Humint Events Online: July 2007

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Still Hard to Believe How Lame the Purdue Crash Simulation Is

Why exactly are we supposed to believe this lame cartoon is an accurate recreation of what happened on 9/11?????

I mean, disregarding for the moment other glaring problems in the simulation, WHY THE FUCK ARE THIN TORN SHEETS OF ALUMINUM CUTTING THROUGH THICK STEEL CORE COLUMNS?????

Jesus-- it's insulting!

The only possible reason I can think that they think we should take this seriously is because it reflects what we were shown on TV that day-- CGI images.
Bookmark and Share

Ohio 2004 Presidential Ballots "Accidentally" Destroyed

Bookmark and Share


The media will never stop their pathetic shilling for the war.

To add more thoughts on this, I think the key point here is NOT that O'Hanlon and Pollack haven't been critical of the Bush administration's handling of the war-- because the two have given at least lip-service to the idea that the Bush administration bungled the war. And I have to say, Glenn Greenwald and ThinkProgress, to name two sites, seem to ignore this point for their own purposes.

Rather the depressing point for me is how these two are given ample attention from the media to further sell the war, when these two have promoted the war from the very beginning-- and still the media sells these people to the public as war critics.

What is further depressing is that the anti-war position is never given comparable time.
Bookmark and Share


In which Dave McGowan exposes himself as an idiot and a shill.

Really-- I used to like McGowan, but this piece is just pathetically bad.

UPDATE: To clarify, McGowan takes on no-planers in the most lame way possible, without doing one iota of original thinking, and obviously without ever having digested any of the work on this blog or other comparable sites. Worse, McGowan was as far as I know, previously a Pentagon and Shanksville no-planer, whereas in this latest piece, he appears to revert on Shanksville and ignores the Pentagon. Further, he call mini-nukes bullshit without any explanation, and seems to prefer the idea that the WTC towers were loaded with massive amounts of conventional demolitions. The problem McGowan does not confront is how this was done in perfect secrecy and without anyone coming forward after the fact saying they saw demolition charges being loaded in the towers-- and then he uses a similar lack-of-witness argument against the idea that no plane hit the South tower! He also seems inexplicably oblivious to the idea that video fakery could be so advanced as to actually fool people and to the idea that 9/11 planners could ever have pulled off live video fakery.
Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 29, 2007

"Further Revelations on Molten Steel and High Temperatures, and the China Syndrome at the WTC"

from the Anonymous Physicist:

My previous WTC7, and other articles, on the nuclear demolition of the WTC here and at detailed the mechanism for the high temperatures and molten steel at the WTC, both photographed and witnessed up to five months later. What my articles did, and what no one else in the 911 truth movement apparently has done-- except William Tahil-- is to state that there had to have been a source for GENERATING heat at the WTC, and to propose such a mechanism. This is because the "collapse," or destruction, mechanisms proposed, in and of themselves, do not provide for such high temperatures weeks and months later. The mechanism was revealed to be the China Syndrome of high heat generating, nuclear reacting fragments, arising from the interactions of building-destroying mini-nuclear bombs, either with other unexploded nukes, or nuclear reactors present.

It is fascinating to see all the disinformation regarding the very high temperatures and molten steel weeks and months after 9/11, at the WTC. Let us examine what all the 911 non-nuclear demolition theorists have to say in this regard. The regime/media "collapse" mechanism of planes/fuel/gravity/pancaking does not allow for such high temperatures weeks and months later. So the MSM, and the regime's 911 Commission report hide any mention of this. They simply ignore it, or say there was no evidence of molten steel, as this NIST "investigator" does here. The government (the actual perps), was also very active in destroying any proof of high temperatures after the 9/11 event-such as altering the second AVIRIS data set.

Then we have the DEW theory. Here I have been told, the proponents of this theory act similarly to the regime. They state that all the firefighters and other responders who were eyewitnesses (and who had nothing to gain, and perhaps much to lose with their accounts) are wrong, or deliberate disinfo agents. And some DEW proponents claim that all the photos showing molten steel are doctored in some way, such as alleging color enhancement. The DEW proponents also know that any beam weapons used on 9/11 (of which no hard evidence has been presented, even though it is not impossible for beam weapons to have been used in some way during the "collapse" phase) could not account for such high temperatures and molten steel weeks and months later. So they claim that all the eyewitnesses and photos, and other data are false. In other words, if it doesn't fit their DEW hypothesis (of which there is no evidence), then any countering evidence against DEW is said to be "bogus" even if the eyewitnesses are irrefutable, and photos and other data support them.

Then we come to the thermite theory. Here the disinfo nuclear physicist (i.e. Dr. Steven Jones) knows full well that only the nuclear reactions of the China Syndrome could account for all the high temperatures and molten steel weeks and months later, so he has taken a different tack from the above two. He was quick to claim the molten steel for himself and his thermite theory! Remember we are now discussing this molten aspect weeks and months later, not on 9/11 itself. So let let me dispose of this ludicrous claim that thermite used on 9/11 could be the source of great heat months later. This Youtube video of thermite ignition shows it to be cooled off in minutes--and not weeks and months. Notice how, after just a few minutes, the thermite residue stops glowing; and a person can safely touch its container and the ground near it. It has cooled off in minutes.

Now let us see that one reporting source has stated that the very high temperatures were at the surface of the WTC, not five, but SIX, months after 9/11. Here is an article, in GCN (Government Computer News--a trade newsletter on the government IT field). The article is about firefighters/responders' computer cataloging of 7000 human remains found at the WTC from 9/25/01 to 5/30/02. It states that, "For six months after Sept. 11, the ground temperature varied between 600 degrees Fahrenheit and 1,500 degrees, sometimes higher." And furthermore, it notes that, "In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel." Note that the "1500 degree F, sometimes higher" is said to be the "ground temperature." Again indicating that the heat source, underground, must be at a significantly higher temperature-- as there was nothing visible there, at the surface, causing this heat. This is also another proof of my earlier assertion, made here, that the second set of AVIRIS data announced must be fraudulent. Recall that the second set of data, allegedly taken on 9/23/07, but not released for 19 days, claimed that there were only 3 or 4 spots with greatly diminished temperatures left at the WTC-- as compared to the dozens of hotpsots at temperatures up to 1340 degrees taken on 9/16/01. This article further demonstrates that high temperatures were at the surface of the WTC six months later.

I previously cited Bronx firefighter/responder, Joe O'Toole stating that he saw molten steel in February, 2002 -- five months later. The GCN article now brings "1500 degree temperature, sometimes higher" to SIX months after 9/11. This is further proof of heat GENERATING sources underground-- namely the China Syndrome. That is, as already detailed here, there were fragmented nuclear reacting criticalities, that needed no oxygen to generate high temperatures, almost indefinitely, until "cleaned up"-- PERHAPS BY UNSUSPECTING, UNINFORMED, UNPROTECTED HUMAN BEINGS. So we are now into March 2002 for the China Sydrome still occurring at the WTC.

Interesting that only two months after this March, 2002 date, the "clean-up" was declared officially over. Could the clean-up only have been declared to be over, on 5/30/02, because all the China Syndrome fragments had been recovered by then? Will all the now-unfolding thyroid, blood, lymph, and other cancers among the firefighters, and other responders, at the WTC, be further proof of their exposure to the radiation of the China Syndrome at the WTC? These cancers are highly unlikely to arise from "inhaling asbestos" or other toxins; they are commonly related to exposure at radiation-releasing sites-Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl, and the latest Ground Zero: the World Trade Center. And if these firefighters/responders wore masks/respirators, it would even more strongly lead to the conclusion that their cancers are from radiation, not inhalation of toxins.

