Thursday, May 31, 2007
"The city’s health commissioner said Thursday there was no evidence of a link to cancers and trade center dust exposure."
Bush Proposes That US Troops Stay 50 Years or Longer in Iraq0 comments
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Did You Know High Strength Steel Gives No Resistance to a Medium-Sized Aluminum Plane Going 450 MPH?
“Because of their unique design and the use of the so called “steel bearing wall” tube structural system, which as far as we know has never been used before or after its application in the WTC towers, the buildings essentially showed no resistance to the impact of a medium-sized plane flying into them at about 450miles per hour.”
He also noted that designers chose to fabricate many of the building columns out of very high strength steel [90 ksi steel as opposed to the more typical 36-65 ksi steel]. “This is not allowed by the structural design codes then and is still notallowed in current codes,” he stressed. “But the World Trade Center did not need to obtain a permit from City Hall. Because of special status as Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, they could make such choices outside the prevailing codes.”
This choice, he argued, allowed builders to use less steel in the columns [two to three times thinner than typical columns] presumably to save cost.
But by using high strength steel and thin cross sections, he pointed out, on impact the plane was able to cut through the outside steel bearing wall and enter the building...
What will those wacky engineers come up with next???
"How come people in the buildings weren't notified?" asked one member of the group. "And how can you sleep at night?"
Giuliani's politely-phrased response, caught by WNBC newscameras filming the event, was "I didn't know that the towers were going to collapse."
That response contradicts remarks the former New York City mayor made about being warned about the collapse during a phone interview with onetime ABC anchor Peter Jennings on September 11, 2001, as shown in a transcript WNBC obtained from the Giuliani 2008 campaign.
Giuliani told Jennings, "I--I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, the head of emergency management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us."
Bush Administration War Criminals-- Nazi Style
Critics will no doubt say I am accusing the Bush administration of being Hitler. I'm not. There is no comparison between the political system in Germany in 1937 and the U.S. in 2007. What I am reporting is a simple empirical fact: the interrogation methods approved and defended by this president are not new. Many have been used in the past. The very phrase used by the president to describe torture-that-isn't-somehow-torture - "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. The techniques are indistinguishable. The methods were clearly understood in 1948 as war-crimes. The punishment for them was death.
More Nonsense from Bush on Iraq
At today's press conference, President Bush tagged on a sort of addendum to this cliché, one that I hadn't heard him utter before. Asked about reports that the U.S. presence in Iraq has in fact strengthened al-Qaida, he replied, "Al-Qaida is going to fight us wherever we are," adding, "The fundamental question is, 'Will we fight them?' "
The dissonances here are a bit subtler, but again three things stick out.
First, it isn't true. U.S. troops are deployed, to varying degrees, all over the world; al-Qaida is fighting us in only a couple of places and, even there, hardly as the dominant force.
Second, by making such remarks, the president is only hyping al-Qaida's power. What a great recruitment slogan: "Al-Qaida—fighting wherever the Americans are!"
Third, if the claim is true, why doesn't Bush play strategic jujitsu? He should amass a lot of troops someplace where we have a great advantage, lure al-Qaida to come fight us, then spring the trap and crush them. Clearly, Iraq isn't that place.
I am curious-- has there ever been a more unsubtle and intellectually dishonest president than Bush? In an average press conference, half the things he says is pure boilerplate and cliche and much of the other half is just illogical gibberish.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
7 Basic Lines of Evidence for 2nd Hit Video Fakery
2) clear airframe abnormalities seen in images of the plane
3) aircraft attitude/flight path discrepancies between videos (subtle but real)
4) bizarre/unreal/unlikely camera pans/zooms
5) signs of compositing/greenscreen/bluescreen editing in the footage
6) statements from people like Evan Fairbanks hinting at fakery
7) at least three 2nd hit videographers are professional video animators
In other words, there are 7 basic lines of evidence that the gov't shills will ignore as they play their games of distraction.
I guess what is really odd is how I almost never get someone here who is doubtful about this stuff but is open-minded and interested in more evidence. It's either people who come here believe it, or they simply won't address the issues.
Real Footage for TV Fakery Proof
While the videos that have been saved digitally on various websites are extremely useful at showing the fake nature of the footage, I think only by trying to obtain one version of faked footage can we really blow this thing open for good. The digital footage archived digitally from TV broadcasts or from official DVDs simply does not have the quality we need to prove CGI fakery for once and all.
If the original videos can not be found, have been destroyed, or the authorities won't allow copies to be made, then we also have proven our point.
As I pointed out last week, a good place to start would by filing a "freedom of information act" request with the FBI for the video they took from Evan Fairbanks.
Or contact some of the "amateurs" who have posted these videos online and ask for a high-res copy in order "to prove the conspiracy theorists wrong". Perhaps even offer them money for a good copy.
As I see it, the problem with the analyses done by me, by Marcus Icke, by bsregistration, by Webfairy, by Gerard Holmgren, by Ewing2001, by Scott Laughrey (911 hoax), Killtown, etc, is that they are ONLY going to appeal to a small group of (very intelligent) people who are already open minded about massive 9/11 fakery.
Whereas someone different, a patriotic citizen, who can obtain original video and then show it is (surprisingly!) altered, has a better chance of really getting some attention to this incredible aspect of 9/11.
Don't get me wrong, I think the evidence for video fakery is extremely strong. But I am talking about a strategy for blowing the story open once and for all.
UPDATE: Marcus Icke critiques "Still Diggin'" here, in a new article that relates to my point. That is: analyzing the 2nd hit videos carefully is both very tricky and time consuming. It is easy to get fooled by optical illusions and sloppy measurements-- I know this from personal experience. That is not to say that there isn't evidence for fakery, but rather it needs to be done carefully and precisely. Marcus Icke has done the most careful work I know on the video fakery subject, and has developed some pretty damn good proofs for video fakery. But how many people has he convinced even with his careful analysis?
That is why we need better proof.
New York Times, September 13, 2001
It's got some interesting stuff in it that I will be posting on in the next couple of days.
Monday, May 28, 2007
Iraq: An Exercise in Deliberate Mismanagement
One of the people he had to impress was Feith, the Defense Department's number three official and a leading player in the clique of neoconservatives who had taken over the government's national security apparatus.
Lang went to see him, he recalled during a May 7 panel discussion at the University of the District of Columbia.
"He was sitting there munching a sandwich while he was talking to me," Lang recalled, "which I thought was remarkable in itself, but he also had these briefing papers -- they always had briefing papers, you know -- about me.
"He's looking at this stuff, and he says, 'I've heard of you. I heard of you.'
"He says, 'Is it really true that you really know the Arabs this well, and that you speak Arabic this well? Is that really true? Is that really true?'
"And I said, 'Yeah, that's really true.'
"That's too bad," Feith said.
The audience howled.
"That was the end of the interview," Lang said. "I'm not quite sure what he meant, but you can work it out."
UPDATE: Glenn Greenwald has other evidence for deliberate mismanagement in Iraq:
And Fred Kagan himself has acknowledged that he believes U.S. military strategy in Iraq -- including the "surge" which he personally designed -- must be developed "with the possibility of conflict with Iran ever on the horizon."
All of the super-serious and responsible pundits may be drowning in angst over the fact that we cannot leave Iraq because it is so very vital that, before we leave, we stabilize that country and turn it into a beacon of democracy, or at least avert even worse violence. But however laudable that goal might be, that is not the goal of the people controlling our actual strategy in Iraq. Stabilizing Iraq in order to leave is not what they are interested in.
What they seek -- by their own acknowledgment -- is a conflict with Iran and Syria, and they want to stay in Iraq because that is how that goal can be achieved.
