Controversy And Conspiracies III
Souce: bbc.co.uk
Mike Rudin 2 Jul 08, 09:00 AM
After the huge response to Richard Porter's blogs last year about 9/11 Part of the conspiracy? I was very keen to get to the bottom of what exactly happened.
For the latest Conspiracy Files programme, on 9/11 - The Third Tower (Sunday 6 July at 2100 BST on BBC Two), I've been looking in detail at allegations that there was a conspiracy to deliberately demolish a third tower at the World Trade Center.
This third skyscraper was never hit by an aeroplane. There is little photographic evidence of extensive damage. Yet seven hours after the Twin Towers collapsed, this 47-storey building collapsed in a few seconds.
Afterwards the thousands of tonnes of steel from the building were taken away to be melted down in the Far East. The official explanation is that this third huge tower at the World Trade Center collapsed because of ordinary fires - but that makes this the first and only skyscraper in the world to have collapsed because of fire. Nearly seven years on the final official report on the building has still not been published. The report is now promised this month.
World Trade Center Building 7 has become the subject of heated speculation and a host of conspiracy theories suggesting it was brought down by a controlled demolition. And some people suggest it was not just the government and foreign intelligence, but the police, the fire service, first responders and even the media that were involved.
It is certainly true that on 9/11 the BBC broadcast that WTC7 had collapsed when it was still standing. Then the satellite transmission seemed to cut out mysteriously when the correspondent was still talking. Then Richard Porter admitted in his blog last year that the BBC had lost those key tapes of BBC World News output from the day.
So is that proof that we at the BBC are part of a huge sinister conspiracy or is there a simpler explanation?
The mystery of the missing tapes didn't last that long. One very experienced film librarian kindly agreed to have another look for us one night. There are more than a quarter of a million tapes just in the Fast Store basement at Television Centre. The next morning I got a call to say the tapes had been found. They'd just been put back on the wrong shelf - 2002 rather than 2001. Not so sinister after all.
What about the incorrect reporting of the collapse of Tower 7? Having talked to key eyewitnesses who were actually at Ground Zero that day it is clear that, as early as midday, the fire service feared that Tower 7 might collapse. This information then reached reporters on the scene and was eventually picked up by the international media.
The internet movie Loose Change has been viewed by more than 100 million people according to its makers and it asks this question in the latest film release: "Where did CNN and the BBC get their information especially considering the building was still standing directly behind their reporters?"
It turns out that the respected news agency Reuters picked up an incorrect report and passed it on. They have issued this statement:
"On 11 September 2001 Reuters incorrectly reported that one of the buildings at the New York World Trade Center, 7WTC, had collapsed before it actually did. The report was picked up from a local news story and was withdrawn as soon as it emerged that the building had not fallen."
I put this to the writer and director of Loose Change, Dylan Avery. I asked whether he believed the BBC was part of the conspiracy. Given the question his film had posed about the BBC I was surprised by Dylan's response: "Of course not, that's ludicrous. Why would the BBC be part of it?"
He added candidly: "I didn't really want to put that line in the movie."
And the reason the interview with the BBC correspondent, Jane Standley, ended so abruptly? The satellite feed had an electronic timer, which cut out at 1715 exactly.
We've done our best to tackle many of the other questions raised about Tower 7. I interviewed the lead official investigators, scientists and eyewitnesses who support the official explanation; but also architects, engineers and others who now question that account.
The final report on 9/11 should be with us soon. The official investigators are confident they will be able to solve the final mystery of 9/11. But I doubt they will ever convince their harshest critics, who believe there was a home-grown conspiracy at work that day.
- Jon Gold's blog
- Login to post comments
COUNT THE LIES-
So is that proof that we at the BBC are part of a huge sinister conspiracy or is there a simpler explanation?
The mystery of the missing tapes didn't last that long. One very experienced film librarian kindly agreed to have another look for us one night. There are more than a quarter of a million tapes just in the Fast Store basement at Television Centre. The next morning I got a call to say the tapes had been found. They'd just been put back on the wrong shelf - 2002 rather than 2001. Not so sinister after all.
What about the incorrect reporting of the collapse of Tower 7? Having talked to key eyewitnesses who were actually at Ground Zero that day it is clear that, as early as midday, the fire service feared that Tower 7 might collapse. This information then reached reporters on the scene and was eventually picked up by the international media.
The internet movie Loose Change has been viewed by more than 100 million people according to its makers and it asks this question in the latest film release: "Where did CNN and the BBC get their information especially considering the building was still standing directly behind their reporters?"
It turns out that the respected news agency Reuters picked up an incorrect report and passed it on. They have issued this statement:
"On 11 September 2001 Reuters incorrectly reported that one of the buildings at the New York World Trade Center, 7WTC, had collapsed before it actually did. The report was picked up from a local news story and was withdrawn as soon as it emerged that the building had not fallen."
I put this to the writer and director of Loose Change, Dylan Avery. I asked whether he believed the BBC was part of the conspiracy. Given the question his film had posed about the BBC I was surprised by Dylan's response: "Of course not, that's ludicrous. Why would the BBC be part of it?"