Once again, I assert that the high temperature hotpsots ("1500 degrees, sometimes higher") revealed in this article, to be present until at least March, 2002 could only have been caused by the GENERATION of heat from nuclear reacting criticality sites underground-- the China Syndrome. The over 40,000 WTC responders must be provided with this crucial information. They, and their physicians, must be told of their radiation exposure. Let their subsequent outrage upon learning this "ultimate truth", and the outrage of their families, CAUSE--as heroic New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison put it (and as now appears on his headstone)--"JUSTICE [to] BE DONE, OR THE HEAVENS FALL."
Bookmark and Share

CIA Tortured an Al-MI5-duh Agent

This article gives some interesting insights into how intelligence agencies like the CA and the MI5 can use and manipulate "terrorists".
Bookmark and Share

9/11 Video Fakery and Geospatial Intelligence

This is probably the best explanation for the majority of the 9/11 2nd hit videos:
The fake 9/11 videos were created using georeferenced TIGER data and systems from the NRO and NGA, the spy satellite agencies that evacuated their employees for a scheduled drill of "airplanes crashing into buildings" on September 11, 2001. This georeferenced imagery was processed using the FCS* prototypes essential to SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld's agenda of transformation and privatization of the Military. Combined with fake news footage and scripted eyewitnesses, the 9/11 perpetrators broadcast a hoax to "shock and awe" the world.
(check out the accompanying video)

*FCS = Forward Combat Systems
Bookmark and Share

Saturday, July 28, 2007

"The Simpsons Movie" Is About Ultimate Truths

Amazingly, the new Simpsons movie (which I just watched today) contains the following concepts that essentially follow the ultimate truths laid out by "Anonymous Physicist":

-- nuking the moon (this is the first scene of the movie!)

-- people destroying the planet (Springfield) via idiocy and pollution

-- containment of the planet (Springfield) by a massive impenetrable shield (the grid)

-- regression of civilization following containment of the planet (Springfield)

-- outsiders deciding to destroy the planet (Springfield) to stop humans (Springfielders)

-- humans (Springfielders) using outside technology to bomb the containment grid and allow escape from the grid

-- megalomaniac government advisors (and a clueless president) doing much of the nasty work

-- moon landing fakery thrown in for good measure!

In fact, "The Simpsons" has been tied into the "powers that be" for a long time, and the show has presaged aspects of 9/11, as has been discussed here before.

What is surprising-- and somewhat disturbing-- is that the creators of the movie are now talking about ultimate truths, with suprisingly minimal camouflage.
Bookmark and Share

Friday, July 27, 2007

Newton's 3rd Law and Perceptions

Newton's 3rd Law: "To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"

Now, consider a Boeing 767-200 going 540 mph and weighing almost 200 tons, smacking into a concrete and steel tower. One can easily imagine that overall kinetic energy of this event was awesome, and would allow the plane to penetrate cleanly into the building.

However, now consider a stationary Boeing 767-200 (anchored to the ground in some way) being impacted by the side of a massive steel and concrete tower going 540 mph and weighing at least 200,000 (and possibly 500,000) tons. One can easily imagine that overall kinetic energy of this event was awesome, and would allow the tower to completely smash the plane flat with little if any penetration of the plane into the building.

Here's the kicker-- these are both views of the same event, just perceived from different sides.

Which view is more accurate?

Probably the one that is least intuitive-- the building going 540 mph impacting the plane.

Here's another more detailed way to view it-- the front of the fuselage of a Boeing 767-200 going 540 mph, with the overall plane weighing almost 200 tons, smacks into 6 x 14 inch wide outer steel columns of the WTC tower. One might imagine that the overall kinetic energy of this event would allow the fuselage to shear though the steel outer columns and allow the plane to penetrate cleanly into the building.

However, NOW think about 6 x 14 inch wide outer steel columns of the concrete and steel WTC tower, each column weighing 6 tons, traveling 540 mph, smashing into the stationary plastic and aluminum front of a Boeing 767-200 fuselage. In this case, one can imagine the steel columns ripping right through the front of the fuselage, tearing it into shreds, leaving the columns and building facade essentially intact.

Again, these are both the same event, just perceived from different sides.

Which view is more accurate?

Again, probably the one that is least intuitive-- the columns going 540 mph impacting the front of the fuselage and ripping it into shreds.
Bookmark and Share

Drunken Astronauts

Bookmark and Share

Tillman Cover-Up

Bookmark and Share

"We Are Not the First" by Andrew Tomas

I found this book on my bookshelf right before I left for my recent vacation, and took it to read. I don't think I'd read it carefully before; I think I bought it used when I was in college. In any case, I've finally read the book now.

The theme of the book is the idea that ancient humans (0-10,000 BC) had amazingly advanced knowledge and technologies and that advanced extra-terrestrials most likely imparted the advanced technology to humans. This was a popular theme in the late 60s and early 70s, but seems to have completely disappeared from our popular culture (disturbingly). Erich von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods" was the most popular work of this genre but there were others who expounded this theme. Now, some of the information that relates to this theory, may contain disinfo or misinfo-- particularly the more popular von Daniken work. Like the 9/11 conspiracy world, my guess is that the von Daniken misinfo/disinfo was used as part of a deliberate campaign to discredit the whole idea-- where the general idea is completely sound but obvious lies are used to discredit the whole topic. Clearly, the flaws in von Daniken's work are widely used to ridicule the general idea of advanced knowledge and advanced technologies derived from aliens. In any case, "We Are Not the First" contains hundreds of fascinating examples of ancient mysteries consistent with alien visitation and impartation of knowledge, and is more credible than "Chariots of the Gods". One major problem with von Daniken was his insistence that aliens were the only explanation, whereas Tomas is generally very careful in his interpretations.

What is abundently clear is that after the dark ages, human technology and knowledge declined catastrophically from a peak thousands of years ago. How much it declined has always been unclear, in part because so much ancient knowledge was destroyed in the burning of huge ancient libraries. Of course the current thinking is that right NOW we are at the PINNACLE of human achievement. I think the popular view of technology is a massive, global misconception-- in fact I think it is part of the biggest cover-up in history, and that "the powers that be" have deliberately obscured the past achievements of man, as well as ET contact, from the bulk of humanity. You might even call it the "ultimate conspiracy".

Finally and importantly, it makes sense to me that all religion is derived from physical and mental contact with advanced (extraterrestrial) beings over the centuries rather than from a supernatural all-powerful creator entity. I think the thesis of "GOD" = "ETs" is a powerful and ultimate truth.
Bookmark and Share

Congratulations to the Bush Administration!

They apparently can't even win a bogus war on terrorism.

The implications of which are rather disturbing.
Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Vaporized WTC Victims?

I just finished reading Robert Shaler's book "Who They Were", on the identification of 9/11 victims at Ground Zero. Shaler was the director of the forensic biology department for the New York City Chief Medical Examiner, and oversaw the enormously complex identification process for 9/11 vicitims at Ground Zero. Much of the ID'ing was done by DNA typing, as the very few intact bodies were found, and much of the human remains were small pieces.

Only 293 intact bodies were recovered from Ground Zero, out of at least 2749 victims.