Why On Earth Would Someone Try To Demolish Two of the Largest Buildings in the World with Thermite/Thermate???
I don't think so.
The weird part is that I am sure Steven Jones is smart enough to know how silly the thermite/thermate hypothesis is.
But Steven Jones is not crazy. He sounds very rational, very smooth.
The fact that we have a full professor of physics, someone who has published in the top science journal Nature, pursuing something so illogical, should raise suspicions for EVERYONE.
Even people who believe the official 9/11 story should wonder why someone like Jones is promoting this theory-- and wonder exactly what he is trying to distract people away from. If he is trying to make 9/11 conspiracy theorists look bad, as he seems to be, WHY WOULD HE DO THAT?
For those official 9/11 story supporters who aren't bona fide shills-- you do need to think about why deliberate disinformation campaigns would be waged to discredit notions of 9/11 being an inside job.
Dick Cheney: Walking Propaganda Machine
As Army officers on duty in the war on terror, you will now face enemies who oppose and despise everything you know to be right, every notion of upright conduct and character, and every belief you consider worth fighting for and living for. Capture one of these killers, and he'll be quick to demand the protections of the Geneva Convention and the Constitution of the United States. Yet when they wage attacks or take captives, their delicate sensibilities seem to fall away. These are men who glorify murder and suicide. Their cruelty is not rebuked by human suffering, only fed by it. They have given themselves to an ideology that rejects tolerance, denies freedom of conscience, and demands that women be pushed to the margins of society. The terrorists are defined entirely by their hatreds, and they hate nothing more than the country you have volunteered to defend.I really wonder if Cheney himself is brainwashed. Certainly everything he's done has only helped terrorists-- of whatever stripe.
The terrorists know what they want and they will stop at nothing to get it. By force and intimidation, they seek to impose a dictatorship of fear, under which every man, woman, and child lives in total obedience to their ideology. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian empire, a caliphate, with Baghdad as its capital. They view the world as a battlefield and they yearn to hit us again. And now they have chosen to make Iraq the central front in their war against civilization.
The problem is that if Cheney was really interested in stopping terrorists, he would give up this cartoon language and develop a more sane approach.
UPDATE: Digby puts into words the thoughts I didn't take time to write down.
91st Indy 500
Apart from the rain, the big disappointment was all the people smoking right around us. It was unpleasant. Plus, I didn't realize that so many people went to the race to drink truly massive quantities of alcohol-- and there were beer cans EVERYWHERE.
I'm not a racing fan at all, but I was curous about this race, as it has such a great reputation.
I don't think I will go again unless they do something about the smoking.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Evidence for Planes at the WTC?
Here's the deal--
1) beyond any reasonable doubt, photos and videos of the second plane are fake
2) some plane parts, such as the engine under the canopy, were planted
3) the second (south tower) hit was by all indications a giant hoax-- no plane hit the tower-- and witnesses to that either saw it on TV or were fooled in some other way
4) some type of aircraft may have impacted the north tower, and this may account for some of the plane parts that were found
IMPORTANTLY-- NO ONE HAS EVER MATCHED ANY AIRCRAFT PARTS "FOUND" AT THE WTC TO THE PLANES THAT OFFICIALLY CRASHED.
Aircraft parts all have serial numbers. No one has matched the serial numbers of the plane debris to the flight 11 or flight 175 planes. Same for the other 9/11 crashes, for that matter.
Unless there is some very serious accounting of all aircraft parts from all four planes, there is every reason to think the official plane crashes were hoaxes.
What we have NEVER been shown for the plane crashes: one of any of the four tail sections (which usually survive crashes best) and even one of the hundreds of seats that should have been on the planes.
Purdue Engineers Rewrite History to Support the Official Story
The tail did not slide in like that-- there was no hole for it to go into!
And in fact, for the north tower, there were huge fireballs on the impact face!
Purdue has done a disservice to the world.
If There Was Any Doubt the Media Manipulated Footage on 9/11...
And if they manipulated this, where would they stop?
Friday, May 25, 2007
72% of Americans Think the Country Is On the Wrong Track
But I Thought Bush Said bin Laden Wasn't That Important!!!
Victory in Iraq is important for Osama bin Laden, and victory in Iraq is vital for the United States of America," Bush told the graduating class seated in a stadium under bright sunshine along the Thames River.
Bush said intelligence showed that in January 2005, bin Laden tasked Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, his senior operative in Iraq, to organize a terrorist cell and use Iraq as a staging ground for attacking the United States.
Just your basic government double-think, I guess.
It IS truly weird how obsessed Bush is with al-CIA-duh in Iraq, but doesn't really seem to put much premium into getting bin Laden or Zawahiri.
But maybe that is because bin Laden and Zawahiri aren't the ones REALLY in charge...
Definitely a home team call at best.
UPDATE: As I said, there really is no doubt James was fouled. I'm glad to see others see it.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Caption Contest!!!7 comments
Bush Is A Psychopath
The President also acknowledged that his troop escalation strategy, and the announcement of the September deadline for a report from General David Petraeus on its progress, would result in a likely increase in violence and bloodshed in Iraq.
"It could make August a tough month, because what they're going to try to do is kill as many people as they can to try and influence the debate here at home. Don't you find that interesting? I do, that they recognize that the death of innocent people could shake our will," the President explained.
Yeah, it's interesting. It's fucking fascinating, isn't it? Watching people die.
What a psycho.
Then there is this:
"I'm credible because I read the intelligence," Bush said when a reporter asked if his warning in a Wednesday speech at the US Coast Guard Academy, based on two-year old intelligence, could be trusted.
He's credible because he reads the intelligence.
Here's a piece from 2003 identifying Bush as a psychopath.
Palpable Anger About Iraq and the Failure of US Political Leadership
The Story That Was Ignored As It Came Out the Morning of the Virginia Tech Shooting
Report: France told CIA about plans to hijack planes prior to 9/11
French secret services produced nine reports between September 2000 and August 2001 looking at the Al-Qaida threat to the United States, and knew it planned to hijack an aircraft, the French daily Le Monde said on Monday.
The newspaper said it had obtained 328 pages of classified documents that showed foreign agents had infiltrated Osama bin Laden's network and were carefully tracking its moves. One document prepared in January 2001 was entitled "Plan to hijack an aircraft by Islamic radicals", and said the operation had been discussed in Kabul at the start of 2000 by Al-Qaida, Taliban and Chechen militants. The hijack was meant to happen between March and September 2000 but the planners put it back "because of differences of opinion, particularly over the date, objective and participants," Le Monde said, citing the report.
Le Monde said the French report of January 2001 had been handed over to a CIA operative in Paris, but that no mention of it had ever been made in the official U.S. Sept. 11 Commission, which produced its findings in July 2004.
WaPo and NYTimes pick up the story.
To clarify: I know the French story is "disinfo", but that doesn't mean that there wasn't a desire to cover it up-- and the VT shootings came very conveniently that day. I'm not saying the VT shootings were done JUST to cover up this story, but the real deep-down perps may have timed the shootings to blot out this story.
Broken Record Bush
FOIA Filing For Fairbanks Footage?
I'm just thinking that getting this footage might really allow us to blow video fakery open-- IF the govt will let us have the footage, that is.
Since the Moussaoui trial has concluded, there no apparent reason to keep the footage secret. And as far as I know, the footage was not released with other evidence from the trial.
In any case, what is sorely needed is high-resolution footage for serious video analysis.
By the way, it is also worth noting that the FBI never apparently returned the AUDIO portion of Fairbanks tape. THAT would be very interesting to get.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
"What Would Jesus Bomb?"
