrete floor will result in PULVERIZED concrete observed during the Towers' collapses! Nonsense! My own experiments, and I welcome you to try this yourself, is that only chips/large chunks of cement flaked off the blocks -- no mass pulverization to approx. 100-micron powder as observed. Explosives, however, can indeed convert concrete to dust --mostly, along with some large chunks-- as observed in the destruction of the Twin
Towers on 9-11-01.



6. The observations of molten metal [I did not say molten steel!] in the basements of all three buildings, WTC 1, 2 and 7 is consistent with the use of the extremely high-temperature thermite reaction: iron oxide + aluminum powder --> Al2O3 + molten iron. Falling buildings are not observed to generate melting of large quantities of molten metal -- this requires a concentrated heat source such as explosives. Even the government reports admit that the fires were insufficient to melt steel beams (they argue for heating and warping then failure of these beams) -- but these reports do not mention the observed molten metal in the basements of WTC1,2 and 7. Again we have a glaring omission of critical data in the FEMA, NIST and 9-11 Commission
reports.



7. I understand that models of the steel-frame WTC buildings at Underwriters
Laboratories subjected to intense fires did NOT collapse. And no steel-frame buildings before or after 9/11/2001 have collapsed due to fire. Thus, the "official" fire-pancaking model fails the scientific test of REPRODUCIBILITY. (Earthquake- caused collapses have occured, but there were no major earthquakes in NYC on that day. And buildings which have collapsed due to earthquakes collapse asymmetrically, as expected -- not like the nearly straight-down collapse of WTC 7 to a small rubble pile!)



8. Explosions -- multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence -- were heard and reported by numerous observers in (and near) the WTC buildings, consistent with explosive demolition. Some of the firemen who reported explosions barely escaped with their lives.


Essentially none of these science-based considerations is mentioned in the Popular Mechanics article on this subject, authored by B. Chertoff (a cousin of M. Chertoff who heads the Homeland Security Dept.) (Squibs are mentioned briefly, but the brief PM analysis does not fit the observed facts.)

I have performed other analyses regarding the WTC collapses on 9-11-01 which may be of interest --let me know if you're interested. The matter is highly interesting to me as a physicist -- and as a citizen of the United States. I conclude that the evidence for pre-positioned explosives in WTC 7 (also in towers 1 and 2) is truly compelling.

Steven E. Jones
Professor of Physics/BYU

Tales of the Tails

The tails of 757s and 767s are massive structures. The vertical stabilizer is twenty-five to forty feet tall on these planes.

The tail is also the part of the plane that survives the best in a head-on crash. The tail should has less momentum as the plane strikes the building or ground head-on, and the counteracting force slows down the speed of the plane-- thus the tail should not have been subject to the same forces as the from of the plane or the wings.

Of the four planes that crashed on 9/11, not one tail was ever seen by the public and certainly there are no photographs of any of the tail structures from flight 11, 175, 77 or 93.

Moreover, the holes that the planes went into (WTC, Pentagon, ground) are not even large enough for the vertical stabilizer to go into intact. So what happened to the tails? Why didn't one tail from one of the 9/11 planes break off from the crash and ensuing explosion, and then get found near the crash site?

How did every tail just disappear?

Importantly, note how easily the tail of a large jet breaks off in this little movie-- just from a hard landing.

Yet we are expected to believe the tail of all four jets on 9/11 just disappear into whatever they hit?

I call bullshit.

So It Begins

The post-Katrina power play:

President Bush: "It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces - the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice."

Mainstream Media Still Can't Figure Out How the Canal Walls Broke

It's hilarious-- it's just like the WTC collapses, where they will dance and dance around saying how it doesn't make sense and it shouldn't have happened, and they will NEVER MENTION the OBVIOUS POSSIBILITY THAT THERE WAS DEMOLITION.

WHAT ARE THEY AFRAID OF???????????



Meanwhile, WingTV has a nice piece where they put a lot of pieces together and wonder, as I have, if Katrina was the "new 9/11".

NYFD and NYPD Know 9/11 Was an Inside Job

"Fireman Admits Again: 9-11 Inside Job"

Killtown Has a Blog

One of my favorite 9/11 sites, Killtown, has just started a blog.

Oddly, the way the Killtown proprietor (who describes himself as a 30 year old male from Washington DC) writes seems very familiar to me. I used to live in DC so I wonder if I possibly know him.

Anyway, more good stuff to check out (as if there wasn't enough already!).

The Resistance Paradox of the WTC Collapses

A scientist who is a 9/11 skeptic passed this concept onto me:

The WTC collapses show the lower parts of the structures offering no more resistance to the collapsing upper portions than the nearby air, yet the upper parts are turning to dust while in mid air. If one assumed this was a gravity-driven collapse brought about by plane impacts and ensuing fires, one would have to say the lower parts were offering no resistance (because of the speed of fall) and yet at the same time offering high resistance (because the top portions are turning to dust).

That is something even a junior high school science student knows is
impossible.

This is the resistance paradox.

Demolition offers the only way out of it.

By the way, if you can somehow prove that the WTC towers collapsed without demolition, Jimmy Walter is offering a one million dollar prize.

Why Does New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin Fear the CIA?

I think it is unlikely that he was simply worried about his criticism of Bush.

This aspect of the Katrina disaster should set-off alarm bells:

In an interview by WWL TV, Mayor Nagin complained vociferously that Louisiana National Guard Blackhawk helicopters were being stopped from dropping sandbags to plug the levee soon after it breached. There is evidence that no repairs were allowed on the levee until after New Orleans was totally flooded!

However, the media has been almost completely silent about this blatant stand-down order-- much as they have been silent about the air-force response on 9/11.

Much more likely than that Nagin was worried about criticizing Bush, it is that he knew what the plan was for New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina: an illegal land-grab by "white folks".

Blogging is the New News Media

The story of the New Orleans Times-Picayune and Katrina.

Bush Unmasked

Tee hee!

He really is a petulant jerk.

Something Encouraging

I received a message about the Ground Zero protest yesterday:

I just got back from ground zero. People know the truth! Half of the police and firemen were coming up to us ( I was with WingTV) and telling us that they know that 911 was an inside job. They were told not to talk about it. But they were supporting what we were doing!!!!!