Even more striking is the fact that only 1592 victims could be ID'ed-- meaning for at least 1157 victims, nothing was found or for whatever remains were found, intact DNA was not recovered.

Again, this is strong confirmation for extremely high energy devices, as might be obtained from nuclear blasts, being used to destroy the twin towers-- and at the same time vaporizing many of the poor souls left inside the buildings.

Keep in mind that officially, for the flight 77 and flight 93 crashes, all people were identified by remains found at the crash site-- same for the AA587 crash on November 12, 2001.

But only about 58% of Ground Zero victims were recovered in any significant form.
Bookmark and Share

High Rate of Thyroid Cancer in 9/11 FDNY Ground Zero Workers

Bookmark and Share

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About UFOs and ETs But Were Afraid to Ask

I don't claim to be an expert on this topic, but I finally finished reading Jim Marrs' "Alien Agenda" and I think it is an excellent overview of the topic.

Despite your level of skepticism on this topic, I think it would be hard to come away from this book saying there is nothing to this issue at all, or that it isn't a vitally important part of our global situation.

The UFO/ET issue clearly is complicated, with layers of disinfo, probably starting from the highest levels.

Nonetheless, I think the scenario laid out by "Anonymous Physicist" here does a good job of making sense out of many many disparate threads in this whole incredible arena of knowledge-- an arena of knowledge that is ignored and/or mocked by the media as matter of course, not unlike the way the media treat 9/11 "conspiracy theories".
Bookmark and Share

Monday, July 09, 2007

Open Thread

Regular posting will be sporadic at best for the next three weeks.
Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 08, 2007

Part 6 of the "September Clues" Video Series that Is Taking the Nation by Storm!

Well, maybe that is an exaggeration. But still, this is quite interesting--
Bookmark and Share

Safety Factor or "Factor of Safety"

Factor of safety (FoS) can mean either the fraction of structural capability over that required, or a multiplier applied to the maximum expected load (force, torque, bending moment or a combination) to which a component or assembly will be subjected.


Appropriate design factors are based on several considerations. Prime considerations are the accuracy of load and wear estimates, the consequences of failure, and the cost of overengineering the component to achieve that factor of safety. For example, components whose failure could result in substantial financial loss, serious injury or death usually can use a safety factor of four or higher (often ten).

If we assume that the WTC had a factor of safety of four (and this is a typical number used by various sources), this means structural columns could lose 75% of their strength (from heat or other damage) and be just fine. In fact, the columns would be better than fine, as the factor of safety is calculated for the maximum load of a building, which generally is not reached by the weight of the inner contents.

But simply put, the safety factor means that ALL of the columns on one floor of the WTC would have to lose more than 75% of their strength at the same time for the floor to collapse. Given the fact that fires were contained to a fraction of the area on each floor, the fire-induced collapse explanation cannot account for the destruction of the towers.
Bookmark and Share

Hanging Skin and Nuclear Explosions

Another remarkable finding from Anonymous Physicist-- the hanging skin of 9/11 casualty Felipe David is a striking piece of evidence indicating a nuclear blast in the basement of the WTC.

Where in the World is Felipe David-- and Did He Survive Exposure to Nuclear Radiation?

By The Anonymous Physicist

Assuming the following tale is not completely psyops, then on 9/11, Felipe David, employed by Aramark Corp., was checking or replenishing vending machines in one of the basement levels of WTC1. (Curiously Aramark Corp has Thomas Kean—Chairman of the 9/11 Commission--as one of its Board Directors since 1994.)

The following is supposedly Felipe David’s account of what happened beginning just before the first plane “hit.” "That day I was in the basement in sub-level 1 sometime after 8:30am. Everything happened so fast, everything moved so fast. The building started shaking after I heard the explosion below, dust was flying everywhere and all of a sudden it got real hot. I threw myself onto the floor, covered my face because I felt like I was burned. I sat there for a couple of seconds on the floor and felt like I was going to die, saying to myself 'God, please give me strength.'

"When I went in, I told them it was an explosion," said David, who was then helped out of the WTC by Rodriguez and eventually taken by ambulance to New York Hospital. "When people looked at me with my skin hanging, they started crying but I heard others say 'OK, good, good, you made it alive. [This ends the extract from the first URL above.]

Now I would like people to note that nowhere in the above quote, allegedly direct from Mr. David, does he mention fire. He states that he felt and heard explosion(s), and then “it got real hot.” He never says he saw any fire. This may be crucial. However when you read of his story through the words of William Rodriguez, “fire” is added into the story. "He had been standing in front of a freight elevator on sub-level 1 about 400 feet from the office when fire burst out of the elevator shaft, causing his injuries."

Reports, as we shall see, differ greatly as to how he got to the vicinity of other workers for help, including keymaster William Rodriguez, of whom we have already seen much “coincidence” and strangeness. We have the “most official” story (always the one to be most wary of for those in the know) that he staggered into Rodriguez’ office or area, and Rodriguez helped him outside, and into an ambulance. Some earlier reports even stated that Rodriguez carried Mr. David. The following site no longer works, but I copied the following from google: “Rodriguez carried Felipe David out of the building and re-entered it to rescue two men trapped on the elevator who were in danger of ... ”

But this Christian organization’s website quotes Mr David saying he ran six blocks for help! "I asked God to give me strength. And I was able to get up and run six blocks to find an exit," Mr. David says. Then we have this remarkable TV interview that morning with Kenny Johannemann. Mr. Johannemann states that he was the one who helped David, “I dragged a guy off. His skin was hanging. I helped him into an ambulance” Note that there is no mention of Rodriguez. Wise individuals have suggested that perhaps no one interviewed on TV on 9/11 was genuine. Notice how the camera angle changes and zooms in on him, just as he is asked about “terrorism.” The regime had long range plans, and a carefully crafted script. Note how Johannemann’s arms flail just like another 9/11 witness that morning who has been shown to be bogus. He, of course, could be telling the truth (and each of you will have to draw your own conclusions), but I cannot find anything on him in recent years.

So we have at least four accounts as follows:
Rodriquez helped David to an ambulance.
Rodriquez carried David to an ambulance.
Johannemann helped David to an ambulance.
David ran six blocks to an ambulance.

Of course, in the shock and excitement of such events, we know that accounts can differ, and we cannot make any definitive conclusions in this regard.

Now, let us return to Felipe David’s “hanging skin.” What caused this? It is always possible that some conventional fire or explosives caused his burns and the hanging skin on his face and arms. But we saw that David himself did not mention “fire.” So we may conclude that it wasn’t any direct fire that caused this. A conventional explosive blast could have done this. But this too may not be so likely, as such blasts may be expected to cause different types of wounds deep into the face and arms. But that is still a possibility, as is a fire that he just didn’t see.

That brings us to one possible cause of his hanging skin, that indeed he couldn’t possibly have seen! That is radiation from a mini-nuke, which may have just exploded, at that time, in one of the sub-basement levels. One is not capable of seeing the radiation (gamma rays, neutrons) emitted by a nuclear blast. One will just feel the heat, then pain and then the skin will be damaged, and may either be vaporized, charred or hanging—depending on the flux intensity (distance, wavelength/type of the radiation etc. are factors here). This eyewitness account on the survivors of the Hiroshima nuclear attack describes how common was damaged, hanging skin amongst them. (You can use your “find” function and search on “hanging.”)