Christian Terrorist Mark David Uhl
LYNCHBURG, Virginia (CNN) -- A first-year Liberty University student was arrested in what police said was a plot to detonate explosive devices Tuesday, the day of the Rev. Jerry Falwell's funeral.
Liberty University of course being the ultra-Christian University that Falwell founded.
Pre-Iraq War Follies
"Reporter" John Miller's Foreknowledge-- More Media/Government Collusion in the Events of 9/11
The "anonymous physicist" has a new finding/revelation that indicates possible foreknowledge and media/government collusion regarding the second tower "collapse." Just as we recently learned of media foreknoweldge of WTC7 "collapse."
On 9/11, ABC-TV anchorman Peter Jennings (whose voice most of us recognize) is talking with another reporter whose voice is that of ABC-TV reporter John Miller--ABC's terrorism/crime "expert."
In this video, they are showing and talking about the just "collapsed" first tower (WTC2). Listen to the other reporter (Miller) revealing that he has been told information that indicates others know that the other tower will soon fall too.
After viewing the first tower fall, Miller says; "and now uh they say that the other tower is leaning. Um. If you look at some of the pictures, it appears to be on a slight angle uh to the right."
Won't you tell us who "they" are, John? Could it be military intelligence?
Funny thing though. In the video, I see no tilting to the right of WTC1, do you? Not on this video, or any others. Therefore it appears that John Miller was told to provide a helpful excuse for the second collapse, that someone in power knew was coming! Just as we recently learned that the PTB told the BBC ahead of time that WTC7 collapsed when it hadn't yet. Note also the following. Miller says "photos", when all they had, as this was happening, were the videos. See how he also starts the false meme that the tower “goes straight down” just as we see close-up that it is also exploding outwards. Notice also Miller's final "uh", just before he says "to the right." Since it's not really there he had to pause to think or recall what he was told, or else he made it up on the spot. Note also that Jennings does not try to refute the "coming straight down" lie even though he too can see it exploding outwards, as it disintegrates. Jennings, it seems, knows that Miller was there to tell everyone (including himself) what to say and think.
Why does John Miller have and provide this (bogus, "leaning to the right") knowledge ahead of time? There are many remarkable things we can learn about John Miller! Soon after this 9/11 "reporting", he was promoted to co-anchor of 20/20 at ABC-TV. And within a year, he wrote a book that 9/11 happened because of "intelligence agencies' failures."***
But wikipedia has a summary of Miller's life-long oddities.
He became an NYC TV reporter with only one year of college, when most can't get this job with one or two full degrees in journalism. He quickly became the "expert" on organized crime/Mafia and terrorist groups, reporting first at WNEW-TV and then WNBC-TV in NYC.
He then served as the Deputy Police Commissioner of NYC from 1994–1995. Despite this background (or maybe more likely because of it?), Miller gets an interview with none other than Osama bin Laden in May 1998! Now if you were OBL, and if you really were an enemy of the USA, would you give an interview to someone associated with the police and intelligence agencies of the USA?! And maybe someone should write a book stating that "Al-CIA-Duh was successful on 911 because of John Miller's failure to reveal where OBL was in 1998." Unless of course, OBL was CIA, then you would only trust another fellow intelligence asset.
In 2003, Miller quit 20/20 and ABC, and became LAPD Bureau Chief for Counter-Terrorism and Criminal Intelligence. In September, 2005 Miller left the LAPD to become the FBI's Assistant Director of Public Affairs. (Could this be in their sub-bureau of faked videos and skyscraper collapse foreknowledge?)
But we learn from Wiki that John Miller's strange odyssey actually began at birth. "John's father, John Miller Sr., was a gossip columnist in New York and friends with Mafia boss Frank Costello. The two were so close, Costello served as godfather to John Jr." Fascinating that John Miller's godfather was THE Godfather or “boss of all bosses” at the time. But does this remind anyone of that other great anti-Mafia, Mafia family guy. Hint: He was Mayor of a city whose two largest towers were "collapsed" with mini-nukes. This could only have been done by the real Mafia--the U.S. government.
***Reading the reviews at Amazon, the book is clearly disinfo.
This Miller guy is a real piece of work. He's clearly a key example of the embedding of US intelligence in the media for 9/11.
I mean really-- what are the odds that one of the few people to ever interview bin Laden before 9/11 gets on ABC news on the morning of 9/11 to talk live about the demise of the twin towers??? Not to mention the incredible fact that Miller, a guy with Mafia connections, is interviewing bin Laden in the first place!
More dirt on Miller here.
Meanwhile, not one single official 9/11 supporter has been able to indicate that they support the NIST model for destruction of the WTC twin towers.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Fake Opposition Democrats Strike Yet Again
Democrats Drop Withdrawal Dates From Iraq Bill
By CARL HULSE
WASHINGTON, May 22 — Congressional Democrats relented today on their insistence that a war spending measure sought by President Bush also set a date for withdrawing troops from Iraq. The decision to back down, described by senior lawmakers and aides, , was a wrenching reversal for some Democrats, who saw their election triumph as a call to force an end to the war. A Democratic effort to include timelines prompted Mr. Bush’s veto of the original bill last month, producing a political impasse.
“We don’t have a veto-proof Congress,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader.
Today's Edition of "Fuck That Shit"
Why Bush hasn't been impeached, by Gary Kamiya
"Congress, the media and most of the American people have yet to turn decisively against Bush because to do so would be to turn against some part of themselves."
(snip) But there's a deeper reason why the popular impeachment movement has never taken off -- and it has to do not with Bush but with the American people. Bush's warmongering spoke to something deep in our national psyche. The emotional force behind America's support for the Iraq war, the molten core of an angry, resentful patriotism, is still too hot for Congress, the media and even many Americans who oppose the war, to confront directly. It's a national myth. It's John Wayne. To impeach Bush would force us to directly confront our national core of violent self-righteousness -- come to terms with it, understand it and reject it. And we're not ready to do that.
"No Plane" Witness
Maria and her employees were stunned when they saw the horrible sight of the World Trade Tower building burning furiously -- thick, black smoke, billowing out of the first tower. Initially, everyone thought it simply a tragic airline accident, when without warning, the second tower exploded into flames. No one saw the second plane take deliberate aim for the tower, and it wasn't until later that news reports confirmed that the U.S. was under terrorist attack.
From the pictures at the site, it seems as though these people were in a close enough position to see or hear a plane.
American TV Network in the Middle-East Broadcasts Terrorist Messages
On the surface it is incompetence. But, you have to wonder if it isn't intentional at some covert level.
After all, isn't it ironic how the Iraq war is the greatest recruiting tool that al-CIA-duh ever had?
Monday, May 21, 2007
The NIST Model for the Destruction of the WTC
As I understand it-- and please correct me if I am wrong here-- this is the basic model put forth by NIST to explain the demise of the WTC twin towers:
1) the airplane impacts break less than 20% of the outer and core tower structural columns.
2) the airplane debris knocks fireproofing off of the steel support structures such as the floor trusses that support the concrete floors.
3) jet fuel from the airplanes cause severe fires throughout the area of impact and eventually weaken, on one side of each tower, the core and outer support columns as well as the fireproof-less floor trusses on a floor section.
4) the floor support trusses give way, and a floor section on one side of the tower collapses
5) the collapsing floor does not break away from the outer and inner columns to which it is attached, but rather pulls them in the direction of the collapse. The outer columns are pulled inwards while one row of core columns is pulled away from the core. Note, photos and videos show the outer wall buckled in somewhat prior to "collapse". This buckling is more believable for the South tower than for the North tower.