I had tears in my eyes.

Katrina Disaster Updates

Explosions were heard before levee went.

The Katrina disaster in New Orleans was set-up to provide a pretext for the Pentagon to send troops into an American city.

A weather modification bill is being worked on in the US Senate.

New Pearl Harbor Day

I hate to say it, but at this point, I am very burned out on September 11th 2001.

I don't feel like doing ANYTHING about 9/11 today.

Not protest, not write letters, not even blog.

What I can say is I would love to know exactly how the WTC towers were blown up.

I would love to know what really happened with the 19 hijackers and the passengers on flights 11, 175, 77 and 93.

I would love to know what flying machines hit the WTC towers.

I would love to know if the hijackers even boarded any planes.

I would love to know who set up the bombs at the Pentagon, what sort of flying machine went into the Pentagon, and how many of the plane parts found were planted.

I would love to know whether any human remains were found in Shanksville, or whether that was a fraud just like the crash site was.

I would love to know what really happened to flight 93 and how many of the calls were real and how many were faked.

I would love to know details about the NORAD live-fly hijacking drills on 9/11, and if any of the 9/11 flights were part of the drill.

I would love to know how much the media and the airlines are covering up about 9/11.

I would love to know exactly how much Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld knew about 9/11 before it happened, how much they knew when it happened, and how much they knew when they covered the whole mess up with the sorry 9/11 commission.

Will we ever find out any of these things?

I doubt it.

I think however, 9/11 is sort of an accelerated version of the Kennedy assassination, where unlike it taking thrity years for most people to realize there was a conspiracy, it will only take a few years. I think within the next couple of years, most people will realize the official story is a sham. And there will be another government investigation, but it will likley be a limited hang-out: some new info will be let out but the vast horrible truth will be covered up, perhaps forever.

I'm not sure there is any thing we can do about this, since these secrets will go to the grave of this Republic. The only way they will be let out is if the Republic is destroyed. The problem is, it is hard to see this country going down without catastrophic turmoil and possibly the death of most people on this planet.

I am not a doomsayer, and I am not predicting the imminent demise of this country. I suspect things will go on in this country much as they have been for the next few decades. Sure, the Democrats will get power back in some sort of "popular" uprising (as the media would put it), and maybe they will fix the votings machines too. But in terms of war, there is really only one party in Washington DC: the war party. And as long as we have a huge army and want to dominate the planet, we will find reasons for war.

Of course, all empires over-reach, and fall with time. This will happen too with the USA.

Maybe it has already started.

Maybe it won't start for a while longer.

I think it is too hard to tell at this moment.

Appalling, Sickening, Outrageous, etc

Yet one more reason for cleaning out the poor neighborhoods in New Orleans: fresh bodies for the war on terror.

From a bad novel? Actually from the WSJ: "Ten U.S. Army recruiters are offering volunteer help for Katrina evacuees at Houston's Astrodome. But the recruiters, struggling to keep enlistment up during Iraq war, are also available with options for the jobless. "Our intent is to approach the evacuees at the right time for them," says Army spokesman Douglas Smith."

The Levee Breaches and the Response to the Breaches: A Detailed Analysis

These two issues are incredibly important stories that have largely been ignored by the mainstream press.

Gee, I wonder why?

Because these are two important articles, I am copying them whole. I apologize for the length, but they are worth the read. Another reason for copying them whole is that these stories do not exist as single articles but are lumped together with many other articles on one huge page.

The first article is about the response to the flooding, the second article is what caused the levee breaches.

Alarm sounded too late as N.O. swamped
Slow response left city. in lurch

By John McQuaid
Staff writer

Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans with a double blow when it made landfall Aug. 29. First, storm surge waters from the east rapidly swamped St. Bernard Parish and eastern New Orleans before the eye of the storm had passed the city about 9 a.m. Within hours, surge waters collapsed city canal floodwalls and began to "fill the bowl," while top officials continued to operate for a full day under the mistaken belief that the danger had passed.

A rough reconstruction of the flooding based on anecdotal accounts, interviews and computer modeling shows that the huge scale of the overlapping floods - one fast, one slow - should have been clear to some officials by mid-afternoon Monday, when city representatives confirmed that the 17th Street Canal floodwall had been breached.

At that point areas to the east were submerged from the earlier flooding, trapping thousands, while gradually rising waters stretched from the Lakefront across to Mid-City and almost to the Central Business District.

Federal officials have referred to the levee breaches as a separate and much later event from the flooding to the east, and said that they were unaware of the gravity of the problem until Tuesday, suggesting valuable response time was lost.

"It was midday Tuesday that I became aware of the fact that there was no possibility of plugging the (17th Street Canal) gap and that essentially the lake was going to start to drain into the city. I think that second catastrophe really caught everybody by surprise," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Sunday, adding that he thought the breach had occurred Monday night or Tuesday morning. By that time, flooding from at least one of the two breached canals already had been under way all day Monday, evidence shows.

Oy. Pathetic. How could he be so misinformed?

Even on Tuesday, as still-rising waters covered most of New Orleans, FEMA official Bill Lokey sounded a reassuring note in a Baton Rouge briefing.

"I don't want to alarm everybody that, you know, New Orleans is filling up like a bowl," Lokey said. "That's just not happening."

Simply outrageous! Was he lying or clueless?

Once a levee or floodwall is breached by a hurricane storm surge, engineers say, it often widens and cannot quickly be sealed. Storm surge waters in Lake Pontchartrain may take a day or more to subside, so they keep pouring into the city - most of which lies below sea level - until the levels inside and outside the levee are equal.

Experts familiar with the hurricane risks in the New Orleans area said they were stunned that no one had conveyed the information about the breaches or made clear to upper-level officials the grave risk they posed, or made an effort to warn residents about the threat after storm winds subsided Monday afternoon.

"I'm shocked. I don't understand why the response wasn't instantaneous," said Louisiana State University geology professor Greg Stone, who studies coastal storm surge dynamics.

Exactly. This is very fishy that the response was so delayed. Can you say "let it happen on purpose"?

"They should have been monitoring this and informed people all the way to the top, (and) then they should have warned people," said Ivor Van Heerden, who uses computer models at the LSU Hurricane Center to study storm surges and provided officials in the Louisiana Office of Emergency Preparedness headquarters with data indicating the potential for flooding that could result from Katrina.

