Watch Wingnuts' Heads Explode

9/11 was not an inside job...Bill Clinton says 9/11 not inside job...Bill Clinton is a liar...does not compute...9/11 was not an inside job...Bill Clinton says 9/11 not inside job...Bill Clinton is a liar...does not compute...9/11 was not an inside job...Bill Clinton says 9/11 not inside job...Bill Clinton is a liar...does not compute...9/11 was not an inside job...Bill Clinton says 9/11 not inside job...Bill Clinton is a liar...does not compute...9/11 was not an inside job...Bill Clinton says 9/11 not inside job...Bill Clinton is a liar...does not compute...9/11 was not an inside job...Bill Clinton says 9/11 not inside job...Bill Clinton is a liar...does not compute...

sssssssssssss...KABOOM!

The 9/11 Commission Was Flawed?

No-- say it ain't so!

I'm certainly hugely relieved-- apparently this new account of the commission will "achieve what none of the crackpot conspiracy theorists have managed to do so far: put the 9/11 Commission in disrepute."

Dagblam those crackpot conspiracy theorists!

Re-Post: Bent and Charred Parking Meter North of WTC7

The photo below is from the Meyerowitz "Aftermath" book.



Meyerowitz's caption-- "I often wondered, as I walked along Barclay Street, what it was that did this to the parking meters. There were at least eight of them, all leaning over the sidewalk at a thirty-degree angle, their bodies charred and their plastic faces melted away." (emphasis added)

Barclay Street is just to the NORTH of WTC7, and is on the opposite side of WTC7 from where the WTC towers were.

This parking meter evidence is as close as Meyerowitz comes to questioning the official story. But it is a obviously evidence that goes strongly against the official story. It essentially proves a very hot, very strong blast wave from WTC7 -- and thus almost certainly is proof of demolition.

Bush Administration Moral Relativism

Michael Mukasey edition.

John Negroponte edition.

John Yoo edition.

Rats Fleeing a Sinking Ship?

28 GOP congressional representatives have announced plans to retire in advance of the 2008 election.

The Lovely Folks of the Air Force

Apparently they feel like they're not getting their fair share of the defense budget.

And uh oh, the Navy has just upped the ante:

U.S. Navy Set to Break Electromagnetic Railgun Record

The Office of Naval Research will test fire an electromagnetic railgun (EMRG) at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, Va. on Jan. 31, 2008, between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. EST. The gun will be fired at over 10 megajoules of energy – a power level never before achieved by an EMRG.

It's Okay

It's really OKAY for those supporters of the official story to admit that some things about 9/11 are a little strange.

You don't have to give up the whole game, you just have to admit that certain things like "collapsing" buildings and "planes" being completely swallowed by buildings don't look like what one would completely expect.

It's really okay to think that.

It's okay.

The Editors Explain Blogging

In the foreword to their new book "Liberal Fascism".

More liberal fascism here and here.

Jutting Dust Clouds Reveal Explosives

The following are a set of screenshots taken from this video of the early stages of the south WTC tower coming down.





Here I have marked in different colors some of the clouds that jut out in these same three shots:




You should be able to see that two of the clouds (orange and green) grow in size relatively slowly during this time frame of the three shots, whereas the red and blue clouds suddenly appear in an"explosive" manner.

Since the green cloud is in between the blue and red puffs, it is very hard to claim that these suddenly appearing clouds are simply due to an advancing collapse/crushing front (though I'm sure that won't stop some shill from claiming that).

It's also rather hard to say that the red cloud is from some suddenly crushed drywall, given its location in relation to the falling top (though I'm sure that won't stop some shill from claiming that).

I'd be interested in an explanation for these suddenly jutting clouds where they are not from explosives.

The "P" Hole

This is a nicely done montage of different photos of the Pentagon hit before the "collapse", showing a good view of the overall damage to the facade:

(click to enlarge)

That hole in the second story is 17.5 feet wide, if we assume 12 foot floor heights.

I see several anomalies here that are inconsistent with a 757 hit (seen better in the enlarged version).

A couple of big anomalies are the lack of marks from the impact of the huge 757 tail section, and that windowless section on the right hand side that simply looks bombed out on the first and second floor. A third big anomaly is the square hole on the second floor with the center piece dangling down.

See how many others you can spot!

UPDATE: This is what you need to believe to have the official story work:



One problem is this:

The bent column marked above would have (officially) been hit by one of the strongest parts of the plane, the wingroot (and possibly the engine depending how exactly you line it up), and it makes little sense that other columns would be blown away but not this one. This is even more nonsensical when the (official) angled trajectory of the plane means that the right (starboard) wingroot would hit before the other wingroot, meaning a bigger impact and theoretically causing significant impedance to the entry of the plane.

Of course there are lots of other things that don't make sense here, but that won't stop the shills from saying that 'of course a Boeing 757 hit here, it's ridiculous to think otherwise'.

I do like the original picture I posted because it takes away the plane that is so often super-imposed on these images and forces you to think about what would cause this damage. I am curious if someone took this picture around to people and polled them as to what happened, how many would say a plane crashed there.