6) the floor collapse pulling the outer and inner columns on one side of the tower weakened the core structure dramatically such that the entire upper part of the tower (about 30 stories for the South tower and about 15 stories for the North tower) tilted towards the side of the floor collapse and started falling down on the same side as the initial floor collapse.
7) this upper section of tower falling down on one side puts too much strain on the floors below and the floors below very rapidly gave way-- one by one-- leading to a global, symmetrical, progressive collapse for each tower.
Now, assuming a planes DID crash into the towers (and of course there is a great deal of doubt that Boeing 767s hit the towers), parts 1-4 of the NIST sequence are acceptable. I find it plausible that floor trusses holding up a 65 foot section of floor could be weakened by fire leading to floor collapse.
What I and others have a great deal of problem with is parts 5-7. To put it simply, these parts of the model are absurd.
There is NO evidence that the fires were hot enough to cause inner and outer structural columns to bow in towards the collapsed floor section. Further, to posit that a heavy floor section could pull and distort these structural columns, rather than simply break away from the brackets that held the floor to the heavy structural columns, is rather improbable.
But then to say that this one floor section, comprising at BEST, one sixth of the cross-sectional area of the tower, could cause the complete upper section of the tower to topple over is flat-out ridiculous. A partial collapse of the tower above the collapsed floor would be weakly plausible. But to say that the whole top section of the tower tilts as a whole and falls as a whole section-- flat-out absurd.
Finally, the idea that the upper section of the tower breaking off and falling down on ONE SIDE can drive a near free-fall global symmetrical collapse, is simply wand-waving covering up the fact of demolition. There is no precedent, no logic to explain the NIST model.
There are many reason to think the towers were demolished with explosives of some sort, and the evidence for explosive demolition of the towers is overwhelming. Of course, as I have pointed out before here, the case for nuclear demolition is quite compelling.
But it still is worth trying to understand what the official explanation for the destruction of the towers is, in order to point out simply how BAD it is.
Two basic questions--
1) did I describe their model correctly? (again please let me know if I missed a key part of their model or if I made a mistake)
2) does the NIST model adequately explain what happened to the towers?
Non-9/11 skeptics/official story believers-- please chime in!
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Pakistan Pretends to Fight alCIAduh
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Friday, May 18, 2007
The NIST Simulation of a 767 Disintegrating
(click to enlarge)
It's not unlike NIST is depicting the South tower as a giant cheese grater, and the plane as a large piece of cheese. But why is the cheese slicing through the grater at the same time?
I like the way they have the plane going all the way in at the same time the debris field has not even gone the length of the plane. This suggests there was very rapid deceleration of the debris/shredded cheese once it went in the building. Odd how the part of the plane outside the building never showed any deceleration-- in the videos, anyway.
Also odd-- how much destruction there was in the first 100 feet inside the building, but how little debris deflected back out the entrance hole. All we see is gray powder and then a fireball coming out the entry hole.
The Empire State Building Plane Crash
It's an interesting story.
The B-25 was 10-15 tons and had a 67 foot wingspan and a 53 foot length, so obviously it was significantly smaller and lighter than a 767.
Needless to say, the Empire State Building survived the crash and ensuing fire just fine.
Perhaps most interesting is that the Empire State Building was supposedly built to withstand the impact of a 10 ton plane-- and it did just fine. Worth noting then, the WTC was built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707-- a jet comparable in size and weight to a 767.
Too Funny Not to Share
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Censorship in NY Times Blog Piece on Rosie O'Donnell and 9/11
Interesting, in light of the fact that many comments referring to the WTC being blown by demolition have been posted. So they are not afraid of the topic of the demolition of the WTC in general.
The ugly nuclear truth must be too much for them.
"Torture Betrays Us and Breeds New Enemies"
As has happened with every other nation that has tried to engage in a little bit of torture -- only for the toughest cases, only when nothing else works -- the abuse spread like wildfire, and every captured prisoner became the key to defusing a potential ticking time bomb. Our soldiers in Iraq confront real "ticking time bomb" situations every day, in the form of improvised explosive devices, and any degree of "flexibility" about torture at the top drops down the chain of command like a stone -- the rare exception fast becoming the rule.
To understand the impact this has had on the ground, look at the military's mental health assessment report released earlier this month. The study shows a disturbing level of tolerance for abuse of prisoners in some situations. This underscores what we know as military professionals: Complex situational ethics cannot be applied during the stress of combat. The rules must be firm and absolute; if torture is broached as a possibility, it will become a reality.
This has had disastrous consequences. Revelations of abuse feed what the Army's new counterinsurgency manual, which was drafted under the command of Gen. David Petraeus, calls the "recuperative power" of the terrorist enemy.
The Fairbanks Follies, Continued
Now we have Evan Fairbanks telling Peter Jennings how and why he got to video the second, alleged plane hit of the WTC.
"I walked out of Trinity Church after we had a blackout in our studio." (Allegedly from the the first WTC1 “hit,” while videoing the Archbishop of Wales.)
However the Archbishop of Wales, Rowan Williams wrote "...when the South Tower collapsed, there as a power failure in neighbouring buildings..."
So there appears to be a double lie by Fairbanks--
1. That the power failure cited by the Archbishop was in other nearby buildings, not in the Trinity Church as Fairbanks said, and
2. The power failure in other buildings occurred only after the first tower (WTC2) fell—- not as Fairbanks falsely stated, that the power failure occurred earlier just after the other (and first hit) tower WTC1 was hit. Note that the South Tower “collapse”, and the subsequent power failure is obviously after Fairbanks allegedly videoed the plane hitting it in the first place! No one should know this better than him.
So we must ask: Does Fairbanks claim the bogus early power failure just to give him an excuse for halting his videoing of the Archbishop and to go where he was predetermined to be? Archbishop Williams does not even mention being videoed by Fairbanks. But that could be an oversight.
Now to another Fairbanks dubious statement I have uncovered. As Spooked posted on 5/11/07, Fairbanks said: "FBI agents conducted me to a safe place, that I stopped shooting. When I told them what I had on videotaped, they brought me to their command center."
But we learn that now Fairbanks is supposedly saying that it was the Port Authority who got hold of him to make a copy of his video. Note this source says he “fell in” with the P.A.--“Around 10:15, Fairbanks fell in with two Port Authority officers who wanted a copy of his footage as evidence. He agreed to cooperate, walking with them toward Trinity Church, where he planned to make a duplicate tape in the building’s audiovisual facility. At the last moment before heading inside, he decided to turn his camera skyward for a final shot. “I did this very graceful zoom out from the plume of smoke,” he remembers, “and put these two people in the foreground,” careful to provide human scale. Just as he did, he heard and felt a rumble. He looked up to record the north tower coming down.…”
Note this excerpt is from Chapter One of a new book by David Friend who has worked for Life Magazine and did a CBS “documentary” on 9/11. Life magazine will forever be infamous for printing reversed prints of the Zapruder film (while the tape itself was forbidden to be seen) that falsely “showed” President Kennedy going forward after the fatal head shot—when he was, in fact, slammed backwards—- making it impossible to have been done by the patsy, Oswald. And the CBS TV 9/11 documentary?… Well nothing ever changes. CBS’ Dan Rather was the lone reporter shown the Zapruder film in November 1963 and said Kennedy went forward in the limo. He rather quickly went from cub reporter to the very top.
Note another amazing coincidence from the above excerpt. Fairbanks also claims that just when “at the last moment before heading inside [now the Trinity Church, not the earlier cited FBI Command Center]” the North Tower just happens to “come down.” So we are to believe that whenever Fairbanks momentarily points his camera at a skyscraper, it will either be hit by a plane or collapse within a second or two!?