He added candidly: "I didn't really want to put that line in the movie."
And the reason the interview with the BBC correspondent, Jane Standley, ended so abruptly? The satellite feed had an electronic timer, which cut out at 1715 exactly.
I count one.
That WTC7 is the "final mystery of 9/11." That is a BLATANT lie, and is what prompted me to create this film.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
How Preposterous is This?
"The satellite feed had an electronic timer, which cut out at 1715 exactly."
Almost as preposterous...
as denying the basic common sense backed up by scientific fact that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were controlled demolition.
That's more like it.
As we get closer to the date, the true nature of the "documentary" is revealed. I imagine it will be fair and balanced, in a Rupert Murdoch kind of way, but far more nuanced.
Here are our blog entries from last year on Ms. Standley;
"The Famous BBC WTC7 Video viewable at LiveLeak"
http://911blogger.com/node/6482
"The BBC in Denial"
http://911blogger.com/node/6501
"Jim Hoffman's article on BBC's 9/11 Timeline & Foreknowledge of WTC 7's Collapse"
http://911blogger.com/node/6512
"BBC Has Lost Tapes Of 21st Century's Defining Moment"
http://911blogger.com/node/6529
"Time-Stamp Corroborates 911Veritas' Timing"
http://911blogger.com/node/6536
"Part of the Conspiracy? (2)"
http://911blogger.com/node/6595
-----------------------------------------------------
So how come nobody knew about the Reuters report last year?
Reuters
Producers of Conspiracy Files
Date: Thursday, July 3, 2008 9:49 AM
To: James, Michael
Subject: BBC Early Report WTC7
Size: 4 KB
Greetings,
Thank you for getting back to me so soon regarding the outstanding FOIA request
for the WTC 7 south side (close up/lobby) photos and video. I placed a call to
NIST yesterday in order to receive an update of the fee waiver request. I will
forward anything I get from a release to you for dissemination.
On another subject, I read a message on your blog regarding the BBC early
collapse report and would like to send you some follow up questions that you may
be presented with following the airing of the documentary. The questions work
to eliminate any so-called "plausible deniability" which is a "Church Committee"
buzz word over here in the states.
In order to eliminate the plausible deniability surrounding this particular
aspect of your documentary please consider the following questions:
First- Regarding the Early Report of the Collapse:
"Conspiracy Files" claims that Reuters was the first party to state that WTC 7
(the Solomon Brothers Building ) had collapsed before it actually did,
Conspiracy Files attempts to resolve the issue with the following statement:
"It turns out that the respected news agency Reuters picked up an incorrect
report and passed it on. They have issued this statement:
"On 11 September 2001 Reuters incorrectly reported that one of the buildings at
the New York World Trade Center, 7WTC, had collapsed before it actually did. The
report was picked up from a local news story and was withdrawn as soon as it
emerged that the building had not fallen.""
1- When did Reuters issue the withdrawal of the story?
2-What is the process of issuing a story and withdrawing a story?
3- Who specifically at Reuters reported that the building had actually collapsed
after they picked up the story?
4- If there were rumors that the building might go all day, at what time did the
Reuters story get released, and who released it?
5-Is the statement that Reuters "issued" to Conspiracy Files contemporary (ie;
Is it a statement made now in 2008, or is there evidence that Reuters actually
withdrew the statement in 2001)?
6-Please show documentation from 11 Sep 2001 that Reuters withdrew the story
regarding the collapse of WTC 7 before it did.
7- Was the purported retraction by Reuters issued in the short time between the
initial false report of the collapse and the time of the actual collapse? (Data
is needed that show that a retraction statement issued in 2001)?
8- Where did Reuters "pick up" the story?
9- What is Reuters process of "picking up" stories?
Second-Regarding the Satellite Feed:
Satellite Feed cut out at 1715
1-On what information does BBC base that information on (the 1715 cut off)?
2-Must we take BBC's word on this, or is this information have a verified
source?
3- Please show us the verified data regarding the Satellite Feed timer from 11
Sep 2001.
Answers to the above questions now will certainly help to avoid the likely
influx of questions later, and may help to solve the matter without the
necessity of FOIA requests being issued in the UK.
--
In the 90's I worked for
In the 90's I worked for Reuters America in Long Island, NY. I worked next to the guys that developed and maintained the New Processing System that is used to feed stories into the Reuters news wire (I worked on the Time and Sales application). The day of the OJ verdict a headline was put out early that OJ was convicted. It was quickly removed from the system within 15 minutes. Any Reuters reporter can enter a story or even just the headline (story to be added later) from any of the 15,000 Reuters terminals (at the time) around the world. So, it is certianly not impossible for a Reuters' reporter to have picked up a wrong headline, published it, and then have it deleted soon thereafter. As far as oversight, there basically isn't any. If a reporter makes a mistake they can correct it with an update - they don't need "approval".
Hopes this helps.
There was no "wrong headline"
it was exactly right, just a few minutes early.