The storm approached the coast early Monday, the easterly winds from its northern quadrant pumping a rising surge into the marshy Lake Borgne area east of St. Bernard. There, two hurricane levees come together into a large V-shape. Storm surge researchers say that point acts as a giant funnel: Water pouring into the confined area rises up - perhaps as much as 20 feet in this case - and is funneled between the levees all the way into New Orleans.

The water likely topped the levees along the north side adjacent to eastern New Orleans, which average only 14 or 15 feet, according to the Army Corps of Engineers' New Orleans project manager Al Naomi.

The surge reached the Industrial Canal before dawn and quickly overflowed on both sides, the canal lockmaster reported to the Corps. At some point not long afterward, Corps officials believe a barge broke loose and crashed through the floodwall, opening a breach that accelerated flooding into the Lower Ninth Ward and St. Bernard Parish.

Okay-- why the fuck wasn't the barge secured better? Shouldn't they have taken better precautions knowing a major storm was coming? Moreover, they mention the lockmaster, indicating the canal had locks. Were the locks closed before the storm?

The floodwaters moved quickly.

By around 8 a.m., authorities reported rising water on both sides of the Industrial Canal, in St. Bernard and eastern New Orleans. The Coast Guard reported sighting residents on rooftops in the Upper Ninth Ward. "Water is inundating everywhere," in St. Bernard, Parish Council Chairman Joey DiFatta said.

At 9 a.m., there was 6 to 8 feet of water in the Lower 9th Ward, state officials said. Less than two hours later, most of St. Bernard was a lake 10 feet deep. "We know people were up in the attics hollering for help," state Sen. Walter Boasso, R-Arabi, said that morning. By 11 a.m., water was covering Interstate 10 at a low point near the high-rise over the Industrial Canal.

Sometime Monday morning, the 17th Street Canal levee burst when storm surge waters pressed against it and possibly topped it, Corps officials said. Col. Richard P. Wagenaar, the corps's site commander at 17th Street, told The Washington Post that a police officer called him Monday morning to tell him about it. He told the Post he couldn't get to the site.

So what EXACTLY was the Corps doing that day? Their response is reminiscent of the NORAD response on 9/11.

Naomi said he thinks the breach occurred in the mid- or late-morning after the hurricane's eye had passed east of the city. By that time, north winds would have pushed storm surge water in Lake Pontchartrain south against the hurricane levees and into the canals. Then the wind shifted to the west.

"As I remember it the worst of the storm had passed when we got word the floodwall had collapsed," he said. "It could have been when we were experiencing westerly winds in the aftermath of the storm, which would have been pushing water against it."

Naomi and other Corps officials say they think the water in the canal topped the levee on the Orleans Parish side, weakening its structure on the interior side and causing its collapse. However, Van Heerden said he does not believe the water was high enough in the lake to top the 14-foot wall and that the pressure caused a "catastrophic structural failure."

Why the disagreement over whether the canal topped? "catastrophic structural failure"? Where have I heard that before?

It's unclear when floodwalls in the London Avenue canal were breached, but Naomi said it may have been about the same time.

Once the floodwalls failed, water - then at about 8 feet or higher in the lake - began to pour into New Orleans from the west, beginning the full-scale nightmare emergency managers and other officials most feared. At 10 a.m., reporters from The Times-Picayune saw water rising over I-10 where it dips beneath the railway trestle south and east of the canal.

So the levees must have been breached shortly before this?

Naomi said that he thinks Corps officials had communicated the information about the breaches to the Baton Rouge Office of Emergency Preparedness.

Well they damn well should have!

"It was disseminated. It went to our OEP in Baton Rouge, to the state, FEMA, the Corps," Naomi said. "The people in the field knew it. The people here (in Corps offices) in Louisiana and Mississippi knew it. I don't know how communication worked in those agencies."

Officials at the OEP could not be reached for comment. New Orleans officials were also aware of the 17th Street Canal breach and publicly confirmed it at 2 p.m.

Why the over 4 hour delay beforte confirming?

Around the same time, The Times-Picayune reported 4 feet of water in one Lakeview neighborhood.

An hour later, Terry Ebbert, head of New Orleans' emergency operations, listed Treme and Lakeview as among the areas hardest hit by the flooding. Ebbert said there would be casualties because many people were calling emergency workers saying they were trapped on rooftops, in trees and attics. In some cases, he said, authorities lost contact with people pleading for help.

As the day wore on, the flood crept east and south and made its way across the city, penetrating neighborhood after neighborhood.

At 3 p.m. Times-Picayune reporters found it was knee-deep under the Jefferson Davis overpass near Xavier University. A Mid-City couple stranded there said their home was surrounded by 5 feet of water. An hour later, the I-10 dip under the railroad overpass was under 15 feet of water.

George Saucier, the CEO of Lindy Boggs Medical Center south of City Park, told The Times-Picayune that water from the 17th Street breach had flowed into Bayou St. John and overflowed its banks, then followed streets like sluices on its way south, where it was starting to flood the hospital's basement.

By late afternoon, people stranded on I-10 near the Industrial Canal could see residents on rooftops stretching across Lower 9th Ward.

As night fell Monday, many outside of New Orleans breathed a sigh of relief believing the city had been largely spared the worse.

Why??? And why weren't the breaches patched up immediately?

But thousands were stranded from the Lower Ninth Ward, across St. Bernard and south to the east bank of Plaquemines Parish. And waters continued to rise overnight throughout central New Orleans. By dawn, they stretched all the way from east to west and into Uptown, and were coursing through the Central Business District. As TV helicopters flew over the city and beamed out pictures of the flooding, the extent of the catastrophe was clear.

That flooding would complicate evacuation efforts in New Orleans for days.

Part two, the breaches:

Corps trying to find reasons for collapse
Barge may have caused breach in floodwall

By John McQuaid
Washington bureau

WASHINGTON - A loose barge may have caused a large breach in the east side of the Industrial Canal floodwall that accelerated Hurricane Katrina's rising floodwaters in the Lower Ninth Ward and St. Bernard Parish, Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi said Monday.

Who owned the barge and why wasn't it secured better?????