But we note that the powers that be apparently now want people to think that the Port Authority, not the FBI, got hold of Fairbanks. Could that be because the NYPA, unlike the FBI, would not have video doctoring capabilities? This appears to be like the federal agent in the WTC2 alleged plane hit videoed by Fairbanks. The agent has been morphing back and forth from being Secret Service to being FBI. But let’s examine the videography that includes him. First it is highly unlikely that a plane hit or explosion would randomly and momentarily occur just as Fairbanks gets the camera low to include the agent and the towers. Apparently those setting this up, or should I say creating it, wanted to have the shock and awe of someone in the video. There could even be reasons why they wanted it to be a federal agent. Such as “get with the program, see what we can do to anybody.”
Now many people have noted that the agent does not react to what should have been very loud jet noise near him, as the alleged jet approaches. Rather he reacts only a short time after the loud explosion itself. But at least he does jump. This brings us to Fairbanks, allegedly holding the camera. A loud explosion should automatically (and autonomically) cause him to also have a strong, startle response. Yet we see from the alleged video’s non-jumpiness that he does not do so for several seconds. When it does finally show change, it is well after an automatic, startle response should have occurred.
All this and my last piece on this site, and much else, indicate the likelihood of Fairbanks and his 9/11 video being as he himself put it “artificial…Hollywood… bad, special effects…” With the whole world suffering subsequent, bad, special effects.
I definitely agree with this assessment. I would also add it is odd that Fairbanks says there he was in a "studio" in the Trinity Church.
Another thing worth noting is in this clip, how unnaturally calm Fairbanks is as he relays his story of an extremely traumatic event-- the evening of 9/11 no less!!! Is Fairbanks hypnotized or on drugs? Really, look at him in the clip-- it is not as if he is an experienced TV personality-- but he is just so calm.
The last thing is again is in this clip, Fairbanks says he sees the plane in his viewfinder and SAYS (out loud?), "gee- it is awfully close for a plane to be here now". This has to be a lie-- assuming he even really took this footage attributed to him, since the plane is only in the video for a fraction of a second. There is simply no way he can think about a plane being next to the tower before the tower exploded.
The bottom line here is that Fairbanks story is obviously a load of crap, and everything Fairbanks says is consistent with him being an agent or a patsy who is peddling a fake video.
Interesting Words from Al Gore
A large and growing number of Americans are asking out loud: "What has happened to our country?" People are trying to figure out what has gone wrong in our democracy, and how we can fix it.
To take another example, for the first time in American history, the Executive Branch of our government has not only condoned but actively promoted the treatment of captives in wartime that clearly involves torture, thus overturning a prohibition established by General George Washington during the Revolutionary War.
It is too easy—and too partisan—to simply place the blame on the policies of President George W. Bush. We are all responsible for the decisions our country makes. We have a Congress. We have an independent judiciary. We have checks and balances. We are a nation of laws. We have free speech. We have a free press. Have they all failed us? Why has America's public discourse become less focused and clear, less reasoned? Faith in the power of reason—the belief that free citizens can govern themselves wisely and fairly by resorting to logical debate on the basis of the best evidence available, instead of raw power—remains the central premise of American democracy. This premise is now under assault.
American democracy is now in danger—not from any one set of ideas, but from unprecedented changes in the environment within which ideas either live and spread, or wither and die. I do not mean the physical environment; I mean what is called the public sphere, or the marketplace of ideas.
It is simply no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse. I know I am not alone in feeling that something has gone fundamentally wrong. In 2001, I had hoped it was an aberration when polls showed that three-quarters of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for attacking us on Sept. 11. More than five years later, however, nearly half of the American public still believes Saddam was connected to the attack.
Ultimately, in this brief excerpt from his new book, Gore blames much of our problems on propagandists who use the medium of television news. This is clearly an important point, but I wonder how much deeper Gore is willing to take it. The problem, I think, is that to blame our problems on TV and media conglomerates is ultimately superficial, and to take it deeper gets one into the dreaded territory of the CONSPIRACY THEORIST.
The ultimate question is-- who is really in control and what are their true goals?
The good thing is that Gore is pushing for true internet freedom.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
2nd Plane Was Going Trans-Sonic Speed?
I walked out of Tower One on 9/11/01 after we were hit and just in time to have United fly over my head into Tower Two. There was no damn conspiracy, if Rosie - or any of the other idiots promulgating this load of horsedip - had been there that day they would understand just what the destructive power of those planes was like. People on my (low) floor fell down when we were hit because the building moved so far before whipping back. The second plane that hit Tower Two was very likely going at or near transonic speed when it hit the Tower simply based upon the sound that it made passing over us immediately prior to hitting the building. You don’t want to know what the sound was like when it hit the building Rosie, just be glad you weren’t there and stop peddling such garbage.
"I walked out of Tower One on 9/11/01 after we were hit and just in time to have United fly over my head into Tower Two."
That's a good trick, considering where the south tower was hit on the far side of where the north tower would be.
"...simply based upon the sound that it made passing over us immediately prior to hitting the building"
If it was going "trans-sonic speed", wouldn't it be quiet passing over his head right before it hit?
"You don’t want to know what the sound was like when it hit the building..."
Perhaps you could give some sort of description for us?
I posted a comment at that piece about Rosie O'Donnell and 9/11, but it seems they stopped taking comments... :(
UPDATE: They started adding more comments sometime last night and now mine is there. See if you can find it!
As predicted, lots of people using the freeway overpass collapse as an argument for the official story. As usual, lots of people saying conspiracy theorists are nuts and stupid. Lots of people using the same tired arguments that Bush admin is too incompetent too do 9/11. But it seems as though the "truth" crowd started getting stronger towards the end.
As far as trans-sonic-- that means speed of sound-- about 769 mph. Obviously no commercial aircraft was going that fast. Did he hear a sonic boom? Or just an explosion? Or two explosions...
Really, what makes most sense is that this guy never saw the plane, was in the plaza after the south tower was hit and heard the explosion over him, thought it was the plane making a sonic boom-- and then he saw the explosion.
Of course, the tower swaying hardly proves an airplane hit.
I just thought this trans-sonic thing was interesting. I never heard that description of the 2nd plane before.
19 Senate Democrats Vote with 48 Senate Republicans to Keep Killing People in Iraq
At least, 29 Democrats tried to do the right thing.
What is most surprising is that Hillary Clinton voted for the measure to cut off funding for the war by March 31st, 2008.
For Some Reason, "Hannity and Colmes" Still Haven't Contacted Me About Being on Their Show
This was a freaking BIPARTISAN subpoena that Gonzalez simply ignored.
More Evidence of Nukes at the WTC
Interesting Piece on EMPs and EMP Weapons
The electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is a product of a nuclear explosion. It puts out of action even those electronic control systems that have withstood the shockwave and reduces expensive smart weapons to scrap metal. There are different ways of generating electromagnetic pulses - for example, it can be produced by explosion-induced pressure on a magnetic field.
Physicist Andrei Sakharov was the first to propose using this principle in a bomb in the 1950s. Today, records in the size of an induced magnetic field, maximum current and properties of such "radiators" belong to Russian scientists. They surpass foreign counterparts by 10 times. Depending on what facilities the EMP is directed at, the damage radius can be from several hundred meters to kilometers. Without creating a shock wave and inflicting visible damage, it destroys all enemy electronic equipment. Moreover, unlike electronic countermeasures, electromagnetic weapons are capable of damaging radio electronic components even if they are switched off.