I assert my following interpretation of Mr. David’s words is the most likely account of what happened to Mr. David. He hears and feels explosion(s). He doesn’t see any fire coming at him, but is surprised to feel great heat on his skin, and goes to the floor. He then is further shocked to feel and see his skin burned and hanging. All this is very much like what the burn victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki reported.

Now radiation exposure to the skin should result in significant swelling. But we have no photos or videos of Mr. David, until this Youtube video (in Spanish) allegedly three months later, when Mr. Rodriguez visits Mr. David. David’s face does look (still?) a bit swollen, but not much. But this is allegedly three months later, without any allowed record of what his face, arms and legs looked like until that point in time. Why do we not have any photos or video of Mr David until that point in time? Could he have had massive skin swelling, beginning almost immediately after his skin was damaged by “something,” possibly radiation from a nuclear blast? Could they have only trotted Mr. David out after his swelling had come down to a “normal” level?

Finally I note that there seems to be nothing in the public record on Felipe David for the last five years or so! Even though he “too” could be regarded as a “hero.” Why do we not know where he is, and his status? Hopefully Felipe David is OK. Hopefully he did not get cancer, or other medical problems, or suffer a strange “accident.” Hopefully truly independent researchers will find him, and get his story direct from him, when he wouldn’t be surrounded by any public media, or “handlers” from the government, or any other interference. With the dearth of information forced upon us, we may ask: Where in the world is Felipe David? What has he been doing these last five years or so?

And is Felipe David the (only?) radiation survivor of a mini-nuke at the World Trade Center on 9/11? Does he share a kindred experience with those who were in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in those early days of August 1945 that marked the dawn of a new, horrible age? We must recognize that just like the World Trade Center on 9/11, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also called…Ground Zero.
Bookmark and Share

NOW the New York Times Endorses Iraq Withdrawal

The problem is NOW the fucking damage has been done.

The New York Fucking Times COULD have helped stop the war back in 2003. But instead they spread propaganda to build public support for the criminal invasion.

NOW, Iraq is a failed state, whether we stay or leave.

Which may be exactly what the "Powers That Be" wanted from this war-- a new and improved "terrorist" training ground.
Bookmark and Share

The Significance of Roswell

At the time of the 1947 crash, it was the only nuclear-bomb equipped air base in the world.

One could imagine this place would be of interest to "visitors".
Bookmark and Share

Saturday, July 07, 2007

Brief Overview of the Evidence for No Plane at the South Tower

1) Near impossible flightpath for amateur pilot-- and remote control plane would have taken more direct path without last-minute course correction (extreme banking)

2) Overwhelming evidence that the videos showing either "UA175" do not show a Boeing 767, were manipulated or are fraudulent:
a) clear airframe abnormalities seen in images of the plane
b) plane is too small for 767 in some videos
c) aircraft attitude/flight path discrepancies between videos (even more apparent with photos)
d) bizarre/unreal/unlikely camera pans/zooms
e) "nose-out" video fakery phenomenon in Fox 5 video
f) lack of a plane in long zoom out shot of Fox 5 video
g) linkage of many videos to video animators

3) Impossible crash physics upon contact with the tower
a) no slowing as plane enters
b) no explosion as plane enters
c) no part of plane breaks off despite fact that entry hole doesn't accomodate all of wings and tail
d) no deflection in the plane's path as it enters
e) no deflection/distortion of wings as they impact the tower
f) almost no deflection of debris backwards
g) impossibility of plane acting indestructible as it enters but then undergoing complete destruction after it goes in

4) Lack of plane debris clearly matching a Boeing 767 and no black boxes officially recovered

5) Evidence of planted plane debris
a) engine under canopy
b) fuselage piece on top of tower debris on WTC5 roof

6) Witnesses who were in a position to see the plane but never did
Bookmark and Share


Cool date!

This date in history:

2005-- London tube/bus bombings, which were almost certainly false-flag terrorism.

1947-- crash incident at Roswell, NM, about which there has been a clear high-level government cover-up, and which most likely involved the crash of an extra-terrestrial ship and the death of its pilots. Here and here are some interesting pieces on this incident.
Bookmark and Share

Updated 9/11 Odds

9/11 ODDS

Very little in this world is certain, and therefore it is difficult to be absolutely certain of many aspects of 9/11. Moreover, my ideas for what happened on 9/11 have evolved, as I take in new evidence and new ideas and analyze new evidence.

The following are how I rate various aspects of 9/11, in betting terms (and yes, I would bet real money on these if it were possible):

1) Some officials in the US government had specific foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks: 1,000 to 1

2) Some officials in the US government aided the hijackers at various points before 9/11: 1,000 to 1

3) Some officials in the US government had a direct hand in carrying out the attacks: 1,000 to 1

4) Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon: 1,000 to 1

5) No conventional plane hit the Pentagon: 100 to 1

6) Pre-planted explosives including nuclear weaponry caused the total collapses of the WTC twin towers: 1,000 to 1

7) WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition of some form: 1,000 to 1

8) no plane crashed at all in Shanksville and the crash site was a complete hoax: 100 to 1

9) UA93 did not crash in Shanksville: 1,000 to 1

10) flight 11 did not hit WTC1: 500 to 1

11) flight 175 did not hit WTC2: 1,000 to 1

12) at least some videos and photos of the second hit were faked: 10,000 to 1

13) Bush had some specific foreknowledge about what was going to happen on 9/11: 10 to 1

14) The air defense (NORAD) response to the hijackings was distracted and/or disabled by wargames being run on 9/11: 50:50 (lack of real hijacked planes may have been more of a factor)

15) The direct 9/11 attacks did not involve any conventional planes: 100 to 1 (planes were probably used indirectly)

16) The 9/11 attacks did not involve any planes at all and were a hoax facilitated by pre-planted explosives, planted plane parts and video fakery: 100 to 1

17) There is a cover-up/disinfo campaign about 9/11 being maintained by the government: 1,000 to 1

18) There is a cover-up about 9/11 being maintained at high levels by the media: 1,000 to 1

My previous odds as of October 2006, can be seen here.

Interestingly, I have clearly firmed up on many of these key points in the last 8 months-- going from 100 to 1 to 1,000 to 1 in many places.
Bookmark and Share

Friday, July 06, 2007

Heavy Spraying of Water

Keep in mind, when you think about the incredible heat that remained at Ground Zero for months, that this heat remained after incredible amounts of water were sprayed on the pile (for instance 3 million gallons between 9/11/01 and 9/21/01, plus an additional 1 million gallons of rainwater).

Need I point out that a low-level nuclear chain reaction would not be extinguished by water, while normal fires would?
Bookmark and Share

Bumbling Terrorist-Physicians in Britain

This story still makes little sense.

In particular, why educated men would launch such an ill-conceived attack, fail, then drive up to Glasgow and try again with another ill-conceived attack?

More than anything, these guys sound like mind-control victims. Which brings up something I have long wondered-- is Islam a particularly effective mind-control device, or is there something else being used?

More here, including the ominous (in propaganda terms) news that these guys allegedly tried to come to the US.
Bookmark and Share

Thursday, July 05, 2007

The Importance of the Lingering Heat at Ground Zero

The “China Syndrome” Came to New York City on 9/11

By The Anonymous Physicist

Some people may not have not fully grasped the significance, and necessity, of my hypothesis on heat generating criticality sites at the WTC after 9/11. Some shills have actually, and laughably, attempted to claim thermite could have been been responsible for these high temperatures and molten steel.