The Clintons

I'm no fan of them, but I do find the double standard shown by this Frank Rich column annoying. Basically, he is saying that if Hillary gets the nomination, every little bullshit financial deal of theirs will be thoroughly probed out the wazoo by the media-- looking for any hint of scandal.

Which is all fine on the level of the media acting as a watchdog.

I just wish the "MSM" showed the same investigative gusto in going after Bush/Cheney financial deals-- and 9/11 for that matter.

But of course, everyone should realize by now the media HAS an agenda, and carries water for the PTB.

UPDATE: FWIW, I find it hard to get so upset about Bill's recent behavior regarding Obama and the SC primary (summarized nicely here). I find Bill's blowhard refutation of 9/11 being an inside job probably the most annoying thing he's done recently.

There's a Mistake I Keep Making Over and Over Again:

that the "official story shills" who come here (day after day after day) can be reasoned with in any way, shape or form.

While much of me wants to reject the idea that the OSS's who come here are in fact professional operatives, it's quite hard to come to any other conclusion after seeing them operate for a while.

But for some reason-- I'm not sure why, perhaps because it's hard to understand these people myself-- I keep thinking I can reason with them.

Part of it relates to having an open comments section. It invites these "entities". But the blog doesn't feel quite right without open comments, either. So it's a problem.

It Is a Moral Imperitive to Give the Benefit of the Doubt to Conspiracies

Simply put, the elites of the world are powerful enough to do almost anything-- especially to do things in their own interests and contrary to the interests of regular folk, and then to get away with it.

They should NEVER be given the benefit of the doubt about ANYTHING having to do with money, war or both.

Given the immorality of these folks, it is our moral duty to distrust what they do-- and what happens under their rule.

Is this hard to understand?

9/11 Amateur Part 3

Some good stuff here-- particularly on the Fairbanks video:


There are several points made that I think are flawed-- the video maker needlessly keeps mixing in real smoking guns with red herrings and trivially explained questions, IMO-- but it's still worth a look.

One of the best points, I think, is questioning how Fairbanks chose that bizarre angle. Fairbanks clearly is not a midget.

I like how Connie Chung says an "American Airlines" jet hit the south tower...

"9/11 FAQ"

Some common sense for the shills to ignore or pretend is ridiculous.


Via Ningen.

Those Clouds Are Just Smashed Up Drywall

Yeah-- that's the ticket!

Watch the Corner of the Tower Explode

AHEAD of -- not in response to-- the falling tower top.

Look just about one second in, there is a explosive burst-- sharply jutting clouds of dust -- right at the corner below the tipping top.

Amazing Photo Showing How the Top of WTC2 Was Shredded in Mid-Air

Here we absolutely massive chunks of outer columns being blown away from the tower:

What else could cause this but explosive force?

The other question is-- where is the STUFF that was behind these walls? What could propel thousands of tons of steel outward but either leave everything else behind or turn it into dust in mid-air? And what IS producing all the dust if not explosives?

Pic from Plaguepuppy's site.

Related video here.

Disappearing Sledgehammers: Common Theme on 9/11

Four plane-shaped sledgehammers that pounded plane-shaped holes into buildings and the ground then disappear; two tower top sledgehammers that pound tower bottoms into dust, then grind themselves into dust.

Phunny physics!

Why Is It So Difficult to Count Votes Accurately?

And why do officials keep minimizing inaccurate counts?

Pure Obscenity, Pure Insanity

Bush asks for $193 billion for war funding for 2008.

Wall St Execs Collect $33 Billion Bonuses

But, you have to realize they took 5% less than last year!

"No Planers" Are Stupid

Pics from here.

Thanks to DF for the link!

The Coming Economic Meltdown and Some Advice

Good article from Mike Adams.

Here's an older article sounding similar themes, but gets a little deeper into the problem.

(thanks to Rob for the links)

Definitions of Fascism

Some interesting reading.

Obviously "fascism" is a bit of a catch-all phrase, whose meaning is in the eye of the beholder-- sort of like knowing pornography when you see it.

But some definitions hold up better than others, and I would say fascism pretty clearly tends to fit conservatism much more than liberalism.

In All Likelihood, Hillary Is the Next President

Can't see any Repub winning this year, period-- and it looks like Hillary has the best chance of winning the Dem nomination.

And all the crimes of the past eight years, including 9/11, will be swept under the rug in the spirit of unification-- to our eternal shame.

An apparent change of leadership by the powers that be is just enough to keep most people happy. And the media will LOVE picking on Hillary and gossiping about Bill.

The future is clear: meet the new boss, same as the old boss, only wearing a pants suit!

UPDATE: I often wonder if the medias avowed dislike for the Clintons is actually some sort of reverse psychology trick on the public to help ease the Clintons into the White House again.

Or, perhaps as the old saying goes-- any press is good press.

Firefighter: Giuliani 'ran like a coward on 9/11'

(nelson) Ha ha! (/nelson)

It is fascinating how 9/11 doesn't seem to have the magic effect for Giuliani's presidential campaign that so many thought would be there.

Wheeee! Free Money!