At present, the infrastructure and troops of many countries are stuffed with electronic equipment. It will be the main target for electromagnetic weapons. The destructive effect is produced by the high acceleration of the magnetic and electrical components of the EMP. They induce voltage changes ranging from 100 volts to 10,000 volts in circuit networks and terminals of radio electronic equipment. The ensuing massive sparking of cable jackets, their contact to frame and the ground, and breakdowns in connectors put the equipment out of action and lead to fires and explosions. To understand this effect better, it is enough to imagine what will happen to your TV-set if there is a power surge - it will simply melt.
Grossly Illegal Behaviour by Bush
NOW can we impeach him?
Comey and Mueller were clearly both operating on the premise that Card and Gonzales were basically thugs. Indeed, Comey said that when Card ordred him to the White House, Comey refused to meet with Card without a witness being present, and that Card refused to allow Comey's summoned witness (Solicitor General Ted Olson) even to enter Card's office. These are the most trusted intimates of the White House -- the ones who are politically sympathetic to them and know them best -- and they prepared for, defended themselves against, the most extreme acts of corruption and thuggery from the President's Chief of Staff and his then-legal counsel (and current Attorney General of the United States).
Does this sound in any way like the behavior of a government operating under the rule of law, which believes that it had legal authority to spy on Americans without the warrants required for three decades by law? How can we possibly permit our government to engage in this behavior, to spy on us in deliberate violation of the laws which we enacted democratically precisely in order to limit how they can spy on us, and to literally commit felonies at will, knowing that they are breaking the law?
How is this not a major scandal on the level of the greatest presidential corruption and lawbreaking scandals in our country's history? Why is this only a one-day story that will focus on the hospital drama but not on what it reveals about the bulging and unparalleled corruption of this administration and the complete erosion of the rule of law in our country? And, as I've asked times before, if we passively allow the President to simply break the law with impunity in how the government spies on our conversations, what don't we allow?
Of course, the only reason this isn't a scandal of regime-shattering proportions is because of fucking 9/11-- which of course was an inside job and which also cut off much normal governmental and media scrutiny. Thus we are left in this Orwellian nightmare.
"I don't think I've heard that before," Giuliani said, "and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11."
Paul said he was referring to what the CIA calls "blow back" in mentioning the hostility American involvement might ferment in foreign cultures.
The "blow back" idea of course is limited hangout bullshit for 9/11, but I'm amazed Giuliani doesn't seem aware of this idea.
UPDATE: Ah, I see that it is simply bad GOP politics to even offer any sort of tempered view of terrorism. Apparently, the only acceptable popular conservative view is that the terrorists are evil and we have to use any means necessary to get them. Is it conservatives in general that are so brainwashed about terrorism-- or is it that the conservative media pushes this ridiculous line and the conservative faithful eat it up?
Or some combination of the two?
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
All Our War Problems Are Solved
After a frustrating search for a new "war czar" to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, ABC News has learned that President Bush has chosen the Pentagon's director of operations, Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, for the role.
In the newly created position of assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan policy and implementation, Lute would have the power to direct the Pentagon, State Department and other agencies involved in the two conflicts.
Lute would report directly to the president and to National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley.
Filling the position had become a priority for the White House, after a handful of retired generals told the White House they did not want the job. Among them, retired Marine Corps four-star Gen. Jack Sheehan, who proved an embarrassment to the White House after he wrote an op-ed piece in the Washington Post saying there were "huge shortcomings" in the White House view of the strategy in Iraq.
Question-- Why do we need someone with the title "CZAR"? What is wrong with something like "Commanding General, Middle-Eastern Theater of Operations"? Why can't the Bush do this job, considering it is such a critical part of his presidency?
"Lute would have the power to direct the Pentagon, State Department and other agencies involved in the two conflicts."
Really? That sounds pretty damn powerful. Sort of like the... PRESIDENT. What are the odds this Lute guy will have ANY power? What are the odds that he will simply get the blame for whatever new goes wrong in Iraq?
Interesting Observations About Evan Fairbanks and His Footage
Statements by and about 911 videographer, Evan Fairbanks, as well as the video itself, need careful analysis. This Plaguepuppy PDF is a good place to start.
The NY Times piece the PDF cites is entitled “Catching the World in the Act of Changing” by Sarah Boxer; and was published on 11/22/01. Some of Fairbanks’ ABC-TV showing of the alleged WTC2 hit is here. Note how bright/undetailed the two towers are all the way to the bottom without any shadows from other buildings on it.
First we see that the NY Times piece came out (naturally) on the anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination. Thirty eight years later. Those two digits add up to 11. Sure enough, reporter Boxer says Fairbanks’ video is the "new Zapruder film." Her analogy to the Zapruder film is remarkable. This film was doctored, and for 11 years, lied about, and forbidden to be viewed by the American people. During that time, the media/government falsely said that it showed Kennedy's head and body went forward. But upon first public viewing in 1975, it proves--despite its (primitive) heavy doctoring--that JFK went straight back— from a frontal shot. And the added audio [motorcade cop’s dictaphone recording] makes it even more clear that the S.S. (secret service) driver fired the fatal head shot.
Now Fairbanks videos the WTC after coming out of Trinity Church. Trinity was the name of the purported first Atomic bomb site at Alamogordo, NM--the culmination of the "Manhattan Project." Maybe now we find out just why they used those names (Trinity/Manhattan) back in 1945. Boxer writes that Fairbanks’ camera is seemingly "a second or two behind the events." Is she hinting at the doctoring of the video? Then the following part is very telling: "He doesn’t know what he is photographing. How could he? And he certainly doesn’t know what it will look like in retrospect. He has no idea of the things that people will know when they finally do watch it...." Is she letting us know that the video will be doctored and Fairbanks won't know what is on there because it will be manufactured, and will not be what he saw while videoing!
Fairbanks' name itself is interesting. The alleged plane makes a high-speed, last moment near impossible bank, as videoed by someone named "Fair-banks."
Now let's look at Sarah Boxer.
We see that Sarah Boxer is a long-time cartoonist. Recall Fairbanks’ comment that it looked “artificial”, when he got "his" video back. She is also an expert on photography. Her first book is about cartoon versions of Freudian cases. The names of her animal characters are telling too. We have a male version of Alice in Wonderland—Bunnyman--first cited. The rest gets into, "there's really nothing to fear," crying wolf, being chased by mere paranoid fantasies etc.
Note that her NY Times piece states that Fairbanks just "found himself" in FBI local headquarters, 30 minutes after WTC2 “collapse”— written as if this was a random event. However Spooked last week quoted Fairbanks as saying the FBI “conducted” him first to a “safe place,” and then “brought” him to “their command center.” So the media/govt has begun to falsify the fact that the FBI was right there when he filmed, and took him right away to their headquarters, and later gave him a “copy” minus the audio. Fairbanks words: "They have the original, which has five minutes of audio. This is a copy." So did the FBI (or sister agencies) then “just find themselves” doctoring the video, removing the crucial audio and giving him back (in his own words) an “artificial/Hollywood like…copy”?
Would Peter Jennings, who did the Goebbels-like piece on the JFK assassination—omitting part of Asst. W.H. Press Secretary, Kilduff’s Dallas press conference where the latter said, and showed, that the entrance of the fatal bullet was at the right temple--ever have on air anyone who wasn’t showing only what the regime wanted the people to see? And is Fairbanks on ABC-TV so incredulous “even after I’ve seen it [the copy] six or seven times” because it does not jive with what he saw and heard? Never forget that on Nov. 22, 1963, the FBI and Secret Service also swooped down on photographers and witnesses to the Kennedy assassination. They confiscated film and cameras and began coercing/threatening witnesses who were close enough to see and hear who really fired the fatal head shot. Same government, same methods.