Any attempt to have a complete theory of 9/11 must include the WTC demolition on 9/11 itself, and crucially its aftermath of the great hotpsots and molten steel, up to five months afterwards. The latter being supported by irrefutable, numerous eyewitnesses, and photographs and at least one AVIRIS overflight temperature data set. (With the second, long-delayed release of overflight data likely being bogus, as claimed here.) It is risible that a shill physicist claims this photo, of a crane lifting molten steel weeks after 9/11, as “proof” of thermite use on 9/11. Now while thermite, or other conventional explosive, may have been used in some subsidiary capacity on 9/11, my earlier articles have highlighted how only mini-nukes could have accounted for all the phenomena of the 9/11 WTC demolitions. It is not unexpected, but still sickening, to see how a shill physicist has claimed that the molten steel weeks after 9/11 “proves” thermite alone brought down the WTC towers. He HAS to claim that, for he knows well that the real source of this molten steel, weeks later, is nuclear reactions.

I have stated that only nuclear criticality sites could be the source of heat GENERATION weeks, and months after 9/11. You can find, say on Youtube, numerous videos of thermite being used to melt things, yes, including metal— but no vaporization. Note that the thermite is not being used as an explosive when it is seen melting through a car, e.g. But some of those videos clearly show that after just a few minutes, the molten thermite residue cools off and no longer glows. It is highly likely that any thermite at the WTC on 9/11 would have cooled off within hours. Indeed, I have stated that even the momentary maximum temperature of a nuke’s hypocenter (up to 100 million degrees), is known to cool off relatively quickly. You can ascertain this rapid cooling off in regards to the Trinity Site, or Hiroshima or Nagasaki, or even H-Bomb test sites. The temperatures returned to normal at all these sites relatively quickly.

Now some claim that oxygen starved fires could allow for vastly longer high temperature fires underground at the WTC. These people don’t seem to realize they have just proven the case ONLY for nuclear chain reactions!! Because only nuclear chain reactions release massive heat almost indefinitely, without needing ANY oxygen whatsoever! This is not the case for any conventional (non-nuclear) fire. This “indefinite” massive heat source was the basis for the term “China Syndrome” in regards to a nuclear reactor mishap which, in theory (but not really due to other factors), could have massive indefinite heat leading to a nuclear reactor criticality (core) remnant burning all the way through to China.

This remarkable article on Chernobyl actually states that the China Syndrome occurred at Chernobyl. It says, “‘China Syndrome’ of meltdown had taken place inside the reactor core. Thermal explosion and outbreak of fires in over thirty places were due to high-temperature and falling uranium core fragments on to the roofs of adjacent buildings.” So here we see learn that the nuclear core had exploded into many pieces of— apparently still critically reacting uranium fragments--with their concomitant high temperatures. But this is just the kind of thing I cited in my WTC 9/11 nuclear demolition hypothesis of nukes exploding either other unexploded mini-nukes, or nukes exploding the reactors in the Nuclear Borers.

So perhaps my previous term, “criticality sites” regarding the source of high temperatures and molten steel, weeks and months after 9/11 is too vague. Instead I propose that from now on we think of this aftermath of molten steel, weeks and months after 9/11 as… “The China Syndrome came to New York City on 9/11.”
Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

“I didn’t vote for him but he’s my president, and I hope he does a good job.”

Believe it or not, that was my attitude about Bush after the 2000 "election".

Yeah, I was pretty upset about the Florida debacle and the Bush v Gore decision, especially coming after what I considered was the ridiculous drama of the Clinton impeachment.

But ultimately, I realized, I had little choice but to accept Bush and to hope he did a good job.

However, for me, Bush ceased to be a president and became a criminal after the Iraq invasion -- when all the lies really became clear. This was about the same time I had a growing realization that 9/11 was an inside job.

Now-- for some reason, Keith Olbermann decided Bush finally crossed the line with the Libby commutation.

I think Olbermann is better than most of the talking heads on TV, but come on. The Libby deal was what finally did it?

Gimme a freakin' break.
Bookmark and Share

Independence Day

What a wonderful concept.

I only wish it were possible to really declare indepedence.
Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

NASA and the FBI Have the Original "Rocerny" 2nd Hit Video and Won't Let Him Share It?

Bookmark and Share

WTC7 Continued

Watch it go down:

1) Now, assuming WTC7 did in fact have five basement levels, even if you vaporized those five lower levels completely (not an easy feat), it is not at all clear that this would cause the building to go straight down so fast. In other words, the building might go down five levels fast, but slow down after that as intact structural elements started doing their job. Remember the failed building demolition where the bottom of the tower was blown out, the tower dropped a few stories, and then the tower stopped and refused to collapse further. This is why the nuclear borer hypothesis is attractive, as it can explain the initial twenty to thirty story free-fall drop. Presumably, after the building has dropped 200 feet or so, it has gained enough momentum to keep falling at high speed and cause the building to truly collapse in on itself.

2) There are two other concerns with the nuclear borer hypothesis:

-- presumably it would have had to drill through manhattan bedrock below WTC7, but of course the machine was made to drill through deep underground rock

-- since WTC7 actually was rebuilt on the same site, if there WAS a deep hole beneath the rubble, one wonders what was done to fill in the hole

3) Remember, WTC7 housed offices for the DOD, the IRS, the Secret Service, the CIA, and possibly even the NSA. There is little doubt the clean-up of WTC7 debris would have proceeded under maximum secrecy.

4) If the nuclear borer hypothesis is not what happened, how WAS WTC7 done? I find it unlikely it was conventional controlled demolition, due to the perfection of the fall and the lack of obvious charges going off. Someone could of course posit a magic silent disintegration ray that disintegrated the building from the bottom up, but I would certainly like more specifics on something like that.

More thoughts on what happened and what didn't happen to WTC7 can be read here.

Lastly, here is a simple overview of the WTC7 issue-- and why the rubble was critical.
Bookmark and Share


Bookmark and Share

Libby's Sentence Commuted

Bookmark and Share

Monday, July 02, 2007

The WTC7 Miracle

I assume everyone is familiar with the incredible "collapse" of the 47-story WTC7 tower-- how smoothly and quickly and symmetrically it went down.

The obvious conclusion for what happened to WTC7 is that it was taken down by some form of controlled demolition. The logic is simple enough-- that what happened to WTC7 can only be explained by controlled demolition because ONLY controlled demolition can cause buildings to go down like that. This is easy and strong logic that everyone can grasp. Fire-induced weakening of structural columns of WTC7 should never have led to such a global, symmetrical collapse (funny how partial collapses occur all the time except on 9/11).

The problem with the traditional controlled demolition explanation is that there wasn't any clear series of explosions that went off before the tower went down, like with traditional controlled demolitions. There may have been one large explosion according to some reports-- but there almost certainly wasn't the series of sharp bang-bang-bang-bangs seen with traditional controlled demolition (I say "almost certainly" because we can't rule out massive levels of video and audio manipulation).

In any case, the way that WTC7 went down was far better than any traditional controlled demolition-- in terms of how smoothly and symmetrically the tower went down.

So given the special nature of the WTC7 collapse, it is reasonable to wonder if something very special was done to bring down WTC7 in the way it came down.

The "anonymous physicist" has come up with a unique and clever solution for what happened to WTC7: it was sunk into a large prepositioned hole in the ground. He theorizes that this hole was made under the WTC7 basement levels by one or more nuclear borer machines. Then the idea is that strong explosives (mini-nuke or otherwise) took out the supports under WTC7 such that it fell straight into the hole underneath.