They're practically giving away US dollars! We're saved for sure from that nasty credit crunch and recession!

It's All About the Nukes

While madmen propose to use nuclear weapons to stop nuclear proliferation, the real COVERT GOAL of the powers that be is, in fact, to spread nuclear weapons technology:

The paper now reports that they are able to corroborate an apparent FBI cover-up of documents detailing an investigation of the theft and sale of nuclear secrets to agents working for Turkey and Israel, who in turn shared the secrets with Pakistan, who in turn may have shared those secrets with Iran, North Korea, Libya, and possibly even al-Qaeda.

New Hampshire Recount Update

Bradblog deserves a lot of credit for covering this issue so carefully.

The American Empire Seems Poised for Collapse

Obviously, most of the US elite are pretending otherwise, but our current financial predicament predicts that the American empire cannot be sustained much longer. Which may be one unintended good outcome of the Bush presidency, as hard as it will be for this country in some ways.

Of course, the true Powers That Be don't care much about the suffering of the average American citizen-- they owe no allegiance to any country, and they enjoy inflicting pain.

UPDATE: Some related discussion here.

Reality and the Purdue Cartoon

Here's a video of the Purdue cartoon of the WTC hit (complete video embedded below), and here are two screen grabs of the hole they say was made by the plane in tower 1:





Here was the hole in WTC1 on 9/11:

(click to enlarge)

So the Purdue cartoon fails on every level:

1) Simple reality that a real plane would not slip past spandrel plates like a ghost. Simple reality that aluminum sheets would not slice through thick steel column like a knife through butter. Simple reality that steel spandrel plates would not wave in the wind like paper. I mean, what the fuck??? The government paid them for this crap?

2) Common logic in terms of how an aluminum plane would act when crashing into a steel and concrete tower and how a fuel-laden wings would behave when crashing into a steel and concrete tower

3) REALITY in terms of how there was a massive explosion at the point of entry (as shown in actual videos of the 1st hit) that they do not model

4) Reality in terms of the hole that was produced in the tower by the "event". Why are the spandrel plates so prominent and the massive steel columns like toothpicks?

It seems to me, and I know I am just a whacked out conspiracy blogger, but it seems to me that the money that Purdue spent on this computer model would be much better spent trying to figure out how (or even if) a Boeing 767 crashing into the tower could produce this odd hole in the tower that was seen with the column sections dangling down blocking the entry hole and the 97th floor blown away somehow.

I Am Not Going to Blame All the Troubles of the US on George W Bush

But what's clear is that he took a country with some serious problems in 2001-- and made everything much much worse.

We're tragically worse off in so many ways-- even putting aside 9/11 and deep conspiracy.

Financially and monetarily, we're in absolutely horrible shape. Militarily, we're in terrible shape. Energy-wise, we're reduced to begging Saudi princes for low oil prices. Our foreign policy is a shambles. We've lost any moral high ground we ever had with the disgustingly Orwellian "war on terror". We spend an obscene amount of money on defense compared to other countries. Health-care, personal income, personal security, the Stock market, employment rate, oil prices, personal freedoms, social equality-- who can honestly claim that anything has improved under Bush?

Even in the absence of the "inside job" truth about 9/11, you can't blame much of these troubles on "al Qaeda", as it is obvious those guys never could have done a fraction of the damage that this country has done to itself.

In 2000, I knew Bush would be bad for the country-- I just had no idea HOW bad.

Iran Framed by the US for Terrorist Attack in Argentina

What a fascinating article. If only US reporters would examine the 9/11 evidence so carefully.

In fact, the Bush Administration's manipulation of the Argentine bombing case is perfectly in line with its long practice of using distorting and manufactured evidence to build a case against its geopolitical enemies.

After spending several months interviewing officials at the US Embassy in Buenos Aires familiar with the Argentine investigation, the head of the FBI team that assisted it and the most knowledgeable independent Argentine investigator of the case, I found that no real evidence has ever been found to implicate Iran in the bombing. Based on these interviews and the documentary record of the investigation, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the case against Iran over the AMIA bombing has been driven from the beginning by US enmity toward Iran, not by a desire to find the real perpetrators.

While the Extreme Pulverization and Compaction of WTC Debris Helps Prove Massively Powerful Demolition--

it's really the China Syndrome and related Ground Zero aftermath effects that prove that the WTC towers were destroyed by nuclear devices.

I highly recommend everyone to read and re-read the articles at the WTC China Syndrome site. They are some of the most original and most important writing anywhere on the nuclear destruction of the WTC and the subsequent cover-up.

Most People Are Clueless

(EXPANDED 1/19/07)

Note-- I don't mean clueless as in "dumb", I mean clueless as not being informed.

And they are not just clueless about 9/11 but about POLITICS in general.

Even "educated" people-- people I know with advanced degrees.

They just don't care and/or aren't interested or do care but have no depth of knowledge because they are too pre-occupied with other things.

Nor are most people very analytical, to probe beneath the surface of things.

And so this is how everything gets controlled. Most people still get their information and news from TV and radio or mainstream internet news sites-- and they believe what they hear.