Naomi said the barge was found on the land side of the floodwall, leading corps officials to believe it could have crashed through the wall and sent a huge amount of water - which was already pouring over the top of the wall - into the neighborhoods immediately downriver.

"We have some pictures that show this very large barge inside the protected area. It had to go through the breach," Naomi said. "The opening is a little bit wider than the barge itself. One would think it's the barge that did it."

Reminiscient of the hole in the Pentagon argument.

If it did strike the floodwall, Naomi said, the barge would have "precipitated a tremendous collapse" that would have quickly flooded the Lower Ninth Ward and then St. Bernard Parish. The breach is "ultimately in my opinion what got (St. Bernard) Parish flooded," Naomi said.

They seem top be implying that a hole knocked in the wall by the barge would cause a huge collapse bigger than the initial damage by the barge. But was there was a "tremendous" collapse or was the hole just slightly bigger than the barge?

There are two large breaks in the floodwall, said Ivor Van Heerden, deputy director of the Louisiana State University Hurricane Center, who did an aerial survey of flood damage Sunday. The larger of the two, possibly caused by the barge, is about 800 feet long. The second is 500 feet.

An 800 foot breach caused by a barge? How long is the barge? I thought the opening was just wider than the barge. Is the barge 800 feet long? And what caused the second breach???

The areas adjacent to the Industrial Canal were among the first to flood Monday morning. Katrina's storm surge pumped water from the east into a V-shaped area between St. Bernard and eastern New Orleans hurricane protection levees, then funneled it up the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway into the Industrial Canal.

There the water spilled over the levee, flooding eastern New Orleans, and overtopping the Industrial Canal walls before the floodwall was breached, Naomi said. The Corps got a report from the Industrial Canal's lock master before dawn that water was pouring over both sides of the waterway. Reports from people in the area at the time indicate that the flood waters rose very quickly starting around 8 a.m.

Naomi also said it's too soon to tell how the 17th Street Canal and London Avenue Canal levees were breached, causing the catastrophic flooding in New Orleans.

So THESE are the key collapses.

Corps officials have said the levees - concrete walls rising out of a low concrete and earthen base - probably collapsed after water flowed over them and scoured the interior side, weakening the structure.

This was the official story intially (NPR had a piece on this).

But some data indicate Katrina's storm surge may have been too low in that part of Lake Pontchartrain to overtop the levees, researchers say.

Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.

Van Heerden said that preliminary data indicated the storm surge along the west side of Lake Pontchartrain and along the causeway reached about 8.5 feet. The levee heights in the canals are about 14 feet.

Joannes Westerink, a hydrologic engineer at the University of Notre Dame who is working on a computer model of Katrina's flooding of New Orleans, agreed the storm surge in the lake was weaker than expected and may not have been high enough to top the levees.

"I would doubt it too," Westerink said of the overtopping scenario. He said that typically a storm surge has wave action on top of it that accounts for 2 feet, then wave crests can reach higher, although waves tend to be small in a canal.

"A very wild guess, I'd say you've got a couple of feet over the surge, so that's 11 feet. That would not be enough to top it," he said.

Yep. nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.

Westerink cautioned that he didn't know enough about the specifics of the storm surge in that area, wind velocities or other factors to be definitive.

Oh, well that's a relief, isn't it? Wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong idea here.

Naomi said Corps officials believe Katrina's winds, coming from the north as the eye moved east of New Orleans, probably caused a buildup of surge along the lakefront and in the canals not recorded at gauges in the center or west of the lake. Then as the hurricane moved north and the winds shifted to the west, they put pressure on the levee walls and led to the collapse. The breaches occurred on the eastern sides of both the 17th Street and London Avenue canals.

There was some evidence of scouring on the eastern side of the 17th Street canal breach, he said, one factor in the Corps theory that the levees were topped.

But Naomi said no one knows what caused the levees to fail and that it might have been a structural flaw.

No one knows would seem to be the key point here.

"I don't think it is necessarily a design issue. There's miles and miles of other floodwall that did not collapse," he said. "There may be some localized issue maybe in a foundation that caused the problem, (something) that we were not aware of. There will be an autopsy. We may find one reason for one canal, another reason for another canal. Just because they both broke doesn't mean it was the same reason. It could be three or four different reasons that all produced the same result."

Of curse, no one mentions the possibility of sabotage.

Naomi said that there were small pontoon barges in the 17th Street canal to the north of the Hammond Highway Bridge. They are still unaccounted for. There were no barges in the London Avenue canal. He discounted the possibility that one or more of them could have caused the 17th Street canal breach.

"The barges were used mainly as a platform for workers to stand on," he said. "Some of them are not much bigger than a couple of desks put together. It would depend on the velocity . . . But it would be very difficult for those barges to get to that location. It's possible, but I don't think so."

Leonardo Ramirez, a construction worker and Metairie resident who lives on the Jefferson Parish side of the levee near the breached area, said that he thought he heard a barge hitting the levee early Monday, although he did not see it happen. "At quarter to six in the morning, we heard a huge bang, and then we heard another," he said. "It was so loud. It scared us."

It couldn't have been an explosion, could it have? Would a small pontoon barge make such a loud bang? Certainly, a concrete wall simply breaking from water pressure shouldn't make a large bang! A cracking noise perhaps, but a bang?

Note one, here is what the New York Times had to say about this over a week ago. That article had nothing about the barge or the fact that the storm surge didn't top the levee wall. They did note that the part that blew on the 17th street levee was recently renovated. Oddly, the NOLA.com article says nothing about this.

Note two, here is a story suggesting the levees WERE blown.

There are three critical issues here:
1) what caused the levees to blow (was it really the storm?)?
2) why was the response to the blown levees so sluggish and why was there no attempt early on to repair the breaches before the flooding got too bad?
3) would someone benefit from the levees being blown and NOLA flooding?