Since Evan Fairbanks has virtually disappeared from the public arena, it's not too much to wonder if Fairbanks is a pseudonym and he actually was an undercover agent of some sort-- giving out subtle clues for "the powers that be".
A Sentimental Look Back At Tony Blair
The Loveable Mr. Paul Wolfowitz
I guess Wolfowitz learned well from Bush and Cheney.
Indonesia became the third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world last week. Following close behind is Brazil. Neither nation has heavy industry on a comparable scale with the EU, India or Russia and yet they comfortably outstrip all other countries, except the United States and China.Oy.
What both countries do have in common is tropical forest that is being cut and burned with staggering swiftness. Smoke stacks visible from space climb into the sky above both countries, while satellite images capture similar destruction from the Congo basin, across the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and the Republic of Congo.
According to the latest audited figures from 2003, two billion tons of CO2 enters the atmosphere every year from deforestation. That destruction amounts to 50 million acres - or an area the size of England, Wales and Scotland felled annually.
Monday, May 14, 2007
An Infinite Number of 2nd Hit Videos
IEEE CG&A, March 1996 (Vol. 16, No. 2) pp. 22-30
Video Mosaics for Virtual Environments
This article presents automated techniques for creating large, high-resolution images and environment maps from regular low-resolution video and photographic imagery. By panning a camera over a scene and automatically compositing the resulting frames, this system can create images and panoramas of arbitrary shape and detail. Translating the camera causes motion parallax in the video, which can be exploited to recover depth maps of the scene and thereby enable limited 3D rendering through view interpolation. The article discusses applications of these techniques to the creation of novel virtual environments and experiences such as virtual travel, home walkthroughs, and home supermarket shopping.
I think this is related to (or a forerunner of) the type of technique they use for special effects in movies (e.g. The Matrix) where a shot is frozen, and then there is a "circular pan".
I have to wonder if they used this technique on 9/11-- that is what all those helicopters were doing: making a composite video scene of the WTC environment that can be used for the production of 2nd hit videos.
Hints of this sort of technique at play comes from this finding by Killtown (and here) as well as the recent work of BSRegistration.
Food for Thought
Think how devastating that would be for the official 9/11 story.
Now imagine the effect of two highly credentialed academic scientists (let's say, oh... a physicist and an engineer) each coming out with different but somewhat strange scenarios for how the WTC was destroyed.
Think how USEFUL that would be for the official 9/11 story.
Finally, imagine the odds of "the powers that be" actually allowing highly credentialed academic scientists to come out and say the WTC towers were destroyed by nuclear weapons.
Not too likely, I think.
Here's the scary part: the case for nuclear demolition is quite strong.
Speaking of which, "mysticalgroove" has a good new WTC nuclear demolition video.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
More Video Fakery
The Frozen Fireball
This is quite a striking finding. I never saw the extended version of this clip before that shows how far out the footage was taken from (a few miles at least). What it looks like, is that this footage, which is typically billed as "real" amateur footage, was actually made by a high-tech camera system, probably filmed from a helicopter (because the viewpoint seems fairly elevated). The close-up-zoom out view looks to be artificial-- made post-production, as shown by the way the fireball doesn't vchange during the zoom.
The big question is how much of the 2nd hit footage was made in this way?
I'm guessing that quite a bit was.
On a related point, Ewing 2001 has an interesting idea on the nature of the 9/11 2nd hit chopper footage-- were they part of an "Exotic Weapons"/"Future Combat Systems" crew?
Friday, May 11, 2007
"It's Hard to Put Together That It's Real This Time"
It certainly is.
Full quote of Evan Fairbanks: "The image of that plane just coming out of no where, coming into the frame and disappearing into the side, into the south side of the tower as if a floor had been hollowed out and it was a hanger it was just landing in. We've seen these images in movies and we know that it's all artificial and Hollywood makes it and it's hard to put together that it's real this time."
This is interesting too: "And it was only after the first tower collapsed and FBI agents conducted me to a safe place, that I stopped shooting. When I told them what I had on videotaped, they brought me to their command center. They have the original, which has five minutes of audio. This is a copy."
And since the 20 foot high tail of the plane doesn't enter the building, and as shown in the video, it doesn't break off and fall to the ground, I am really wondering what ever happened to that large section of plane debris.
And no, I really don't think that puff of dust shown in the video is the disintegrated tail section.
And So It Goes and Goes and Goes...
The same documents that prosecutors used to build a case against the suspects also depict them as somewhat disorganized, lackluster plotters. And clumsy and amateurish, too: The FBI learned of the alleged plot when the men went to a Circuit City store and asked a clerk to transfer a jihad training video of themselves onto a DVD. Also, they mistakenly thought an AK-47 costs $500, instead of $1,500 to $3,000.
Also, one of the men, Tatar, called a Philadelphia police officer in November, saying that he had been approached by someone who was pressuring him to obtain a map of Fort Dix, and that he feared the incident was terrorist-related, according to court documents.
And So It Goes...1 comments
If I Went on "Hannity and Colmes", I Would Say...
-- the media showed us fake videos
-- the twin towers were nuked
-- the media and politicians lied to the American people over and over about 9/11
-- people, such as Hannity and Colmes, who support the official 9/11 story are traitors and war mongerers
-- people, such as Hannity and Colmes, who support the official 9/11 story are the ones who are disrespecting the victims of 9/11.
I would say as much of that as I could get out-- before they hauled me away.
Think I could get an appearance?
Hey, FOX News! Email me!
Thursday, May 10, 2007
This Is Lame
Damn, in his book, Tarpley talks about the WTC twin towers being blown. Here he can barely defend WTC7 being blown. What's with all this "hit by an airplane" crap?
I'm sooo tired of that line.
Although HANNITY and colmes are obnoxious twits, this was still not a good showing by Tarpley.
Stealing Iraq's Oil
besides killing and maiming horrendous numbers of human beings, and making obscene profits from war-related spending, that is.
Micronukes/Nanonukes Can Be Made by the US
The Hiroshima bomb was 20 kilotons TNT equivalent.
Several pounds TNT equivalent is roughly 1 millionth of a Hiroshima bomb-- making it easily a "micronuke" in comparison to a smallish nuke.
"Modern nuclear warheads range in yield from 100 kt to 20 Mt TNT equivalent."
Several pounds TNT equivalent is roughly 1 billionth of a 20 Mt TNT equivalent bomb-- making it a "nanonuke" in comparison to a large nuke.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
An Inside Joke?
Luc Courchesne: Video Artist and Cheney Hit Videographer
Here is more about Luc Courchesne on 9/11 and here is more about his graphics work.
Iraq War Media Follies
Except the NYTimes neglects to mention something kind of important:
On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.
It's a hugely significant development. Lawmakers demanding an end to the occupation now have the upper hand in the Iraqi legislature for the first time; previous attempts at a similar resolution fell just short of the 138 votes needed to pass (there are 275 members of the Iraqi parliament, but many have fled the country's civil conflict, and at times it's been difficult to arrive at a quorum).
Meanwhile, the much heralded "surge" is going to last much longer than they said it would-- for another year, at least.
The Vietnam War-ization of Iraq continues apace.
The Vietnam War is a mystery only if seen through the accumulated myths surrounding it-- such as that it resulted from blunders, or even from overconfident jingoism. Viewed however, as an exercise in deliberate mismanagement, it ceases to mystify, for its outcome fulfilled precisely the goals traditional to the CFR***.