Hardly anyone, relative to the population as a whole, reads alternative sites and blogs. Between politicians not dealing with deeper issues, and the corporate/mockingbird media not covering important issues, this is how serious crimes get covered up. The attempt to grant retro-active immunity to telecoms that were involved in illegal spying by the Bush admin. is a clear non-conspiracy example. Both political parties with the press have effectively neutered this issue such that most Americans have no idea what is going on-- even though it is an important issue relating to law-breaking and civil liberties and political corruption. Rigging the vote is yet another example. How much has this guy's story been publicized, despite it's obvious importance?

How many people truly understand that on the most important issues, there are effectively no differences between the two political parties?

We are controlled everywhere that it matters.

THIS is a major reason why 9/11 gets no traction.

Now, a large percentage of people, bless them, probably do have some innate distrust of politicians. But these people are still hindered by the problems I noted above.

The one area of hope is young people-- who are much more open-minded and internet-dependent. But this demographic is no doubt being intensely wooed by various factions of the powers that be, away from TRUE deeper understanding of the way the world works, by the multitude of distractions out there-- video games, popular culture (movies and music), celebrity scandals, Youtube, Facebook, etc.

Finally, chances are, if you made your way to this obscure site, to read this obscure post, you're NOT clueless-- particularly if you're a regular reader! You're probably either extremely enlightened, or a professional shill. (smiley face)

"Holey" Weirdness, Batman!

Many many weird things in this high-res image of the WTC1 hole:

(click to enlarge)

Here's what is supposed to have happened:


Among other questions is-- what happened to the middle of the 97th floor? It wasn't even hit officially by much of anything, and it's wiped out.

UPDATE: Sorry-- image link was buggered initially. I think it is fixed now.

UPDATE 2: The thing that gets me here is how yes, in some ways, this looks just like a 767 sliced into the side of the tower. But in other ways, it makes no sense at all! I don't think the image is faked-- it is far too complex and fits with other images. But there is just weird, freaky stuff there. And this close-up also is just very strange-- for instance the stuff that looks like knotted rope around the OUTSIDE of some of the knocked in columns:

(click to enlarge)

The Never Ending Story: Spouting Complete Bullshit to Support the Official 9/11 Story

The US Director of National Intelligence asserts that the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, were caused by weak domestic wiretapping laws.

Vice Admiral Mike McConnell, former head of the National Security Agency who was appointed DNI in 2007 by President Bush, spoke today to a group of students in St. Mary's City, Missouri, about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a federal statute that outlines procedures for electronic surveillance by the US intelligence community.

Referencing alleged 9/11 conspirator Mohamed Atta, McConnell said Atta was trackable by US intel until he actually entered the United States. "He's now a US person," said McConnell, with all the rights and privileges of ordinary American citizens.

Inside the US, McConnell continued, Atta would be "invisible to your intelligence community. As long he doesn't break the law, law enforcement can't conduct surveillance, [because] they don't have probable cause."

Terror network al-Qaeda understood that, McConnell then said, "and that's why 9/11 happened, in my view."

There are so many things wrong here-- the major thing is that Atta from start to finish is just an intelligence legend obfuscating the ugly truth of 9/11.

The superficial problem is that McConnell seems to be saying that the authorities REALLY knew Atta was trouble but couldn't surveill him because of (silly) laws-- when there is NO evidence for this-- that they gave up on tracking him because of surveillance laws. If they had true suspicions, they could have had someone watch him to gain more evidence for a warrant. If they had any evidence on him, they still could have applied for a warrant.

McConnell seems to be arguing for spying on everyone for whom there is any hint of suspicion-- but this is illogical because there will be too many false leads for this to ever be an effective strategy (not to mention those pesky civil liberties issues). This also assumes that there are real terrorists out there, which at this point in time EVERYONE with any sense knows is a bogus assumption.

So McConnell is just spouting crap, all the way around. But, what do expect from the head of the spy agencies?

UPDATE: I think most likely, McConnell's current bullshit is because of this complete bullshit-- trying to get the FISA bill passed AND give the telecoms immunity from their lawbreaking.

Election Integrity

Yeah, it's a pretty quaint concept these days.

But here are a couple of important and relevant articles:

1) very good evidence for rigging (towards the Repubs) in the 2006 election

2) good piece about the struggle to do a recount in New Hampshire

Encounter Between Iranian Ships and a Navy Vessel Was a Deliberate Fabrication?

Say it ain't so!

There Are No Such Things as UFOs

These people must be loonies-- I'm sure it was just an airliner as that military guy says. The military never lies about these things, I hope you know.

Fairbanks FOIA Request Denied

A few months back I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the FBI for a high-quality copy of the Evan Fairbanks audio and video tape that they confiscated from him on 9/11.

Yesterday, I finally got a response from the FBI FOIA department.

The letter said that:

the material you requested is located in an investigative file which is exempt from disclosure pursuant to Title 5, United States Code, Section 552, subsection (b)(7)(A).

So they are not denying that they have the material, but saying they won't give it out. So what is this legal excuse they give?