Conclusions:
1) it is not quite clear that the levees went out from the storm. One levee may have gotten blown by a unmoored barge (was it left there intentionally?). It is not at all clear why the key 17th street levee went out. There are plenty of rumors that explosives were used (see note two above).
2) there is NO explanation for this at all yet, and this seems to be such a crtitical point. Very suspicious.
3) there are more and more reasons to think that certain "elites" wanted the poor black neighborhoods in NOLA to flood, in order to clean out the residents and allow complete rebuilding. Lots and lots of money is going to be used to rebuild NOLA, fortunes will be made. Who suffers in all this? The poor people of NOLA who lost their homes and all their possessions, at least for now. The people who have lost loved ones in the flooding. The insurance companies in the short-term and insurees in the long-term. Taxpayers at every level (but of course taxes hit poor and middle class the worst). Who benefits? The rich, as usual. Bush cronies.

Bush will take a hit to his reputation, but that is really his and his handlers fault.

I don't buy the FEMA incompetence/miscommunication excuse for a single second.

Bottom line is that the catastrophic flooding in New Orleans stinks to high heaven. There is MUCH more going on here than a natural disaster.

Ethnic Cleansing

Probably the best description of what's happening in New Orleans, and probably one reason the administration allowed the New Orleans situation to deteriorate so badly after Katrina.

NEW ORLEANS -- On a sultry morning earlier this week, Ashton O'Dwyer stepped out of his home on this city's grandest street and made a beeline for his neighbor's pool. Wearing nothing but a pair of blue swim trunks and carrying two milk jugs, he drew enough pool water to flush the toilet in his home.

The mostly African-American neighborhoods of New Orleans are largely underwater, and the people who lived there have scattered across the country. But in many of the predominantly white and more affluent areas, streets are dry and passable. Gracious homes are mostly intact and powered by generators. Wednesday, officials reiterated that all residents must leave New Orleans, but it's still unclear how far they will go to enforce the order.

The green expanse of Audubon Park, in the city's Uptown area, has doubled in recent days as a heliport for the city's rich -- and a terminus for the small armies of private security guards who have been dispatched to keep the homes there safe and habitable. Mr. O'Dwyer has cellphone service and ice cubes to cool off his highballs in the evening. By Wednesday, the city water service even sprang to life, making the daily trips to his neighbor's pool unnecessary. A pair of oil-company engineers, dispatched by his son-in-law, delivered four cases of water, a box of delicacies including herring with mustard sauce and 15 gallons of generator gasoline.

Despite the disaster that has overwhelmed New Orleans, the city's monied, mostly white elite is hanging on and maneuvering to play a role in the recovery when the floodwaters of Katrina are gone. "New Orleans is ready to be rebuilt. Let's start right here," says Mr. O'Dwyer, standing in his expansive kitchen, next to a counter covered with a jumble of weaponry and electric wires.

snip

The power elite of New Orleans -- whether they are still in the city or have moved temporarily to enclaves such as Destin, Fla., and Vail, Colo. -- insist the remade city won't simply restore the old order. New Orleans before the flood was burdened by a teeming underclass, substandard schools and a high crime rate. The city has few corporate headquarters.

The new city must be something very different, Mr. Reiss says, with better services and fewer poor people. "Those who want to see this city rebuilt want to see it done in a completely different way: demographically, geographically and politically," he says. "I'm not just speaking for myself here. The way we've been living is not going to happen again, or we're out."

At MIMIMUM, Here's the Problem with How Bush Handled Katrina

Keep in mind Katrina is almost certainly the deadliest disaster this country has ever seen.

I'm just copying this whole excellent post:

People are going around and around about who should have done what at what time to get food and water to the victims of Katrina, and to get the buses there to evacuate people from the city who didn't get out on their own, and to get medical care to the elderly so they wouldn't die, and to get control of the shelter areas so that people wouldn't be beaten, raped, and murdered at the convention center and the Superdome. Let's assume we're not deciding who should have done what at what time.

My problem with Bush -- and here, I do indeed address Bush individually, as a guy -- is that during the time that the crisis was developing, from Monday to Friday, he never seemed to experience any actual sense of urgency as a result of the simple fact that people were, minute by minute and hour by hour, dying.

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt that he was being prevented from acting by bureaucracy and the sheer magnitude of the situation. Where are the stories of how he was in his office freaking the fuck out because there were tens of thousands of Americans trapped without food and water? Where's the story of how he ripped a strip off of somebody, demanding to know what the holy hell the holdup is getting water and food to those people?

I want to hear about how he was demanding that extraordinary steps be taken. I want to hear about how he sent his lawyers into a room -- he had four days, you know -- and demanded that they come back in an hour with a plan for him to send the Marines into New Orleans with 100 trucks of food and water, posse comitatus or not. I want to hear that he was panicked. Because I was panicked. Everyone I know was panicked. Everyone I know was gnashing their teeth with helpless rage because they couldn't get in a car, drive down there, and drive a load of homeless Louisiana residents back home with them for soup and a goddamn hot bath. I want to hear that he acted at some point out of genuine despondency about the fact that citizens of the country he is supposed to be running were being starved and dehydrated in a hellish, fetid prison. We are dancing around now about whether it is his failure or not his failure. Where is the decency that would tell him that he is the president, and FEMA is part of his administration, and this failure is his to own and apologize for, whether other people also were wrong or not?

Why is he even trying to shift blame to anyone else? Why isn't he wracked with such guilt, justified or not, that he can't stand up straight? How is it possible that late in the week, when it was so obvious that every safeguard meant to guard against just this kind of catastrophe had failed and he had failed every citizen of that city, he had the joviality to make jokes about his partying days in New Orleans? I'm not talking here about appropriateness or sensitivity, although both were obviously lacking, and there's been no apology for that, either. I'm wondering how it's possible that he felt that way. How was he not tormented? Because he wasn't. You can see that he wasn't. I would feel better if there were some report that he seemed, at some point... shaken. Upset. Angry. Desperate. Something. Something other than "on vacation" and then "lecturing emptily about how much help everyone's going to get, provided they haven't already died of dehydration, drowned, or committed suicide."

The state has the primary responsibility, you say? Okay, fine. Then I want to hear how Bush offered the governor whatever she wanted on whatever terms he could legally get it to her, because it made absolutely no difference who got credit. I want to hear how he couldn't concentrate like the rest of us couldn't concentrate, because he was so consumed by images on television of old women in wheelchairs slowly dying.