Now, there really isn't much data to support this idea except that it CAN explain the EXTREMELY even and rapid straight-down way in which WTC7 sunk. The theory does present the problem of having a 100-200 foot deep WTC7-sized hole in the ground that required some degree of cover-up. This latter point is not insurmountable, but it is an issue. The other problem I think would be the sculpting of this hole under the tower without there being some partial collapse along the way. But this could have been accomplished, nonetheless.

The reason that this nuclear borer/hole theory makes sense is it explains how the whole building could have gone straight down without obvious massive explosions taking out the center of the building.

One odd thing is how little we know about what was under the WTC7 pile. We know a little about the WTC1 and WTC2 debris, and much less about the WTC7 debris. There was certainly a great deal of heat in both piles, and I think it is absurd to think this was simply from the building fires smoldering in an oxygen-deprived environment.

The fact is, even if there were some mechanism to scoop out/vaporize the complete INTERIOR of WTC7 without affecting the outer structural facade, even this would not allow the smooth symmetrical "collapse" that was seen-- unless the bottom twenty floors were simply blown up/vaporized completely and evenly. But even then-- how could they do this without damaging the two buildings right next to WTC7 on either side? This point actually favors the borer hypothesis.

The bottom line here is that, I think, the miracle of the WTC7 collapse requires some very special explanation. The nuclear borer idea may not be the ultimate answer, but it deserves consideration as it can explain the evidence rather well. Of course, while we can't completely rule out out fakery of the WTC7 "collapse" images, this seems somewhat unlikely given the fact that even someone like Rick Siegel ("911 Eyewitness") got footage of WTC7 going straight down.

Addendum: one reason the 9/11 perps may have specifically WANTED to sink WTC7 down into a hole is that it would leave a SMALLER DEBRIS PILE that way! This would be critical for them for explaining why the debris piles for the huge WTC towers were so small! The lack of WTC1 and WTC2 debris can be explained by the idea that that a significant amount of the WTC1 and WTC2 structures were likely vaporized by nuclear-type devices.
Bookmark and Share

Iraq War Propaganda

Glenn Greenwald does a good job of dismantling the recent administration propaganda regarding Iran and al Qaeda (even if GG is a schmuck about 9/11).

Oh yeah, the NY Times is really the perfect propaganda vehicle for the administration (and "the powers that be"), since lefties tend to believe things printed in the Times over other places. This is why the Times is almost as culpable as the Bush administration for the Iraq misadventure-- remember Judith Miller. Also, never forget "Operation Mockingbird".

UPDATE: Fuck Joe Lieberman, the guy is a disgrace.
Bookmark and Share

Impeach Cheney!

Bookmark and Share

Poor Poor Bush

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 01, 2007

How to Explain the Incredible Symmetrical Destruction of WTC7?

The Anonymous Physicist has a highly original hypothesis on what happened to WTC7. Please take time to read this fascinating piece.

WTC7 Demolition: Conventional, or Nuclear After All-- and the Nuclear Borer Hypothesis

By the Anonymous Physicist

In my recent articles on the nuclear destruction of the WTC I wrote that the controlled demolition (henceforth abbreviated as CD) of WTC7 appeared to be conventional. I reasoned that videos do not show the massive outward explosions seen during the nuclear destruction of WTC1 and WTC2. There is also the fact that much of WTC1 and 2 was vaporized and is not there in its own rubble (footprint), whereas WTC7 demolition shows numerous "pancaked" floors remaining. But further examining of the evidence requires continued thinking on this question.

As always, I caution people to overcome naiveté and inertia; and to realize the possibility that many photos and videos released on all 9/11 skyscrapers' "collapses" may have been altered. We know that most, if not all of the videos of the two "plane hits" of the twin towers have been altered, or are simply computer generated. Having said that, here is a fairly complete set of several videos from different locations and angles showing WTC7 destruction. Can we contrast this with video of a conventional demolition of a similarly shaped wide skyscraper? See this demolition of the 32-storey, "wide-body" Stardust Casino in Las Vegas. Ignore the added Vegas fireworks. Notice how the entire (all the way up to the top) central structure all falls down, from the very onset of demolition, with the sides collapsing on top of this at the end. Notice also that the moving plumes of smoke start after the entire edifice has hit the ground. Contrast the latter with WTC7, which had much larger plumes of smoke flowing certainly at the start of demolition, and perhaps apparently even before (from basement explosions?)

But perhaps the most striking difference is in the near perfect, intact, ensemble "sliding down" of the upper floors of WTC7. With the exception of the initial collapse of the central penthouse, and an apparent initial kinking of the top left area of WTC7, we see an almost miraculous, perfectly uniform, even collapse. I assert that this is a demolition unlike any other, for many reasons. But the usual destruction of mere supports does not appear to be involved here. Rather whole levels of structure below the visible top floors appear to have been vaporized-more on this later. Now we appear to see at least the top 20 floors or more just coming down as an intact ensemble. What can account for such near-perfect uniformity? We don't see this in other CDs of similarly shaped buildings. Indeed, in other CDs, we saw that the initial central collapse followed by the outer portions falling inwards is created by the CD planners for the final footprint result, and occurs at the onset of CD. Assuming the videos are (somewhat) genuine, was the initial, central, rooftop penthouse "collapse" a clever way to get people to think the whole thing was occurring like other controlled demolitions? When the rest of it is not. (Or was the Penthouse coupled to something in the basement, or the lowest floors?)

Part of the problem of analyzing the WTC7 CD, is the fact that smoke, and other buildings, obscure what happens to the bottom half. A chemist, Frank Legge, PhD stated that the upper floors of WTC7 came down just slightly slower than freefall speed in a vacuum (6.2 vs. 6.0 sec.). His article is in Steven Jones' "Journal." It concerns itself in proving that fires and gravity could not have caused the WTC7 "collapse," and that conventional CD did. Legge even wrote, in defense of his conventional CD hypothesis, that the bulk of the WTC7 "came straight down with extraordinary precision." To me, all this begs the real question: Was this a conventional CD, or was WTC7 a nuclear CD, like WTC1 and 2? For completeness, I note that others state that the CD of WTC7 was faster than free-fall time, and that a vacuum was created by the explosions that "sucked" the building downwards. Thermobaric, or Fuel-Air Explosives (FAE), are sometimes cited with this hypothesis. A partial vacuum is said to be created with this type of explosive. Of course, even this type of explosive does not vaporize the contents of a building that they might be used in. But these possibilities should be considered.

In more detail, we must ask, does nearly the entire visible part of the building, WTC7, just come down AS IS (without any central falling inward) because some of the lower floors are no longer there? Were they vaporized by a nuke, or nukes? Again because of either video doctoring, or smoke and building obscuration, we do not see the bottom floors. We do know that WTC7, and much of the WTC, had hotspots as seen by AVIRIS/NASA plane overflights. For the moment, let us discuss the undergound hotpsots and molten steel in general, regardless of which WTC building these are under; because I will end with an unimpeachable witness to vaporized steel beneath WTC7. Now these AVIRIS overflights took place on 9/16/01 and 9/23/01. Temperatures as high as 1000 degrees Kelvin or 1341 degrees Fahrenheit were found. This article makes clear that these were surface temperatures. Thus, if the heat source was significantly further undergound (as I will demonstrate), the source(s) would likely have been at much higher temperatures. Now, as with the destruction of WTC1 and 2, gravitational pancaking does not allow for 1300 F. degree surface temperature days and weeks later-nor for the much higher temperatures further underground. It is also improbable or impossible that conventional controlled demolition could account for this either. But the "extreme temperatures" of a nuke might, or as I hypothesized, the remnants of unexploded nukes undergoing partial criticality could account for these temperatures. This remarkable photo shows flaming and apparently molten steel (if you look closely) being dug out of the bottom of WTC1 in late October. It is more easily seen here. Indeed the previous link has firefighter Joe O'Toole state that in February of the next year, there still was molten steel at the WTC! Here we have firefighters describing FLOWING molten steel weeks later. It is impossible to explain such high temperatures so long after 9/11 except for the use of nukes, and/or possible heat GENERATION via nuclear criticalities, as previously cited.