And: They even seem to know that nobody died in the that collapse. That's clearly clairvoyant, at this was the official account afterwards (regardless of right or false).
Mike Rudin seems to jump on that bandwaggon, that Mark Roberts set off: The whisper that building 7 would come down because it was so terrible damaged. The problem with this story: Even after years of reserch we coulnd't not track down the original source of that claim. Sure, firefighters and police officers repeated it, but were did it emerged at first?
I have shown all over that someone strangely knew all along what would happened that day, the aprroaching second plane, the south and north tower come down, WTC 7. And even more strangely it was always a anonymous guy within the OEM, who predicted all that stuff. That's totally bogus, if it would be real, we knew the name of this hero!
Some Just Can't Accept Idea Of Criminality Within Government
Everything is a coincidence.
Please continue shopping.
911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy
911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy - 80 min - Jun 25, 2007
Official Confusion - bbc5.tv
(385 Ratings)
911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy - new documentary by Adrian Connock and David Shayler about the BBC's selective and distorted 91...all » 911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy - new documentary by Adrian Connock and David Shayler about the BBC's selective and distorted 911 coverage. With particular reference to the Conspiracy Files programme aired on BBC Two on February 18th 2007
Before you dismiss this video you should watch it. It is very good.
Thanks for this, Joe -
Thanks for this, Joe - looking fwd to watching it tonight!
Betsy
Summer of Truth
Not Shayler
Shayler thinks real planes never hit the WTC and later, went nuts in public. It doesn't matter how good the film is, they will be able to turn around and link it to a complete lunatic on the order of Icke and lizards, so it makes anything he does useless.
"David Shayler explained to reporters at The Times, The Liverpool Echo, and in public appearances recorded on video, that the Trade Center jetliner crashes where faked using "missiles wrapped in holograms", and that "' . . . there is little evidence to show that jets went into the buildings . . . Watch the footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Centre.'"
9/11 was an inside job says Shayler; by Paddy Shennan; January 22, 2007; The Liverpool Echo
http://daveshayler.com/print/papers/220107LiverpoolEcho.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html
and
"Shayler has since become controversial for his opinions regarding the September 11, 2001 attacks but has been rejected in the 9/11 Truth Movement following his public allegations of being a messiah and his claims that real airplanes did not impact the World Trade Center towers.[1][2][3][4][5][6]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Shayler
Has nothing to do with his BBC rebuttal
North Texans for 911 Truth (new site)
http://tellstruth.webs.com/index.htm
North Texans for 911 Truth Meetup Site
http://9-11.meetup.com/249/
Yes, it has a lot to do with
Yes, it has a lot to do with it.
"I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet but the credibility I add to the movement is enormous."
9/11 was an inside job says Shayler; by Paddy Shennan; January 22, 2007; Liverpool Echo
http://daveshayler.com/print/papers/220107LiverpoolEcho.html
"What I am still saying is go onto the internet and look at the footage . . . people have had a go at me saying there were no planes but there is little evidence to show that jets went into the buildings. I'm entitled to say they didn't and something else did . . . You can make some accurate calculations from Newton's laws of motion."
9/11 was an inside job says Shayler
http://daveshayler.com/print/papers/220107LiverpoolEcho.html
The reality is that most spooks or agents or infiltrators have something meaningful to provide in order to gain access to a group. The challenge is to get what they offer without getting stained by them in the process.
Only weird people, idiots, and psychos
Think someone has lost, or have no credibility, for anything they said or did, or that it has no value, just because they got sick later.
And / or people lacking in personal credibility themselves, and / or have lacking levels of compassion and empathy and caring.
WTF is wrong with people, anyways?
Satellite Feed
Satellite Feed cut out at 1715
1-On what information does BBC base that information on?
2-Must we take BBC's word on this, or is this information sourced?
3- Please show us the data regarding the Satellite Feed timer from 11 Sep 2001.
Just in case you've been living in a cave
First advance review of Conspiracy Files WTC 7 episode
There's a review of "The Conspiracy Files: 9/11--The Third Tower" in the latest issue of the Radio Times, which is the BBC's own TV listings guide. I'm going to wait and see the program before making my mind up. But, unfortunately, this review doesn't make it sound that promising:
9/11: The Conspiracy Files
Sunday 06 July
9:00pm - 10:00pm
BBC2
The Third Tower
There might come a point where you'll find yourself nodding sagely and murmuring, "Mmm, yes, that could have happened, because I must say it sounds very plausible." But you'll come to your senses. Conspiracy theories are nonsense and this particular supposed plot is dafter than most (spread, of course, by that conduit for poisonous nonsense, the internet). Apparently, the 11 September attacks were orchestrated by the Bush administration with the collusion of the secret service and the New York fire and police departments. The evidence? The fate of World Trade Center 7. The 47-storey building was home to various government agencies - it wasn't directly hit by a plane, but collapsed after being badly damaged by a subsequent fire on 11 September. Conspiracy theorists (or teenagers talking rubbish on message boards) claim it was blown up by a controlled explosion, though no-one can explain why or to what purpose. Watching this whole "conspiracy" edifice totter in the face of actual evidence is greatly satisfying.