Prevented from going into the city by the criminals? Are you telling me that armed thugs could take over a suburban neighborhood and surround it, and law enforcement would stand back until the thugs decided to go away? The people at the Superdome who were following all the rules were being, in a sense, held hostage by the relatively small number who chose to be violent -- to shoot at planes and whatnot. Since when do we leave good citizens to die because we don't want to get dirty doing law enforcement?

Say what you want about the mayor and governor -- those people were in pain. They saw people suffering and dying and took it as a given that it couldn't go on that way, and that if it did, government's response would be a failure. The mayor cried at the top of his lungs for help. I want to hear that Bush cried at the top of his lungs for help. I want to hear that he called every corporate hotshot he's befriended in the last twenty years and told them that if they ever wanted another invitation to the White House for dinner, they were going to pony up a fat wad of cash to the Red Cross, and they were going to do it yesterday.

I want him to have reacted like a person who happened to also be the president. I want him to have felt the same bone-deep sense of shock that I felt at the thought that this could happen in a large city, easily accessible by trucks, in a wealthy country. I want him to have gotten on the damn phone and told somebody that if there wasn't water for every person at the Superdome within eight hours, that person's head was going to roll, and he didn't care how it got done, it had better get done. I want him not to have sat around on his ass on vacation while people's children were being taken from their arms to be rescued.

I want Bush not to have spent four days dicking around while the conditions deteriorated. I want him to have acted sooner, not because it was his obligation as president and it would reflect badly on him if he didn't, but because people were dying, and everyone I know who could think of something to do did it. There were a million things he could have done besides sit around making happy speeches about how everything would be fine. The stupid comment about Trent Lott's porch doesn't infuriate me because Trent Lott can't miss his porch. He has as much right to be sad over his losses as anyone. But the lighthearted way in which Bush delivered those remarks was absolutely chilling.

I want him to have been consumed with grief and sorrow at the dying that was ongoing, and he wasn't. I want him to have felt like a profound failure because an entire segment of the population of one of America's greatest cities was suffering and was at risk of starving to death, but he didn't. I want him to have been embarrassed when the FEMA director gave up the information that FEMA knew less about the convention center than CNN, but he wasn't. I want him not to have smirked his way through the entire experience, and he did.

No matter whose fault the slow relief effort was, the fact of the matter is that these are Americans, and this is their president, and the fact that they were homeless, starving, dying of thirst, and deprived of medication never once seemed to actually bother him.

This is just perfectly put. It is simply true. The only thing any thinking person can conclude is that Bush is at minimum an uncaring unthinking animal, and at worst, one evil son-of-a-bitch.

Katrina Timelines

Here and here.

They are both VERY INCRIMINATING for major negligence, at the minimum, by the Bush administration.

And here is the head of the US military flat-out lying about what he knew about Katrina early on.

While most people say it is incompetence, I have to say this is worse. Given what we know about 9/11, I think it is very likely that the Bush administration MADE THIS DISASTER HAPPEN ON PURPOSE.

Destroying the 9/11 Truth Movement

I have been privy to an exchange of e-mails between 9/11 researchers Nico Haupt and Gerard Holmgren and the director of 9/11 truth.org David Kubiak.

To make a long story short, Nico Haupt believes 9/11truth.org is a front group for a type of COINTELPRO operation designed to limit how successful 9/11 activists are in getting the truth about 9/11 to the public.

The first set of e-mails was an exchange between Nico Haupt and David Kubiak, where Haupt asks Kubiak various questions about having military/intelligence connections, and Kubiak replies.

Frankly, this was an argument I could not follow extremely well, not knowing the details of many things they were discussing. Both Kubiak and Haupt had some good points and both were also very obnoxious with each other.

The bottom line for me is that I have some strong suspicions about the effectiveness of 9/11truth.org, and I think it is possible that they are a COINTELPRO operation.

Thus, I have serious and depressing doubts about the future of the 9/11 truth movement. Certainly I have major doubts about 9/11truth.org being an effective agency for spreading the truth and for change. Their fourth anniversary march in NYC will be critical to me-- if they have a turnout of less than a thousand and don't get mentioned in any major papers, they are worthless in my book. (Note, I went to their DC truth emergency meeting last July and was fairly disappointed by the turnout).

More importantly, Gerard Holmgren has sent some follow-up messages which I think are devastating to 9/11truth.org. Holmgren's basic message about 9/11 truth.org is this:

This sorry band of spooks proudly wave their placards which say "stop the 911 cover up " - at the same time as having a policy of censoring from the victim's families *any* research which suggests that the Bush regime was involved in the attacks.

Specifically, Holmgren details how he sent key information about 9/11 being an inside to job to two "9/11 truth" people who acted as liasons to the 9/11 victim's families, Kyle Hence and Bill Douglas. These two repeatedly ignored the information and refused to pass on any information to the victims' families that would implicate the Bush administration in 9/11!!!!!!!


Seeing as how the 9/11 families were the only way the 9/11 truth movement could EVER get any significant political traction, I think it can be fairly said that Kyle Hence and Bill Douglas effectively (and almost certainly intentionally) destroyed any chance the 9/11 truth movement had of going anywhere.

Wasn't that a clever and perfect way for government insiders to take down the effectiveness of the 9/11 truth movement?

As dedicated as the new wave of 9/11 researchers and activists may be, in my opinion, they are never going to have serious political power now that the political power of the 9/11 families has been completely wasted on the fraudulent Independent 9/11 Commission. It is just too hard to convince a majority of Americans that their government had a hand in the 9/11 attacks (the horrible story of post-Katrina New Orleans not withstanding).

I am really depressed right now about this.

Holmgren also has some very revealing and damning things to say about Mike Ruppert, Jim Hoffman and Mark Rabinowitz. I can verify personally that Rabinowitz is a rather unpleasant and narrow-minded attack dog. I find the other info about Ruppert and Hoffman believable.

It seems, not too surprisingly in retrospect, that key 9/11 truth leaders, such as Mike Ruppert, Jim Hoffman, John Judge, etc, have government intel connections and are plants of some sort. The movement was doomed from the beginning.

On the plus side, here are some key 9/11 truth people I think are trustworthy:
David Ray Griffin
Webster Tarpley
Morgan Reynolds
Gerard Holmgren
Nico Haupt

The Poor Beleaguered 9/11 Commission

"Members of the Sept. 11 commission feel they have been left swinging in the wind by the growing tide of revelations about" Able Danger.