Title 5, United States Code, Section 552, subsection (b)(7)(A) -- this section says why certain materials may be exempt from FOIA requests--

(b)(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could be reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings

Well, that's real useful. So, somehow, releasing a copy of this video is going to interfere with a future investigation? Of what? Of whom? Osama bin Laden? Yeah right.

Their exemption seems pretty bogus to me.

I'm not sure how worth it is to pursue this.

Somewhat interestingly, I got the same exact response this guy got from the FBI when he requested material relating to a bin Laden video.

Honey, I Shrunk the Economy! (And all I have to show for it are these crappy approval ratings)

Bush's reverse Midas touch strikes again*:

Citigroup announced a steep cut in its stock dividend and another big investment by foreign investors on Tuesday after taking more write-downs related to subprime securities and posting a $9.83 billion loss for the fourth quarter.

Beginning what is expected to be a grim week for financial company earnings, Citigroup said it was writing down $22.2 billion because of soured mortgage-related investments and bad loans. The bank is also cutting its dividend by 41 percent and obtaining a $12.5 billion cash infusion to strengthen its balance sheet, including big investments by its former chairman, Sanford I. Weill, and the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation. Facing rising expenses and deepening losses, Citigroup is expected to embark on a major cost-cutting campaign that could result in at least 4,000 layoffs. And thousands more could be in the offing in the coming months.

Stock market continues to plunge-- over 200 down right now for the Dow. Not a pretty picture.

*Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not ALL Bush's fault. I just couldn't resist the post title.

UPDATE: Not a good day for Bush-- new low approval rating.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy...

UPDATE 2: Housing starts at 16-year low.

Inflation up most in 18 years, too.

UPDATE 3: Merril-Lynch posts biggest quarterly loss ever.

UPDATE 4: Jan. 17, 2007, Dow drops over 300. Rough times ahead.

It's the Entropy, Stupid

Far out, man!

"The Powers That Be" Leaving the USA?

This seems ripe with symbolism:

In the annals of maritime history, the Queens’ sailing was momentous. It was the first time in the 168-year history of the Cunard Line, the owner of the liners, that it had three ships named after British queens in the same port at the same time. The company arranged the ships’ schedules so that they departed from New York City ports simultaneously.

The Queens’ meeting, witnessed by thousands on shore and on board, will also be their last, company officials said.

“They are not programmed to meet in any other port,” Cunard’s president, Carol Marlow, said during an afternoon news conference at Pier 88 in Manhattan, with the docked Queen Victoria visible in background. “This is a spine-tingling time.”

Via Piglipstick.

Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11

Patriots Question 9/11.

Al-CIA-duh Not Just for Brown People Anymore

OMG! ANYONE could be a terrorist now!

Wanker of the Week: DNI Director Mike McConnell

"You know what waterboarding is?" [McConnell] asked. "You lay somebody on this table, or put them in an inclined position, and put a washcloth over their face, and you just drip water right here" -- he pointed to his nostrils. "Try it! What happens is, water will go up your nose. And so you will get the sensation of potentially drowning. That's all waterboarding is."

I asked if he considered that torture.

McConnell refused to answer directly, but he said, "My own definition of torture is something that would cause excruciating pain."

Did waterboarding fit that description?

Referring to his teen-age days as a lifeguard, he said, "I know one thing. I'm a water-safety instructor, but I cannot swim without covering my nose. I don't know if it's some deviated septum or mucus membrane, but water just rushes in." For him, he said, "waterboarding would be excruciating. If I had water draining into my nose, oh God, I just can't imagine how painful! Whether it's torture by anybody else's definition, for me it would be torture."

I queried McConnell again, later, about his views on waterboarding, since this exchange seemed to suggest that he personally condemned it. He rejected that interpretation. "You can do waterboarding lots of different ways," he said. "I assume you can get to the point that a person is actually drowning." That would certainly be torture, he said. The definition didn't seem very different from John Yoo's. The reason that he couldn't be more specific, McConnell said, is that "if it ever is determined to be torture, there will be a huge penalty to be paid for anyone engaging in it."

The AP's headline gives the impression that McConnell condemned waterboarding. He didn't. He's saying that if you have a deviated septum, then waterboarding is torture -- because it just feels like you're drowning. If not (and the interrogator doesn't go overboard), then apparently it's a-ok. It seems to be an easy distinction for him. The subtlety might be lost on others.

This Yahoo/Reuters article at least sees the distinction:

Waterboarding would be torture to me: U.S. spy chief
By Deborah Zabarenko
Sun Jan 13, 3:51 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. intelligence chief Mike McConnell said in a magazine interview that waterboarding would be torture if it was used against him personally, but stopped short of condemning the controversial interrogation technique.

Privacy: What a Quaint 18th Century Concept

National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell is drawing up plans for cyberspace spying that would make the current debate on warrantless wiretaps look like a "walk in the park," according to an interview published in the New Yorker's print edition today.

Debate on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act “will be a walk in the park compared to this,” McConnell said. “this is going to be a goat rope on the Hill. My prediction is that we’re going to screw around with this until something horrendous happens.”*

The article, which profiles the 65-year-old former admiral appointed by President George W. Bush in January 2007 to oversee all of America's intelligence agencies, was not published on the New Yorker's Web site.