Now I wish to make a crucial assertion. I may be the first to assert that the second AVIRIS data set is bogus! It claims that nearly all the hot spots were gone by 9/23. The govt's "data" claims that the "over three dozen hot spots [on 9/16]" were reduced to "4 or possibly 5" with greatly reduced temperatures by 9/23. Curiously, the 9/16 data were released two days later on 9/18; but the 9/23 data were not released until 10/12-19 days later! I believe that honest scientists got the first set out ASAP, but the regime had time to block and alter the second AVIRIS set. And don't forget no further testing--or more likely release--of similar plane or satellite overflights was allowed. What do I base these assertions on? When honest, intrepid firefighters, and other responders state they witnessed molten steel weeks and months later, and when photos show the removal of such molten steel weeks later, I know whom to believe. This is analogous to the Zapruder film of President Kennedy's murder. That film purports to show the limo moving at a steady 10 mph throughout. This despite the fact that numerous eyewitnesses stated that the limo came to a complete halt (so that the driver could do what others had failed to do.) Some of these eyewitnesses soon paid the ultimate price. Zapruder himself at the Garrison trial of Clay Shaw refused to state, under oath, that the version of his film shown in court was the one he had shot! So if I have to choose between intrepid firemen with nothing to gain, versus a President-murdering, Apollo Hoaxing, its own citizen nuking, world destroying regime, the choice is clear to me. All the eyewitnesses and photos demonstrate that the long-delayed release of the 9/23 AVIRIS data is false! The release of an honest set of such data would have shown very high temperatures weeks and months later. This not only would have shot down the official ludicrous "collapse" story, but also the regime's planned release of the shill physicist's termite, er I mean thermite story. The release of honest temperature grids at the WTC, weeks and months later, would have proven the case for nuclear demolition, and/or heat generation by nuclear reacting criticality sites! This had to be avoided at all costs.

Now let us return to the demolition of WTC7. Unlike WTC1, 2, which I hypothesized were nuclear CD's, we do not see any great outward explosions with WTC7 because they would be going off in the unseen lower floors, including perhaps most likely the basement floors. WTC7 officially had five basement levels according to one (shill) website. Now any nuke; or nukes, used in WTC7 were either limited to the basement and lowest floors only. But was the "collapse" observed so nearly perfectly even because numerous basement and lower floors had just been vaporized? I think there is a good chance this is what happended. Especially when we also consider what would be revealed underneath WTC7 weeks later.

While we must always consider the possibility of fakery with WTC7, let us assume for now that the videos of its unique demolition are genuine. But let us further examine another of my hypotheses, from my previous nuclear demolition article. I made the novel assertion that Larry Silverstein's statement that WTC7 was "pulled", was no slip-up. I believe the PTB have been--from the moment of WTC7's "collapse"--telling the world that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition. As it was happening, we had CBS' Dan Rather say "it's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before when a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down." Note the admission/allusion to conventional controlled demolition. We saw that in the assassination of President Kennedy, Dan Rather upon being the only reporter shown the Zapruder film, stated/lied that JFK went forward in the limo, after the fatal head shot, when in fact, he was flung backwards from the frontal shot (driver). Likewise, anything he said at critical 9/11 events was also scripted for him. Then we had, years later, John Kerry "admit" too that WTC7 was imploded by conventional CD. We know that everything Kerry does is also according to his taskmasters. When he was informed that the Ohio 2004 Presidential election was rigged, and that he was really the next president, and could prove it if he wanted to, he then immediately conceded. He acted out his script.

So why are the Rathers, the Silversteins, the Kerrys of this country so happy to publicly proclaim a conventional CD for WTC7? One possibility must be that it was a nuclear CD. Recall how I noted that whenever the regime admits to something very bad, the real truth is usually vastly worse. In this light, we must ponder why they needed about six or seven hours to demolish WTC7, after the others were destroyed? Admittedly WTC7 harbored the FBI, the Secret Service, the CIA, the IRS, the SEC, the Mayor's Command and Control Center, and according to Guiliani, another federal govt agency that he couldn't name. The latter is often code for the NSA, which officially "does not exist (No Such Agency)". And its charter is itself classified as top secret. Of course, there could always have been federal agencies even more secret than the NSA in WTC7. Some have speculated that WTC7 likely was the "command and control center" for the 9/11 op. Therefore there would have been things in WTC7 that were needed for the destruction of the other buildings of the WTC on 9/11! So it couldn't be demolished until after the others were. And perhaps it took some time to 1) get out things they wanted to save, and 2) set things up so as to absolutely guarantee destruction (vaporization?) of certain other things. This apparently took more time than they expected. How do we surmise this? Because we now know that they told the media to announce that WTC7 came down before it actually did! So we can guess that either 1) There was something important to get out that took longer than they planned for, and/or 2) Making certain something would be completely destroyed took longer than they planned for, and/or 3) outside events occurred that precluded the scheduled destruction of WTC7. The last could be something like isolated military commanders tried to counter the events of 9/11 and the regime needed to counter that with the use of something in WTC7. Of course, only the nuking of the contents of WTC7 would guarantee that said contents were totally unrecoverable (vaporized). Now there is a 4th explanation: the remarkable possibility that the federal perps drilled out sub-basement levels on 9/11 itself. See below.

So in the analysis of the demolition of WTC7 on 9/11, we must consider 1) The possibility that videos are doctored, and need extensive analysis, as the now-proven bogus "plane hit" videos have been; and 2) The probability-especially if the videos are genuine-that WTC7 was demolished through the use of mini-nuke(s) in the lower floors and/or basement levels. Evidence of the unique, ensemble whole (upper) building "collapse" and the very high temperatures and molten steel beneath the rubble of WTC7 for days and weeks afterwards support this nuclear hypothesis. In any case, future inquiry should be directed not to the question of if this was a controlled demolition, but rather whether it was a nuclear demolition, which appears likely.

The following section is to be regarded, at this time, as purely speculation, and is not essential to this article on the demolition of WTC7. This speculative hypothesis (apparently published here for the first time) relates to the nuclear demolition of WTC7, and possibly the other WTC buildings. The following speculation could provide for the necessary nuclear reactors which provided either the explosive nuclear material (Tahil hypothesis), or more likely, IMO, the source for heat GENERATION weeks and months later to explain all the hotpsots, and molten steel observed at such later dates-as late as February 2002. Note that this section is not necessary for the whole of my WTC Nuclear CD Theory, as I have already stated that blasted, unexploded mini-nukes could have provided for the nuclear reacting criticality sites, and resultant hotpsots. I write now of the remarkable Nuclear Borer. A photo of which is here- note it states that 42 levels were bored out by the Nuclear Borer. Here is the public patent granted in 1972. A discussion of the Nuclear Borer is here. I am only concerned with what is spoken of at 2:35 seconds in. I will not comment on the rest of this video. I am only concerned with the depiction and knowledge of the Nuclear Borer. Note that the 1972 public patent states, "The heat source can be electrical or nuclear but for deep drilling is preferably a nuclear reactor." We must note that if this remarkable military device had a PUBLIC patent granted in 1972, it must have been used much earlier. And it is highly likely that 30 years later, in 2001, there would have been much faster, more powerful, smaller versions in existence. Other eyewitnesses have stated that this is precisely the case, and they have been used to quickly construct massive, very deep (thousands of feet), underground, connected bases-but this is beyond the present discussion.