Those poor souls.

How can they rest knowing that they didn't reveal everything about 9/11?

Yet Another Way Bush Benefits from Katrina

TPM:

FEMA Director Michael Brown got his job as a political patronage position, with no relevant experience and the last item on his resume getting fired from a job as a manager of horse shows. Last year he was caught giving out FEMA money as political pork with an eye to the 2004 elections. But that shouldn't surprise since people who get hired as part of patronage operations do their jobs as part of the patronage operation. That's the idea.

Now, look at this article from Tuesday's Times about the boom town atmosphere in Houston as people and business from New Orleans flood into the city ...

Oil services companies based here are racing to carry out repairs to damaged offshore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico; the promise of plenty of work to do sent shares in two large companies, Halliburton and Baker Hughes, soaring to 52-week highs last week. The Port of Houston is preparing for an increase in traffic as shippers divert cargoes away from the damaged ports of Pascagoula, Miss., and New Orleans.

Some of this is just the grim irony of politics and geography. Houston is a nearby port town deep into the oil business. It's also the capital of Bushland.

But see where we're going here. We have a thoroughly politicized FEMA, encased within an administration that ran the Iraqi reconstruction in such a way that they managed to give graft and cronyism a bad name. $10.5 billion is just a small down payment on the money that's going to go into draining and rebuilding New Orleans, constructing a much more durable and comprehensive system of pumps and levees around the city, patching up the coastlines of Mississippi and Alabama. And did we mention the important Senate race next year in Florida? And then there's the Port of New Orleans. And the oil facilities in the Gulf.

How conveeenient that Katrina wiped out the oil refineries around NOLA (there will be no one to work at the plants for months), and that Houston Texas is the closest place to which the oil can be shipped for processing.

Then there is the Halliburton business that benefits from Katrina AND the political patronage aspects of FEMA.

All this stuff is enough to make you dizzy and sick.

Can the US Military Move Hurricanes?

I'm not saying the military can manufacture hurricanes-- but can they possibly steer them in certain directions? That would be very useful, wouldn't it? Try googling HAARP technology and weather and you'll be amazed what turns up.

Was it just chance that three major hurricanes struck Florida, a key swing state, right before the 2004 elections?

What are the chances that Katrina would take this convoluted path to strike New Orleans? It seems extremely strange how Katrina veered towards Florida then was pushed back into the gulf.

Note: I see someone else has similar ideas as me.

What Is Wrong with FEMA?

This story is incredibly disturbing: that aid workers rushed to New Orleans Tuesday, and were held up by FEMA until the city was "secured".

The fucking flooding had just started, there were hardly any reports of looting, and FEMA was worried about security and the city being secured? This is just SO wrong. Evil, one might even say.

And even worse, do you remember the three hurricanes that struck Florida last year before the election?

Do you remember any complaints about FEMA then?

In fact, they were criticized with being overly generous to stricken Floridians.

I don't think FEMA is incompetent. I think at minimum they are a purely political organization and are merely overly driven by political concerns. But what I fear is the worst: they are playing some very sick venal game with the lives of poor, mostly black people.

The Levees Didn't Break, It Was the Canals

Everyone said it was the levees initially, but now it looks as though it was the canal system that is part of the levee flood control system.

Here is the official story then:

Some parts of the city were flooded by the initial hurricane. But the major sources of water now appear to have come from breaches in canal walls. One was the 17th Street Canal, which is used for drainage and runs through New Orleans to Lake Pontchartrain on the city's northern edge. A second breach was in a wall in the London Avenue Canal. There are also breaches in the wall of the Industrial Canal (also called the Inner Harbor Navigational Canal), on the east side of town.

What is the difference between a floodwall and a levee anyway?

The canals walls that broke are technically called floodwalls. They are made of concrete and steel, 6 to 10 feet tall, about a foot wide at the top and 2 feet wide at the bottom. They stand on top of an earthen base.

A levee is a broad mound, 50 feet or more wide at the base that rises slowly to a broad crest at the top. You could easily walk or drive up the side of one. These are far more stable than floodwalls. Water can spill over the top and erode some of the levee, but it will still function. When a floodwall fails, it fails catastrophically.

So, relatively small walls broke and caused all the flooding.

A few thoughts:

1) It is hard to believe that the storm caused enough water to go over such that the foundations actually washed away. Granted it was a big storm, but canals shouldn't get such violent wave action as a levee. Also I would think the foundations would be exposed to water a lot just normally.

2) Two foot thick concrete walls would be much easier to blow (with explosives) than a real levee.

3) Can't water flow into a canal be restricted rather easily? Why wasn't the mouth of the canal sealed off?



Here are satellite photos of one canal breech "before" and "after".

More Reasons the New Orleans Flooding May Have Been an Inside Job

1) contracts for Halliburton to rebuild

2) US troops get to "practice" martial law in a US city with real live US citizens.

Other reasons:

3) get Americans used to regular major disasters with thousands of people dying, as well as the presence of troops in US cities

4) the Bush administration gets to cement the incompetence excuse in every one's minds (really, 9/11 was just "incompetence", there was no government complicity)

5) getting rid of some poor black folks and their homes to make room for the wonders of economic redevelopment-- casinos and luxury hotels

6) so the Bush administration can militarize the weather (more than the US already has)

7) another excuse and distraction to pass noxious legislation

The beauty of it, just like Islamic terrorists attacking the WTC again, everyone EXPECTED a hurricane would eventually cause enough damage to break the levees, and so they had a perfect excuse when it happened-- plus it seems so counterintuitive that the Bush administration would benefit from this, thus hardly anyone will even think they had a hand in this disaster.

But look at it this way-- how many times does lightening like 9/11 and like Katrina strike, and both just happened to occur on Bush's watch?

It's too much of a coincidence.

In Other News

Indictments were handed down in Ohio charging fraud in the ballot recount from the Nov. 2004 election.

Slowly the wheels of justice move...

Of course, the damage has been done (boy, has it been done), but it would be nice to have rock-solid proof of electoral mischief in Bush's 2004 election

MURDER

What else to call what has happened in the aftermath of Katrina, except perhaps genocide?