McConnell is developing a Cyber-Security Policy, still in the draft stage, which will closely police Internet activity.

"Ed Giorgio, who is working with McConnell on the plan, said that would mean giving the government the authority to examine the content of any e-mail, file transfer or Web search," author Lawrence Wright pens.

“Google has records that could help in a cyber-investigation, he said," Wright adds. "Giorgio warned me, 'We have a saying in this business: ‘Privacy and security are a zero-sum game.'"

*Translated: if you don't believe us, just wait until you see what we can do.

Can Someone Please Take Bush to the Local Chapter of "Warmongerers Anonymous"?

This is ridiculous:

But in private conversations with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last week, the president all but disowned the document, said a senior administration official who accompanied Bush on his six-nation trip to the Mideast. "He told the Israelis that he can't control what the intelligence community says, but that [the NIE's] conclusions don't reflect his own views" about Iran's nuclear-weapons program, said the official, who would discuss intelligence matters only on the condition of anonymity.

Plus, I heard Bush gave a little speech yesterday about the dangers of Iran...

CBS - Bush: Iran Threatens The World's Security

ABC - No Nukes? Iran Still a Menace, Bush Says

CNN - Bush: Iran threatens world security

MSNBC - Bush: Iran threatens global security

Yahoo - Bush: Iran threatens global security

AP/Raw Story - Bush insists Iran biggest terror sponsor

Interestingly, this morning's headlines about the speech in the major dailies seemed to have been tempered a bit:

NYTimes - Bush Urges Unity Against Iran

WaPo - Bush Urges United Action Against Iran

LaTimes - Bush criticizes Iran in pro-democracy speech

Did Hillary Cheat in New Hampshire?

New evidence.

I'm not a Hillary or Obama fan-- I don't trust either one-- so this is more in the general interest of general election integrity. Certainly, any one who has been following this topic knows there is plenty of precedent for voting "irregularities".

What Would Go Through My Mind If I Were an Academic Engineer Thinking About Writing a Paper Espousing Demolition of the WTC

Considering it is a politically sensitive topic--

1) what will my peers think of me?

2) will this affect my job/my career (my family)?

3) will this help my career, help me get promoted, help me get grants?

4) will this affect my future ability to get federal research money?

5) is this worth the potential negative consequences for me and my family?

6) is this worth my time and effort?

Considering how much time and training it takes to get into an academic position, who is really going to risk their career on something like this?

Related post-- "Why Haven't More Scientists and Engineers Spoken Out About the Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center?"

Update: all these reasons listed above would keep someone from even probing very far into the issue. If the scientist did enough research (got past the disinfo) to be convinced of demolition, then they also have to worry about being harmed themselves by a murderous regime-- or their family being harmed, or their career being intentionally destroyed.

Prescott Bush and the Nazis

George W. really needs to learn his family's history a bit better.

And he might also think that when he says the US should have bombed Auschwitz, that his words might be misconstrued.

Think for Yourself and Don't Automatically Trust the Experts

This is really the best advice I can possibly give.

Evilly Incompetent or Competently Evil?

This is the eternal question presented to us by the Bush administration.

Today's example: Condi Rice and the State Dept's handling of the Bhutto return and subsequent assassination.

One could make a case this was all just stupid incompetence.

But then again, given that Pakistan is the nexus for al Qaeda/al-CIA-duh and the bogus hunt for Osama bin Laden, it's possible getting Bhutto out of the way was all part of the plan-- to pretend to promote democracy in Pakistan but then not upset the careful balance of intelligence interests there.

US Navy Admits to Misleading Video Editing in the Iranian Speedboat Kerfuffle

Mere words cannot express how deeply shocked I am at this revelation.

Shorter Critique of Bazant, the Master Mechanical Engineer

For his WTC work he:

1) used a completely improbable assumption for floor collisions-- perfectly inelastic

2) used a clearly false assumption in setting up equations for collapse-- crush up, then crush down-- when logic and the physical evidence shows the opposite

3) used an improperly large average particle size to calculate energy required to pulverize concrete-- thus vastly under-estimating the energy required

4) failed to account for and calculate the efficiency of concrete pulverization

5) failed to account for energy required to propel massive steel columns away from the towers

6) initially failed to account for energy needed to expel tons of concrete dust

7) used a flawed and completely unrealistic model of symmetrical column buckling to calculate energy involved in initial floor collapse...


But I'm just a dumb blogger and he's the expert, so let's just trust him-- right?

Three Quick Points About the WTC Events

1) Collapse is at best, by scientific standards, an unproven theory

2) Any reasonable and dispassionate viewer of videos of the WTC destruction cannot rule out demolition as an mechanism for what happened

3) A building collapse is not particle physics-- abstract mathematical models are not needed to understand it

Faked Provocations at Sea

Too freaking much!

The SAME DAY after it was reported that the Gulf of Tonkin incident (which led to a massive escalation of the Vietnam war), was absolutely an admitted FAKE-- the US reports an encounter with Iranian speedboats (official video here).