RT reviewer - Alison Graham
Source: http://www.radiotimes.com/ListingsServlet?event=10&channelId=107&programmeId=80821733&jspLocation=/jsp/prog_details_fullpage.jsp
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.shoestring911.blogspot.com
Not Looking Good... Based on Mike Rudin's BBC5 Radio...
Interview from yesterday !!!
---
I was like you Shoestring, optimistic that much good would come from this episode, but having listened to his short interview, now believe this episode will be a whitewash !!!
If this is, what it's looking like, then all I can say is shame on Mike, and shame on the BBC.
---
Please listen to it yourselves and post what you think... it starts approx 1hr 38mins into the broadcast.
Link : http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00cb1v4
---
I hope he includes at least the following in this episode :
"Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure."
in the NY Post on 12-Sep-2001 stating...
"it's devastating, they'll have to scrap many cases, and start from scratch on others"
---
If this is a hit, however subtle then I can only assume that parts of the BBC are participating in the 9/11 cover-up.
At least WTC7, Richard Gage, Prof Jones and Dylan Avery will get some airtime, and many folks will wonder why they had never heard or seen WTC7's "demolition like" collapse on 9/11.
---
Best wishes
>>If this is a hit, however
>>If this is a hit, however subtle then I can only assume that parts of the BBC are participating in the 9/11 cover-up.
Of course it's a hit. But it's likely the BBC just did what everyone else did, which was to do whatever those in power want them to do, and then when they made a mistake, they worked hard to cover their asses.
Look at the Enron scam that bilked many Americans and the state of CA out of billions. Did the financial analysts who covered for Enron go to jail? No. Merrill Lynch, Citi, etc. -- all the same who then went and did the subprime scam -- they were involved and covered Enron glowingly all through until it was impossible not to, but nothing happened to them. Only the Enron direct sidekick Arthur Anderson went down, but none of the others and the mainstream media were "implicated" as participants.
And in the end what happened? A very few went to jail, but most walked away with millions, hundreds of millions and billions. And California got the Terminator.
There are winners and losers in these crimes. Likely BBC just did what everyone else was doing. The interesting part is when these efforts to trash the CTs have blowback and we gain more people than they turn off.
But claiming they're part of the plot only gives them opportunities like this to rant that they are not. They just did what they were told, and like everyone at Abu Graib, Guantanamo, Enron, the subprime scam, etc., they never asked the questions they were supposed to, and probably helped cover for anyone powerful who they could personally benefit from helping.
Genesis of the label "conspiracy theories"
If you did not believe that only one person participated in the murder of JFK, then you were someone who believed in a conspiracy . . that a group rather than an individual committed the crime.
The official 9/11 narrative is a tale of a conspiracy led by one of the world's wealthiest men who is hiding in a cave tethered to a dialysis machine. If you believe the official story, then you believe in conspiracies.
oh man
"Apparently, the 11 September attacks were orchestrated by the Bush administration with the collusion of the secret service and the New York fire and police departments. The evidence? The fate of World Trade Center 7."
And this is why more and more Ive been taking the Jon Gold approach to 9/11 truth. The constant focus on controlled demolition is becoming tiresome.
_______________________________________
9/18 was an inside job! So maybe 9/11 was too...
>>The constant focus on
>>The constant focus on controlled demolition is becoming tiresome.
I don't see a constant focus, I see tons of different types of articles and ideas all over the front page.
The demolitions touch on the most fragile areas of the cover-up, so they will generate the strongest efforts to discredit, dissuade, distort, etc.
If you feel fed up, tell the BBC. Or, go work on something else. There are *tons* of other things to work on.
Absolutely. Mike Ruppert
Absolutely. Mike Ruppert was not far off base when he told about how he'd seen physical evidence being manipulated in a court room. So it is important to stress other subjects.
I dont feel fed up, but when someone says the evidence for 9/11 being an inside job is essentially "building 7" I do certainly cringe. And thanks for the marching orders to 'work on something else' --actually, Ive been working on a piece about PROMIS and one about the anthrax attacks.
_______________________________________
9/18 was an inside job! So maybe 9/11 was too...
CD Physical Evidence Manipulated?
> Mike Ruppert was not far off base when he told about how he'd seen
> physical evidence being manipulated in a court room.
Funny you would imply that he was off base about that at all. That's happened more than once. The crime lab in Houston and others have been found to have faked all kinds of reports and testimony.
However, how would network and amateur videos, all of which show the Towers' rapid, even, explosive, and thorough destruction be manipulated to change those utterly damning features?
The biggest rhetorical problem with controlled demolition is that people get bored with what's old and simple, so they start looking for stuff that's new and complicated. As a result, the pristine clarity of that core evidence -- which has been available to everyone since the day of the attack -- gets muddled and diluted with speculation and debate about precisely how it was done. I'm not saying Dr. Jones iron-rich spheres findings or other stuff like that is a waste of time -- far from it. But it's already as well established as well as any engineering explanation ever could be, that the WTC was brought down by (unconventional) controlled demolition. That alone, in any fair world, would be enough to generate a new, unbiased investigation, not of "what really happened" but of WHO DID IT.