I think everyone was willing to overlook Bush's obvious failures on 9/11, as just a one-time deal. But now he's had four years to get this country ready for a major disaster and he apparently hasn't.

What is even more stunning is this Katrina catastrophe can't even be explained by incompetence! There are so many stories where Bush people DELIBERATELY are withholding aid (from Chicago, from Canada, from the Red Cross, etc).

This is deliberate destruction of American life!

It makes no sense at all, unless the Bush administration really wants to show the world they are genocidal bastards! Did they plan this aftermath? Was the plan just to deliberately let people die and write it off as incompetence?

It just makes no sense, except in one way-- these people really are in a fantasy world (as a Bush advisor famously said: they make their own reality) and they think they are invulnerable. They must think they can do anything and simply spin their way out of it.

Well, it is NOT going to fucking work this time, I can guarantee that. This is too big and too many people see what a disaster Bush and Cheney are.

One question is, will any Democrat have the nerve, guts or brains to seize this opportunity?

I doubt it. So it is up to the people and perhaps the few Democrats with spines to take backthis country.

As far as the levee: we STILL don't know what knocked the holes, do we?

As far as I can tell, the levee made it through the storm. The levee didn't break until Tuesday evening, well after the worst of the storm passed.

So, it wasn't the wind that got it. The break was actually in an unexpected place that didn't even get large waves.*

And I do seem to remember that right after the hurricane passed, before the levee blew, people in NOLA were pleasantly surprised how NOLA fared much better than they expected....

Like I said, I have suspicions that the levee was intentionally blown by someone, but like the demolition of the WTC towers, this idea is so horrible people will not even try to think about it, much less mount an investigation.

*Not coincidentally, this would also be one of the more accessible places for sabotage.

The Trifecta

Before 9/11 the Federal Emergency Management Agency listed the three most likely catastrophic disasters facing America: a terrorist attack on New York, a major earthquake in San Francisco and a hurricane strike on New Orleans.

Anyone want to bet Bush is going for the trifecta?

A Damn Good Rant

Steve Gilliard-style.

Just read it.

If Katrina Was Like 9/11

--Bush's five week vacation before the event was Bush's five week vacation before the event

--the New Orleans levee was the WTC towers

--the waves were the planes crashing into the WTC towers

--the lack of National Guard reinforcement of the levees was the Air Force stand-down

--the demolition of the levee was the demolition of the WTC (both were the big killers)

--Bush's inept response to the crisis was Bush's inept response to the crisis





All I'm saying is I have my suspicions.

Louisiana Governor Asked for Federal Help on SUNDAY

The smoking gun.

Amazing Satellite Pictures of the Mississippi Gulf Coast

Here. (click on the squares and magnify)

Here are pictures of NO.

Where Was the Fucking Effort?????

To save the levee.

To save the people of New Orleans.

Where was the effort????????

Did ANYONE with any power EVEN TRY before today???

This is not just negligence.

This is fucking criminal.

Outrage

I just can't believe how ill-prepared the disaster teams were for NOLA and Katrina. This was either purposeful sabotage or a mind-boggling series of mistakes.

And I resent being asked to donate money for this. THIS sort of emergency is what I pay taxes for, NOT for the fucking war in Iraq and giving tax breaks to millionaires and subsidies to corporations and all the other evil shit this administration does.


President Death, indeed.

So what was the plan? Was this NOLA disaster what the Bush team was planning for five weeks in Crawford, or is Katrina something they could care less about because something even worse is coming that will take all our minds off everything before?

Like 9/11, none of this disaster makes sense. Incompetence simply isn't enough to explain what happened.

And how weird is it that the recently renovated part of the levee got taken out-- reminiscient of the recently renovated part of the Pentagon getting hit on 9/11.

Was the renovation an excuse to plant something?

Or was it just merely that the renovation wasn't finished, the wall was weak, no thank to Bush and his war?

Why would the administration let this happen/make this happen?

Is it culling of the poor and weak? A psy-ops to freak out Americans once and for all?

Do they want to militarize the weather? Start a global war on weather? I would not be surprised if there is now some political push to have the military develop weapons that control weather.

We're talking almost certainly over ten thousand dead people. Because no one could fucking do their job OR because someone sabotaged the system.

Either way, outrage kind of loses it's meaning.

Worse Than 9/11

My heart goes out to anyone affected by the horrible horrible tragedy in New Orleans.

And whether or not the levee was blown intentionally, my eternal hatred goes to the scoundrels that bungled the relief operation. There is just NO FUCKING EXCUSE FOR THIS.

No One Anticipated the Levee Breaking

This morning, about 7:05 am Eastern time, George Bush was interviewed by Diane Sawyers on ABC's Good Morning America. This is what he said:


"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees."


Condi Rice after 9/11:

"no-one could imagine hijackers using airplanes as missiles and crashing them into buildings"

What a bunch of fuckers.

The Blown Levee

Granted, by its very nature, New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen. BUT the odd thing is no one seems to know exactly HOW the levee broke. The NY Times says it wasn't "water from the sky" and I can't find mention of a large storm surge that knocked over the levee. There is this quote:

"We are facing a storm that most of us have long feared," Mayor Ray Nagin said in ordering the mandatory evacuation for his city of 485,000 people, surrounded by suburbs of a million more. "The storm surge will most likely topple our levee system."

But if you are really conspiratorially minded, check this out:

No one expected that weak spot to be on a canal that, if anything, had received more attention and shoring up than many other spots in the region. It did not have broad berms, but it did have strong concrete walls.

Shea Penland, director of the Pontchartrain Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of New Orleans, said that was particularly surprising because the break was "along a section that was just upgraded."

"It did not have an earthen levee," Dr. Penland said. "It had a vertical concrete wall several feel thick."

Was the levee blown on purpose?

The odd thing is this huge disaster comes almost exactly on the fourth anniversary of 9/11, is guaranteed to take people's minds off 9/11, and comes at a very similar spot in Bush's second term as 9/11 was in Bush's first term. And both 9/11 and Katrina come at a time when Bush's approval rating is dropping.

Unlike 9/11 though, I don't think Bush's numbers are going to go up after Katrina. But if this levee break was some sort of sick covert op, I don't think this one was meant to help Bush.

p.s. Here is a neat graphic showing the levee system around New Orleans.