Today the Iranians claim the video was FAKED! (NYTimes here)

Reminds me a bit of the story of the boy who cried wolf-- the US being the boy in this case.

I'm not sure what Iran was doing-- sending little speedboats around warships isn't exactly a huge provocation, though obviously after the USS Cole incident the navy could be rightfully nervous. Apparently there was some threat made over the radio, and the whole story on that is unclear. On some reactionary talk radio show this morning, the host was all in a bother about this incident, and some guy said the Iranian boats were dropping boxes in the water that could have been explosives. I couldn't see that myself in the video.

UPDATE: I also have to wonder how much Iran took into account the 9/11 video fakery in making the claim of faked video....

Where's the Sledgehammer, Part 3

This antenna was on top of WTC1 and fell 1300 feet to the ground-- it was found on Liberty Street south of the WTC complex:


Why isn't it as smashed up as the debris on top of the WTC1 debris pile here?


Is it possible that falling at near free-fall speed 1300 feet to a hard surface, by itself, is not enough to completely mangle building components?

Is it POSSIBLE???

Going Through a Wall and Leaving a Silhouette-Shaped Hole

Check out when Lemmy drives his motorcycle through the wall!


He leaves a silhouette-shaped hole-- and doesn't disintegrate afterwards!

Motorhead!

Always liked these guys. Here they are doing Barack Obama's theme song (via Sadly No!):



Here's a real classic:

WHERE'S MY CHEAP IRAQI OIL?!?!

Jan. 7 (Bloomberg) -- The fastest-growing bet in the oil market these days is that the price of crude will double to $200 a barrel by the end of the year.

Why Don't People Believe Roger Clemens When He Says He Never Used Steroids?

I saw a poll on ESPN where only 25% of respondents believed Clemens was telling the truth.

40% thought he was lying, 35% not sure.*

Such a cynicism!**

I wonder if these same people who doubt Clemens also doubt if the gov't is telling the truth about 9/11?


*This was on TV. At this site, if you take the poll, it was even worse-- only 20% believed Clemens and only 20% were unsure-- and 60% openly thought Clemens was lying when I took the poll.

**Note-- it might have something to do with the fact that his story stinks (just like the gov'ts 9/11 story).

HUGE WTC SMOKING GUN: RENOVATION OF "PLANE HIT" FLOORS PRIOR TO 9/11

RENOVATION OF "PLANE HIT" FLOORS PRIOR TO 9/11 REMINISCENT OF PENTAGON RENOVATION IN "PLANE HIT" SECTION PRIOR TO 9/11.

NIST report NCSTAR1-6A, page xxxvii (Via 911 Blogger):

In the years between 1995 and 2001, thermal protection was upgraded in a number of the floors affected by the fires on September 11, 2001. Specifically, in WTC 1, floors 92 through 100 and 102 were upgraded; and in WTC 2, floors 77, 78, 88, 89, 92, 96 and 97 were upgraded.

These renovations covered the almost exact same floors as where the "planes" hit-- particularly they spanned the "plane-hit" floors perfectly for WTC1 (94-98), and covered the lowest floor of the "plane-hit" floors (78-84) for WTC2.

Simply put, this is too much of a coincidence to be mere chance: that the same regions of both towers where the demolition started following the "plane hits" were the same regions that were recently "upgraded".

Renovations would have been perfect times to plant explosives and other devices that could mimic plane hits and subsequent fires.


The renovations would fit together, again, with a plan for 9/11 years in the making.

Speaking of the WTC1 "plane-hit", this new video is very good and quite relevant.

TV Fakery Goes Nuclear

in Czechoslovakia.

Video here.

Pretty wild stuff!


(Thanks goes to reader SW for the tip.)

NYTimes Takes on the Voting Machine Problem

Worth a read. Not surprisingly, they mitigate the overall severity of the problem, IMO, and of course refuse to seriously consider any rigging conspiracy-- but still an interesting article.

Obamania!

It seems to be quite the phenomenon-- he seems to have the cult of personality required to be a winning candidate. In many ways, Obama reminds me of Bill Clinton-- important parallels are the absence of his natural father when growing up, the legal background, the charisma, the brains, the drug-use, the ability to appeal to blacks. What seems to be missing from Obama is the womanizing, thankfully.

His politics doesn't thrill me, but a black "liberal" president would give something of a lift for the country, no matter how doomed we may be.

His mother's genes may even make him viable for the presidency for those interested in blood-lines (not me-- the powers that be).

And... this Frank Rich column is actually pretty good-- hard to argue with it.

And also, on the Republican side, I have to admit Mike Huckabee is kind of refreshing, even if I couldn't imagine voting for him.

UPDATE: I forgot this story-- that Obama does have the right genes as he is related to Dick Cheney.

Where's the Sledeghammer-- Part 2

See the post below for the context of this question. The "sledgehammer" refers to the upper chunk of tower that crushed down the huge lower part of the tower to ground level, completely pulverizing everything inside and massively compacting the debris.

The conundrum is that the "sledgehammer" is missing from the top of the debris pile-- instead we just see massively compacted and shredded debris.