This Nuclear Borer speculative aspect of my WTC nuclear demolition theory perhaps resolves the last piece of the puzzle, as follows. Apparently few people seem to be concerned with the fact that the molten steel at the WTC weeks and months later should require a source for the GENERATION of such heat, weeks and months later. I had hypothesized that these great hotspots (deep) underground were nuclear criticality sites from blasted, but unexploded mini-nukes. But the fact that there are so many of these hotpsots indicates that these may not have been "accidents"/mishaps; rather the resultant hotpsots may have occurred because their source was built into the demolition scheme itself. The nuclear reactors in the Nuclear Borers appear to fill this last piece of the puzzle quite well. But the earlier hypothesis of nukes blasting unexploded other mini-nukes, resulting in nuclear-reacting criticality hotpsots may still hold. In more detail, regarding this Nuclear Borer hypothesis, the requisite 20 or more floors were drilled out in the sub-basement, with stability left in, until that was exploded by the mini-nuke(s) at 5:30. The drilling-out was possibly done that day, after evacuation after the "plane hits". Perhaps this "perfect ensemble collapse" was perpetrated to reinforce the claim that the two towers came down via gravitational pancaking. Maybe the powers that be thought it would be easier for the masses to swallow this, if they "collapsed" at least one of the buildings--which by then had many video cameras trained on it--to look like a gravitational pancaking--which the END result does, as does a superficial understanding/viewing of the WTC7 "collapse" itself. But recall all the chaos in the nuking of WTC 1 and 2. Recall the whole chunks breaking off, and that massive, separated top part of WTC2? Did the WTC1, 2 "collapses" look anything like the perfect ensemble "collapse" of WTC7? Or did WTC7 demolition, look anything like any other demolition? So perhaps the WTC7 demolition fell as such a "perfect ensemble" because it fell into its own perfectly drilled-out footprint! Nukes provide for lots of "uneven" chaos. Perhaps only a perfectly drilled-out hole could have accounted for the perfect ensemble collapse--drilled out by the Nuclear Borer (or successor device).

Let us look at the history of the WTC, and the nuclear Borer. The WTC was built in the late 60's and early 70's, when the Nuclear Borer had already been used for some time in drilling out underground nuclear bomb cavities. One possibility in my Nuclear Borer Speculation is thus that Nuclear Borer(s) could have been used at the WTC during its construction, and left in place for use during its destruction! Another possibility (as per the above) is that one of them--or a more potent, yet smaller, successor device--was very busy underneath WTC7 for some 6-7 hours, drilling out sufficient sub-basement floors to allow the unique ensemble collapse of WTC7 at around 5:30 P.M. This may answer numerous questions: Could this be why they took so long, after the other buildings were destroyed? Could some unexpected problem in the use of the Nuclear Borer be the reason that the PTB gave the media too early a time for the destruction of WTC7? Could the exploded nuclear reactors in several Nuclear Borers, and their still critical components be the underground source for the many hotspots and molten steel weeks and months later? Could the Nuclear Borer's reactors be the fission reactors that William Tahil hypothesized? I always thought his hypothesis had some merit, but didn't quite fit. Unlike Tahil, I believe that mini-nukes (fusion devices) brought down the towers, and possibly all the other WTC buildings and now WTC7 too. And these nukes could have also exploded the reactors in the Nuclear Borers which may have been used to drill out necessary parts of each of the WTC buildings for the other nukes to do their thing. In particular, extensive Nuclear Borer drilling may have occurred some time before WTC7 destruction, perhaps that late morning and afternoon. This allowed for that most unique "falling in its own footprint" "collapse" ever to be seen. WTC7 did fall through its own footprint once demolition began; as many underground floors had been bored out and a mini-nuke set-off underground or at a lower floor above ground initiated its unique destruction. It then indeed proceeded to fall through its already drilled out footprint-deep underground! This ends the Nuclear Borer Speculative Hypothesis, which is not necessary for this WTC7 nuclear demolition article, as a whole.

Finally we have this remarkable WTC7 destruction article, originally in the (formerly lauded) NY Times, no less. For the most part, the article has lie after lie, such as this statement: "[WTC7] burned like a giant torch." Of course, everybody has seen that only a few windows on a couple of floors had relatively minor fires that could easily have been put out. These fires were even on lower floors, allowing for an easier task by fire crews. But the fire department was apparently called off by federal agents. But in the midst of all these now typical NY Times/Regime lies, we have this remarkable slip-up and printing of some truth. Dr. Barnett, a professor of fire protection engineering, said, in speaking of the WTC7 rubble, that the "fire and structural damage would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures." Here, in effect, the NY Times has allowed to be printed a statement from a fire engineering professor, and witness, that some of the steel of WTC7 was vaporized! And he even admits that any alleged fire and structural damage could not have caused this vaporization of steel. In effect, he is telling the world, that only the "extraordinarily high temperatures" of nuclear demolition allowed for that! For when he cited the vaporization of steel, not merely the melting of steel, he has proven the case for nukes, and at WTC7, no less! For completeness I note that the termites, er I mean thermite, of the disinfo physicist is in no way capable of vaporizing steel. It might barely be capable of melting steel, but probably not, as it barely reaches the temperature needed to do this, but since it is an explosive, it doesn't provide the time to even appreciably melt steel, let alone vaporize it. An explosive that attains vastly higher temperatures, as do nukes (up to 100 million degrees), can and does cause vaporization virtually instantly at or near its hypocenter.

The particular WTC 9/11 nuclear demolition hypothesis of the Anonymous Physicist states that what vaporized steel-nuclear fusion bombs, and what caused molten steel up to five months later, according to firefighter/responder Joe O'Toole, were two different mechanisms. The first (vaporized steel) was from nuclear fusion bombs (mini-nukes); and the second (molten steel weeks and months later) was from nuclear criticality sites strewn over the WTC from either damaged, unexploded mini-nukes, or the speculative hypothesis above.

So in the final analysis, regarding the hypothesis of nuclear destruction of WTC 1, 2, 5, 6, and now 7, the evidence herein, and in my earlier articles, including the great surface hotspots (implying far greater temperatures below the surface), and the molten steel witnessed and photographed weeks and months later, and the fire professor's admission of vaporized steel in the WTC7 rubble and his admission that the vaporized steel present proved that "extraordinarily high temperatures" could only have caused that; along with the logistics, and other facts previously cited (such as much EMP evidence), prove that only nuclear explosives and/or nuclear reactor criticalities can account for all the above.
Bookmark and Share

Aliens Really Crashed at Roswell

I'm just sayin'.

If you don't want to believe it, you're missing some important pieces of the puzzle.

I'm just sayin'.
Bookmark and Share

Powered by Blogger