It is through distractions, both external and internal, that we stray off-point and off-message. If we had come up with proper sound-bites from the beginning, pitched to the masses who will NEVER get as interested in all this as we are (and will never read BOOKS or long webpages about it) we would be in a very different position by now. I propose a bumper sticker and I grant permission for anyone to make it and sell it: A simple, clear graphic of the Twin Towers forming the two L's of "They Fell Too Fast!" plus the web address of a very credible website such as 911RESEARCH.COM, JOURNALOF911STUDIES.COM, or AE911TRUTH.ORG, in very legible letters.
Other such very brief but clear stickers must be possible -- help think of more! "9/11 Was an Inside Job" doesn't work well, because it only expresses an opinion. It doesn't provide ANY evidence and it doesn't give people any starting point for intelligent research.
If just one out of ten of us 9/11 skeptics had such a readable, almost (but not quite) immediately comprehensible (therefore intriguing), and memorable sticker on our car, our gym locker, or elsewhere, before long we might be getting a lot more MSM interviews. It could become a phenomenon unto itself, which would be the brain-dead MSM "human interest" hook. Whoever gets interviewed would need to firmly redirect the reporter to the features of the destruction that indicate CD, instead of wasting valuable air time as Dylan Avery and Jim Fetzer did by (respectively) showing the laptop used to make Loose Change and the office where they write, making the story about personalities instead of the evidence.
My 17 cents (after inflation).
You don't see a constant focus?
Almost every event (with the exception of the Keene, NH event to my knowledge) within the last two years has had either Richard Gage or Steven Jones as the "keynote" speaker. 80 - 90% of every post on 911blogger.com is about Controlled Demolition in one form or another. The BBC is addressing WTC7 as "the final mystery of 9/11." How many times has WTC7 been addressed as "the smoking gun" in this movement? Too many to count.
When news about the Jane Standley video came out, I was very skeptical, and asked people to be careful with what they promoted. Here is a GOOD example of why we MUST be careful with what we promote because as Dr. Pepper said in Chicago, IF YOU’RE NOT, YOU WILL BE DISCREDITED.
Zombie Bill Hicks, I think, is sick and tired of how EASY it is to make us look insane with Controlled Demolition. I'm almost numb to it at this point (not quite), but I understand where he is coming from.
There was a time in this movement when Controlled Demolition was "taboo." It was one of those "crazy" sounding theories like pods that everyone avoided. WingTV used to make HUGE stinks about different people that REFUSED to talk about how the towers and WTC7 were brought down by Controlled Demolition. Like when Kyle Hence confronted Lee Hamilton on Pakistan. 911Truth.org's policy for posting, at one time, shyed away from Controlled Demolition. It wasn't until Steven Jones came out that everyone started to give CD the benefit of the doubt. Since his coming out, the movement has focused almost all of its' energy on CD.
The media is trying to paint us as the movement that thinks the buildings were brought down by Controlled Demolition because it's EASIER for them to deal with us if we're only about one issue. I am sure that this post will get voted down. I'm tired, and really don't care anymore.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Sorry but controlled Demolition is the most solid edivence....
Sorry but controlled Demolition is the most solid edivence out there, you could have someone from the CIA admitting that they played a major part in letting the attacks happen and for one reason or another they would be ignored or ripped to pieces in court. You cannot argue with Science, we have seen this happen when people believed the world was flat- and look who won that one.
The stance people should take about " Oh so, the Govenment, the fire department, the police the BBC and CNN must have all been in on it?- thats too many people" is agree. I agree that if 1000's of people like Fire Fighter and News reporters were involved someone would have talked by now.
The fact of the matter is- we need to be dealing with 'Conspiracy Facts' not 'Conspiracy Theories'- we dont need to fill in the blanks ourselves and make stuff up to fit, all we need to do is prove the govenment account isnt correct and keep educating the masses and we will get there. Look how far we have come already, and the wonderful work people are doing out there on the streets!
Dont worry about the BBC- Their last attempt to discredit us did absolutly nothing to the movement, and anyone with half a brain could see how bias it was. This one will be more of the same and Im pretty sure will look as pathetic.
Also just tell people- Peer
Also just tell people-
Peer review papers in Scientific journals, 400 architects and engineers ( hopefully 1000 by 9/11/08) all support CD.
They cant all be wrong can they?
I dunno
How many scientologists are there? Im being facetious but you understand the logic Im sure. Im not debating controlled demolition, Im speaking against making controlled demolition = 9/11 truth.
PS - could you point me in the direction of these peer reviewed papers in scientific journals please? Im unaware of them unless you are counting Steven Jones article more than once, and even then, as I recall, that particular journal is online only.
_______________________________________
9/18 was an inside job! So maybe 9/11 was too...
First of all lets remember we are all on the same side here....
First of all lets remember we are all on the same side here ( obviously no one is arguing or anything but....) Lets not do their job for them by dividing our own movement!