Here are the three basic answers for "where's the sledeghammer?"

1) Bazant would say that after "crushing down" the lower tower, the sledgehammer underwent "crush up" as it met the debris pile. However, we have shown that Bazant's explanations are bogus. Briefly, there is no evidence that the sledgehammer even survived the downward destruction, and it defies logic to believe that even if it existed, that this powerful sledgehammer would compact down to the same degree as the lower debris-- simply by caving in on itself as it hits the debris pile.

2) A non-standard explanation-- but still consistent with a collapse mechanism-- for where the sledgehammer went is that it was destroyed in early stages of the collapse, but as it broke apart it initiated a collapse chain reaction such that the tower broke apart progressively during the collapse-- chunks of building progressively breaking down lower floors. The problem with this explanation is two-fold. First, it is hard to see how the collapse would progress symmetrically and to the massive degree seen-- and also produce so much pulverization. Second, it seems impossible that this type of collapse would proceed as rapidly as was seen for the WTC since it is a more piece-meal form of collapse-- bit by bit breaking down. (This type of action is actually what would be expected for a REAL collapse.)

3) The sledgehammer was not the upper chunk of tower but was in fact powerful demolition charges placed throughout the towers. This is the simplest explanation, and the one that can explain the complete picture-- which is why it simply has to be what happened on 9/11.

Where's the Sledgehammer?

Here we can see the top of the WTC1 debris pile, very shortly after 9/11, before the debris has been taken away:


Here's a close-up of the core area:


Here is a further zoom-in:


Here is a another zoom-in:


Why is the debris on top of the pile so shredded and compacted?

Where is the top of the tower that supposedly drove the collapse?

Where is the freaking sledgehammer that did this immense damage?

Rudy!

Wow, just wow:

9/11 Commission Cries Foul Over CIA Tape Destruction

Glenn Greenwald says "It's hard to imagine a more serious scandal than this", showing a severe lack of imagination on his part.

But this is an important story nonetheless. Clearly the CIA has destroyed evidence relating to 9/11-- this may get people wondering more about 9/11 and governmental involvement. In a normal political system, it should lead to an investigation and major trouble for Bush and Cheney.

On the other hand, it's clear that at best, this is just another in a long line of limited hangouts about 9/11-- a hangout that will most likely not bring us closer to the awful truth.

The Ol' Al-CIA-duh Osama Reverse Psychology Trick

Works every time!

DUBAI (Reuters) - Gulf Arab oil producers may be less likely to drop their currency pegs to the weak U.S. dollar after Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden criticized dollar pegs as "unjust and arbitrary", economists said on Sunday.

NIST Uses Same Bogus Assumptions as Bazant

Previously I described how Bazant uses a false assumption to explain how the WTC towers could have undergone global collapse. Briefly, he assumes that a collapse occurs by even failures of columns across a whole story of the tower-- essentially an impossible proposition (even Bazant admits this is very improbable).

Here, in this recent FAQ page, NIST uses the same flawed assumption: that a collapse of one floor/story would put an equal load all along the lower floor that would overwhelm that floor's supports and lead to global collapse:

Thus, the total vertical load on a floor outside the core can be estimated by multiplying the floor area (31,000 ft2) by the gravitational load (80 lb/ft2), which yields 2,500,000 lb (this is a conservative load estimate since it ignores the weight contribution of the heavier mechanical floors at the top of each WTC Tower). By dividing the total vertical connection capacity (29,000,000 lb) of a floor by the total vertical load applied to the connections (2,500,000 lb), the number of floors that can be supported by an intact floor is calculated to be a total of 12 floors or 11 additional floors.

Again, the point in this type of analysis is NOT that a large number of floors suddenly dropping as a block evenly down to the next floor couldn't lead to collapse-- it likely would. The point is an even, symmetrical collapse could never happen in the absence of explosive demolition taking out all the columns on one floor at the same time!

A heat-induced collapse by its nature is going to be ASYMMETRIC.

There are really four basic critical questions in considering whether what was seen with the WTC was a fire-induced collapse:
1) were the fires hot enough to lead to structural failure?
2) could this structural failure lead to symmetric global collapse?
3) would a global collapse proceed at the same speed as what was seen for the WTC?
4) would the debris be as compacted and pulverized as was seen for the WTC?

The Bazant and NIST assumptions deal with question #2-- and, as I've described, they both make very a highly unrealistic assumption.

Of course, NIST has not adequately dealt with questions 1 and 3 as well, and they have not even addressed question 4.

Bazant has dealt with all four questions, but has used unrealistic assumptions for questions 1, 2, and 3, and has been outright deceitful about the pulverization issue.

Please Read: New Comment Policy

I welcome positive feedback, constructive criticism and useful information -- that's the purpose I have always intended for the comments and that is why I enjoy having comments. I don't mind anonymous and off-topic comments.

I request polite, reasoned comments. Comments that contain gratuitous name-calling and mockery will be deleted at my discretion.

If someone truly has a great need to blow off steam at me or Anonymous Physicist, they can always e-mail me: spooked911 (at) hotmail.com

Thanks.