The Iraq War is a mystery only if seen through the accumulated myths surrounding it-- such as that it resulted from blunders, or even from overconfident intelligence on WMD. Viewed however, as an exercise in deliberate mismanagement, it ceases to mystify, for its outcome fulfilled precisely the goals traditional to the ruling elite.
***Council of Foreign Relations
Partying Like It's September 11, 2001
They had a freakin party to celebrate the release of a *Debunking 9-11 Myths* book?!
Sterling Publishing/Hearst Books
Newsweek (big surprise, Newspeak)
National Geographic Adventure
The New York Times (big surprise #2)
Wetherell & Associates, Inc.
Medicare Rights Center (?!)
New York Sun
This Old House
(link for that slick dude debenedetti, he arrived in NYC on Sept 8, 2001 (?!)
and was one of the four contributors the the book)
Definitely a creepy bunch of people there.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Simple Proof the Official 9/11 Story Is Very Wrong: Pentagon Edition
Faked Plane Crashes
Of course, it doesn't help that much of the plane debris we've been shown has the signs of being planted-- such as this and this.
WTC Window Washers and Plane-Shaped Holes
This idea is actually preferable, I think, to the idea that Directed Energy Weapons made the holes.
The major sections of columns in the center holes merely seem to have broken off at the top and fallen inward, and the columns certainly don't look like they have been rammed inward by a huge plane that doesn't even slow as it cuts into the tower.
The Chernobyl image at 4:57 in is followed by a hole in the ground next to the south tower at ground zero-- that is also an interesting comparison with Chernobyl.
Monday, May 07, 2007
An Obvious Tenet Lie About 9/11 and Al Qaeda
On Sept. 11, Tenet was at breakfast near the White House when the first plane hit. He thought instantly of his old nemesis.
"I knew immediately this was bin Laden. I excused myself from breakfast. I jumped in the car," he remembers.
"What do you mean you knew immediately? I mean, most people in the country thought there had been a terrible accident," Pelley asks.
"Listen, when you’ve been following this as long as I've been following this, when you’ve been thinking about multiple spectacular attacks. There was no doubt what had happened in my mind immediately," Tenet explains.
At the CIA headquarters, as the towers burned and the Pentagon was hit, Tenet got the aircraft passenger manifest; Hazmi and Mihdhar*** were listed.
***"Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar, two of the 9/11 hijackers, are among the reasons. Before 9/11, Tenet’s CIA headquarters knew that they were al Qaeda and in America. But the information was filed, not passed to the FBI."
Yesterday on "Meet the Press"-- Tenet (referring to Sept. 12th)-- "We, we, we had not concluded that al-Qaeda was responsible for September 11... "
The sequence of photographs taken during the demolition of a building in Sao Paulo show very clearly the famous "squibs" firing out of upper floors at the beginning of the operation, similar to those seen at the WTC.
There is no doubt that conventional demolition charges were used in the Twin Towers. Why do this if the towers are going to be destroyed by nuclear devices? The pre-positioned conventional charges could not possibly have any controlling effect on the power of the nuclear blast.
The reason - Layers of Deep Black Cover. They know that anyone looking at it afterwards with any intelligence will see the towers were blown up with enormous force. But they do not want anyone to suspect it was a nuclear device. So cover it up with evidence of a conventional controlled demolition. This diverts attention away from the fact that they were not simply imploded but volcanically exploded, from the top down.
The military use different levels of secrecy and cover stories to mount "Black Ops". One set of operatives are given one reason for what they are doing. Another team, with no mutual knowledge of the other teams, is given a different set of tasks with a different cover story and so on. Everything is compartmentalised on a "need to know" basis so nobody has the complete picture except a few pulling the strings at the top.
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Why the JFK Assassination Still Matters
2) government officials covered up what really happened and created a false reality, and elected officials went along with it
3) THE MEDIA LIED to help cover up the truth
4) when the truth started leaking out to the public through various channels, a massive disinformation campaign was created to continue the cover-up-- many JFK researchers were government-sponsored disinformation artists
5) there still has been no justice for what happened
6) the course of the US changed markedly for the worse
I Get E-mail
From : XXX XXXXX
Sent : Wednesday, May 2, 2007 11:33 AM
Subject : 911 Hoax
I was in the city and personally saw the first plane strike the first tower. So did the hundreds of people around me. How was that Faked??
I immediately emailed the fellow back, and asked for more details-- what exactly he saw and so forth. But he hasn't replied.
So, the deal is-- I am thrilled to get actual eye-witness testimony. But something like this email is basically worthless. If someone out there saw a plane hit the WTC (or Pentagon) on 9/11 in "person", I'm happy to hear your account with as many details as possible.
By the way, I tend to think that some sort of real aircraft hit the North tower (the first hit)*. So this fellow may have indeed seen some plane hit the tower. Though it's very much in the air what kind of plane or aircraft hit the North tower. That's why any detail he could provide is of great interest.
*I think the South tower was where nothing hit and was pure video fakery.
Were Planes Shot Down on 9/11?
Ondrovic said, "I saw something in the sky, it was a plane, but it was way out. It looked like it was over Jersey or something, then it wasn't there anymore. I saw a small fireball, and it was gone. I saw two other planes. One came in one way, and the other came in the other way, and there was a plane in the middle that was way far off in the distance. Then the plane in the middle just disappeared into a little fire ball. It looked like the size of a golf ball from where I could see it. And the other two planes veered off into opposite directions."
This statement, or part of it, has been claimed as evidence of directed energy weapon (DEW) use. Maybe so. But I propose that the following conventional explanation is more plausible, and should be investigated. It appears that Ondrovic (in the midst of the chaos on the ground near her) is reporting two separate planes and two fireballs. Admittedly she notes that the first fireball "was way out." She offers more detail about the second fireball. Can not the second incident (and possibly the first too) be explained by my hypothesized scenario, as follows. A jet (or several) has been sent by a local commander in violation of the regime's supposed, stand down order, or NORAD "collapse." But the Air Forces did have jets flying--in fact, to make sure that nothing interfered with their nefarious plans that day. It appears that two jets from opposite sides went to intercept a third ("unauthorized") jet, and then shot it down with cannon fire or missiles. Then the two jets "veered off"--as Ondrovic notes--when their job was completed. Perhaps even this is what Tenet refers to, in his slip-up on the recent 60 minutes interview. He said "planes flying into air for[ce].airports." Now there is nothing anomalous about planes flying into "airports." But planes flying into the air FORce on 9/11 is quite striking. Note that my scenario also jives with what some witnesses claim was a shoot-down of Flight 93-by other jet(s)-- in the Shanksville, PA vicinity. I propose that instead of a stand-down, or NORAD collapse, the regime had numerous flights in the air to prevent local commanders from interfering with the 9/11 plans of the government. Flight 93 was likely shot down, and Ondrovic may have witnessed a double shoot down by conventional, but still murderous, means. I propose that the government was in fact "Flying and Lying," and shooting down those true patriots who tried to stop 9/11.
I would add that there probably was no stand-down on 9/11, as there were no real hijacked planes to shoot down, and that the apparent shoot-downs were the normal actions of the Air Force trying to stop new attacks and enforce the "grounding" orders that were issued that morning.
If planes WERE shot down that morning, the big question of course is WHAT was shot down? Passenger jets? Planes with 9/11 hoax participants? If Ondrovic DIDN'T see planes being shot down, what did she see????
I tend not to think UA93 was shot down-- I think the debris trail was planted-- but I don't rule it out either. And of course I really don't think any plane crashed in that hole in Shanksville.