I respect all the edivence that you talk about and all other edivence that isnt CD that is credible, I just honestly dont think its gonna get anywhere? I dont see the strategy. I mean as longer away from the event we get, the witness edivence becomes more hazey ect. I mean you have all the edivence- what do you want to happen with it?
At least with Ae911truth they have a gameplan- they are sperading the word throughout the Architecture industry, recruiting new reputable scource to look at the edivence and forming a collective that noone is gonna be able to ignore.
I mean like I said- 400 of them cant all be wrong?
And Steven Jones on going research and tests is amazing, he is also activitly spreading the word in the scientific community.
Dont get me wrong, all the edivence is important, bt you cannot argue with scientific facts, its not circumstantial, its not open to interpretation, it cannot be covered up or paid off- its black and white.
After the new investigation is opened we can start properly looking at all of this Who? What? Where and When? until then Im not gonna point the finger.
Speaking of demolitions . . .
Here's a recent presentation at the American Physical Society by an STJ911 member --
http://stj911.org/grabbe/APS_Presentation_2008.html
Author:
Crockett Grabbe (University of Iowa & SeaLane Consulting)
An analysis of the South Tower collapse is made by examining the earlier stages of the collapse, with careful consideration given to the conservation of energy and momentum in the top segment of the tower. This includes events such as the upward movement of the corner of that top segment on collapse initiation, at the same time that squibs appear below the segment. Information gained on the details of that development is used to calculate the minimum energy and power of the sources of that collapse initiation, and it is shown that the sources of that energy and power include 2 separate sets of conventional explosions inside the building just below the top segment. It is shown these explosive forces must produce the energy- and momentum-imparting moves of that top segment, and result in the white clouds that are seen to arise from pulverized concrete below the the floors where the plane impacted, and the subsequent gray clouds that result from pulverized concrete (part of it black carbon produced by the fires) of the top segment. The development of the gray clouds is shown to result from the rapid disintegration of this top segment near its interface with the floors below the impact.
2008 APS April Meeting and HEDP/HEDLA Meeting
Session W16: Physics Education II
http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/APR08/Event/84051
Presentation: outline and slides
http://www.sealane.org/writings/PhysSTFall.html
Sorry- also yeah, I was
Sorry- also yeah, I was counting Steven Jones paper in the Journal twice, but Im sure it will be the first of many!
How about four, five and six?
Isn't it interesting that "coincidentally" the only "story line" that Reuters was to make a mistake about was regarding building #7.
Well, what about WTCs four, five and six? Those buildings had even MORE damage than WTC7, so why didn't Reuters have concerns and create stories about THOSE buildings collapsing?
The BBC is in the bag, and its plain and simple, the employees know it...BUT...
Just like all the rest of the 9/11 attacks, MOST people involved were "fed" pre selected information and were just doing their jobs...so its understandible that they are incensed that folks are critical of their personal performances.
Hordon
Then why is it in there?
He added candidly: "I didn't really want to put that line in the movie."
Dylan Avery needs to be more careful about the things he says.
I suppose he could be quoted out of context there, but he says things all the time that are weird.
My take- please forward that to Rudin
"The official investigators are confident they will be able to solve the final !!! mystery of 9/11"
Mike Rudin Spinmaster. Listen!
WTC 7 isn’t the final mystery, it is one in a row of mysteries.
I just put together the main valid points and hints for an inside job in the last two weeks, points that can not be debunked, as they stand straight for the seventh year after the attacks, and were nearly never touched by “debunkers”. There is no special order in that points, and I’m sure I can add another 200 ones- I’m just not in the mood for deliver hard facts to ignorants. And, BTW, I have sources for all points, valid sources, established sources. It’s no problem to research it.
1: The failing interception of the hijacked planes and the lying from NORAD and FAA. No one was held accountable.
2: Wargames and Exercises that day- cover and confusion
3: Angel is next
4: Secret Service in Booker Elementary School did not evacuate Bush immediately- they know he was not in danger
5: Many members of the Bush Admin spoke of opportunities that 9/11 offered, Bush inclusive.
6: The change in chain of command in case of hijacking- accentuated to Rumsfeld who was MIA that day.
7: Cheney as Master of Wargames in the PEOC, with Norman Mineta testimony “plane is 30 miles out”, exposed the lie when Cheney entered the PEOC and that they tracked the flights but did nothing “do the order still stand?”
8: Lies of the US admin regarding forewarnings- there were countless ones.
9: Lies of the US admin that nobody could imagine such a scenario- exposed through books (Bachmans Running Man), through televison (Pilot of “The Lone Gunmen” aired half a year before 9/11) , plans like OP Bojinka that were found 1995 and through WTC security analysis like Schnabolk did and even military trainings of NORAD and FEMA anticipated such a scenario
10: Investigations into the terror plot were shut down by superiors, FBI and CIA alike.
Nancy Floyd, Kenneth Williams, Coleen Rowley, Harry Samit, Robert Wright, Ali Soufan, John O’Neill. The 9/11 timesline lists hundreds of events which illustrated how this was done: keep all field agents in dark while all agency superiors knew all all along: the Yemen Hub, the Malaysia Summit, San Diego. Etc. The alleged "wall" between the agencies is a myth, there were two units on track of the terrorist who handled that "problem" by creating units with members of all agencies, I-49 squad and Alec Station.
11: The terror groups were infiltrated from the early days on: Zakhary, Ali Mohamed, Emad Salem, Randy Glass, Abduss Attar Sheikh, Melvin Lattimore (Marvin Lattimore) and many more. The blind Sheik Abdel Rahman was "hands off".
12: Quaint foreknowledge: Israels instant messager company Odigo receiced a warning before the attack, source WaPo, Ha’aretz. ZIM, an Israely state shipping company with ties to arm smuggling to Iran (CNN), moved out off the WTC several weeks before 9/11, URBAN MOVING SYSTEMS, the dancing Israelis, were there to document the event and high-fiving.
Silverstein had a doctors appointment, his kids were running late that day, if not, all of them would be on the 88. floor of the North Tower and trapped.
SF mayor Willie Brown was told not to fly that day, John Ashroft didn’t for a whole month before.
13: “Elephant” traces left behind to get the idea of “moslem terrorists”, while no one took credentials. Looks arranged.
14: Al Qaeda terror videos used pictures of FBI from the hijackers- did they had no own ones? A video showing Atta and Jared in Afghanistan, promoted as evidence, was part of a western intelligence sting OP and shown in the documentary “Road to Guantanamo”, it could be established that some picures were shown the “foreign combattants” back in 2003, while the terror evidence hoax was promoted in 2007!
15: The leader of the free world, surrounded by inncocent first graders- a Psy-OP. A tip more and it would become bizarre.
16: Reducing the body count through prepairedness and exercises as well as the overall conducting- FEMA arrived late Monday night in New York for TRIPOD III, at the Pentagon a mass casualty exercise was underway, the Secret Service scrambled in NY because of an UN meeting, the time of the attacks (just before the working starts in NY) the North Tower hit wide above, the South Tower on one hand side so that one stairwell remains intact, while it was evacuated and so on. Clearly islamic terrorist do want high body count, only someone with some sort of conscience would subscribe to a body count nearly as high as in a kind of Pearl Harbor attack, the script analogy, that was adressed many times before and after 9/11.
17: The Bush Admin and its lack of will to investigate the attacks- we all knew of the question to Daschle and Co. to limit the scope of an investigation, the underfinanced 9/11 commission set up to fail in late 2002, the trick to perform the FBI to “never again” instead of researching 9/11, and to sidetrack the investigations with the never expelled Anthrax terror case.
18: Especially for Rudin: The role of the media as attack dogs, if there is nothing to hide, you don’t have to put out ad hominems. All kind of critic on Bush, even harmless one, was used to fire journalists after 9/11. Unpatriotic- McCarthyism.
19: Osama is guilty- since Second Zero, as Tenet, Rumsfeld or Fox News told us- while they promised to deliver a white paper for his guilt, we wait till today, Osama left unaccounted…
20. Pentagon was hit- the best defended building in the world.
21: The date- 9/11 as Emergency Call, a PSY-OP, but on the same day the Pentagon was begun to built, the NWO speech of G.Bush, 11 years before, 9/11 111 days from the end of the year. Muslim terrorists won’t use kabbalistiks, it’s demons work.
22: WTC 7 fire alarm was off due to test modus, no fire alarm data was provided in WTC 1 and 2, besides that all WTC alarms were sent offsite by satellite- someone is lying to us.
The repeater system did also malfunction, NIST claims a button was not pressed, but the very specialist for fire safety was with the firefighters at the fire command station in the North Tower Lobby. Mike Hurley. Incompetence? Again with no consequences. As for Rudy Giuliani.
23: Forged Evidence: The Al-Sutami pass surviving the WTC “infernos”, the new red bandana recovered from UA93, the CVR recordings of UA93 that do not stand up to closer scrutiny, all important data that would validate the authentification is amiss, the hijackers used a “Allah Akbar”, instead of what muslim experts say, the last words before dying were “"I testify there is no god but god and mohammed is the prophet of god.” And Allah Akbar would only be what a bad Hollywood script writer think of what they would say.
The “Osama is guilty” Pentagon video, found “coincidentally” in Jalalabad.
PFLP credential claim a fake- as dancing Palestinians, an old video.
24: Abu Ali Mustafa was murdered by Israel two weeks before 9/11- Mustafa was a leading man in the PFLP, who once hijacked four planes to bomb them, but failed to do so.
Bassum Abu Sharifs mentioned a plan is his autobiography: Haddads plan had been simple: stuff the light plane to the gills with high explosives, then get Abu Harb to fly the pre-planned route and crash it right into the middle of Tel Aviv's tallest building, Shalom Tower.
There are hints that the PFLP was a Shin Bet/Mossad sting OP, like Entebbe and the Sayeret Matkal (David H. Colvin). On board of one plane on 9/11 was Daniel Lewin, once member of that group, allegedly stabbed by one hijacker. Protecting a high secret plan?
25: All evidence for demolitions in NY on 9/11: Molten metal, high-tempeatur attack (the “meteorite”), carbonized paper, vaporized bodies and elements as molybden and vanadium, traces of original Nano-Thermate, microscopic spheres, finger-print of molten iron / thermate residues, WTC7, the farce of FEMA and NIST investigation and so on.
26: The Put-Options as evidence someone know something, even is this was a cover for a general sell before 9/11 and buy back-action afterwards item.
27: Secrecy under the mantle of “national security” as homicide-argument- e.g. try to get a view on the rest of the planes, the Pentagon videos, the 7000 pictures from NY NIST claims it has in his pocket, the long overdue firefighter interviews only made public through court action and so on.
Missing floor plans and statics. Variables of all NIST evaluation and tests.
28: Cui Bono, the Neocon Noble Lie and legend of a foreign enemy to unite within, energy, economy, military budgets, UNOcoal, Pipeline, iraqi oil, permanent war on terra, they were capable of such a crime, had a motive and the occasion do to so as they overtook the US government.
29: Bush was not elected, remember the vote scandal in Florida- the media hides that recount result till after 9/11 even as it was ready, later, when no one could critize a war time president, so at last the results were published without publicity, in the back of a few newspapers, with false headlines and the view on only one recount ballot- the undervotes. Clearly Bush had an motive: from a lame duck, not elected, doing nothing in foreign policy and 5 weeks vacation to a war time beloved president and with 80 % approval rates. Clinton was enabled by terror- the WTC 93 false flag terror, too.
30: Mysterious money transactions in the Twins before they collapsed, Convar, Andrei Koudachev und Gary Faberov, Evergreen “First Equity”. How did they now they would get away with their crimes?
31: The US Patriot Act was signed into law late October- nearly 1000 pages of highly sophisticated juristic law, that’s totally impossible in just 4 weeks- the law was written before and laid on some desks in Washington.
32: The story of the missing paymaster told by Chaim Kupferberg.
33: The war in Afghanistan was ordered before 9/11. “Carpet of bombs”, Nifay Naik, US and British fleet on the way before 9/11.
34: The Jimjams of G.W. Bush, asked about foreknowledge- a criminal suspiciously behaviour.
35: The role of Saudi-Arabia in the plot, 9/11 hijackers tied to Saudi government, Graham says in book. Graham wrote that the staff of the congressional inquiry concluded that two Saudis in the San Diego area, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Bassan, who gave significant financial support to two hijackers, were working for the Saudi government.
3 sheiks turned dead after Zubadai sings their names in US custody to US intelligence services, as he believed he was held by Saudis and the princes would know what to do.
36: Saudi-Government denied that there was ever a quarrel about the suspect list with prince Saud and the US government- but we do have that document.
37: The mysteries surrounding Atta and Co., Military Schools, Jump Seats, Wolfgang Bohringer, Amanda Keller, Whiskey, Women and Drugs, Casino ships, Las Vegas Trips, their missing motive (Why did these 19 do what they did? Hamilton, “They hate us because of our freedom” is no real explanation) Their flights around the world despite beeing watchlisted, their travel destinations (Marriot at WTC), everything.
38: NIST concealed the ownership change in the months before 9/11 to Silverstein, so a dubious smell remains- Silverstein is no prime suspect for me, but to handle three buildings over to a men with jewish religion looks like a trap that was built up to dismiss all “hot demolition” claims as antisemitic- a claim that wouldn’t be possible with the PANYNJ in charge of the buildings. Besides that Lucky Larry had unbelieveable luck- only his buildings deconstructed in full on 9/11, other surrounding buildings do still stand, as Deutsche Bank building or Fiterman Hall, and keep in mind the asbestos concerns and other problems with a deconstruction of such large White Elephants. Not a single item of the treaties is known, even Vornado won't tell us.
39: All the dis-info-artist out there are there for a reason- fog of war, ad hominems, divide and conquer, Co-Intel-Pro- the more because it became even more acute.
40: Black Boxes of WTC crash found or not?
“The FBI states, and also reported to the 9-11 Commission, that none of the recording devices from the two planes that hit the World Trade Center were ever recovered.”
There has always been some skepticism about this assertion, particularly as two N.Y. City firefighters, Mike Bellone and Nicholas De Masi, claimed in 2004 that they had found three of the four boxes, and that Federal agents took them and told the two men not to mention having found them. (The FBI denies the whole story.)
And Hamilton did not know- everytime somethings smells fishy he just do not know:
Hamilton: I do not recall any reference to the black box.
Solomon: Were they all found?
Hamilton: I do not know, off hand, I do not know.
41: Tape of Flight controllers was destroyed. Why?
Punkt 42: Shock & Awe as described by the secret leader of the 9/11 commission:
Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the new danger. Philip Zelikow. Now was that article a fear mongering one or a wish-list? Could it be misinterpreted as the ladder by some rogue elements in the US admin, like the shadow government, which was established trough the JFK murder, false flag terror and all the roots of undisputed government misdoings the last 40 years?