Posts Tagged ‘911’

New Video Compilation Of 9/11 Witness Testimony To Explosives Being Used At WTC-7

February 13, 2014

New Video Compilation Of 9/11 Witness Testimony To Explosives Being Used At WTC-7
By Dark Politricks

These are some very good videos which sceptics and believers of the official conspiracy story on 9/11 and what brought down the Twin Towers should watch.

Why? Well the videos contain numerous clips of TV footage from the day of the attacks which are hard to find nowadays.

This TV footage from mainstream channels shows numerous witnesses and TV commentators speaking of how they heard bombs and explosives go off. What is very illuminating is how on the day of the event even the mainstream media were willing to ask questions about explosives, controlled demolitions and drones / military planes being flown into the buildings. It’s such a shame that they are all now towing the party line and keeping quiet about what they know happened that day.

From Fireman to Policeman, reporters and office workers there are numerous witnesses who on the day claim to have been in all parts of the WTC when they either saw, heard or were injured by explosions that happened BEFORE the Towers fell.

This includes the smashed up lobby which is seen on camera in which people died which the official story explains by claiming fire from the planes shot down the elevator from the impact site.

This is despite the fact that the elevators were hermetically sealed which would have prevented this from occurring. Also whilst people are seen on camera in the holes near the plane impact zones perfectly unharmed people were being killed, burned and thrown all over the place hundreds of floors away at the bottom of the towers.

There is also enough live video footage to rubbish claims that no loud bangs, explosions or cutter charge like sounds were heard on the day. Numerous clips will show you how loud the explosions were and how similar they were to demolition explosives as well as dozens of witnesses who talk about leaving the scene as “bombs are still in the building”.

The videos also explain how easy it would be for a small team of people to plant enough explosives near the cores of the Twin Towers without:

  1. Being spotted by witnesses.
  2. Taking a long time as skeptics claim.
  3. And using only a dozen or so small inconspicuous boxes containing high-grade military explosives.

By planting these high explosives on every second floor and using programmed timers it would be easy to demolish the central core of the WTC and stage what looked like a pancake collapse.

The Maths is pretty simple and the power outs in the days leading up to 9/11 would have provided these conspirators with enough time and cover to carry out their job without being spotted.

Not only were the bomb sniffing dogs pulled out of the towers before the attacks but CIA 9.11 whistleblower Susan Lindaur, who was one of the first people arrested under the PATRIOT Attack for trying to tell her story, explains how in the run up to the attacks vans and men carrying tools and equipment would visit the towers every night for days in a row between 3-5 am in the morning when no other staff were present.

The blackouts gave the cover that engineers needed to do work as well as enabling CCTV to be off at the time needed to plant the explosives. A small team could plant enough bombs to demolish both towers within 24 hours.

How they could have easily rigged the WTC Towers for demolition

The videos also show some clips I personally haven’t seen until now including a shot of WTC-7 before it fell and what looks like cutter charges going off all across the building.

You can actually see small flashes of light dot from window to window from the right to left of the building and this would have been required for WTC-7 to fall into its own footprint the way it did.

No sporadic fires could have caused such an evenly and well-timed collapse including the 2+ seconds of freefall. Even the company NIST asked to carry out experiments to try and prove how the buildings fell could not replicate a collapse scenario which means NIST had to rely on computer models and unrealistic parameters to explain how a single point of failure caused what looks like a demolition sequence in WTC-7.

Just like the video of the collapse of WTC-7 which shows the Penthouse of the building dipping before the rest of the structure the same goes for the Twin Towers. You can see the highest points of the towers, the aerials and other equipment on top of the tower’s core dip before the rest of the building starts to collapse. This all indicates that the central columns had been removed first.

For people who haven’t seen the structure of WTC and think a plane and office fires could have demolished it’s huge central core think again.

The way the building was built meant that even if the trusses and other supporting columns and beams were weakened by fire or a plane the central core would remain intact. The sides of the building may have toppled or slowly fallen off bit by bit but there is no way a fire could have caused the huge central core to be crushed and pulverized into dust as it was.

The explosive nature of the collapse was so intense that steel and other materials were melded together and fires burnt underground for ages during the clean up process.

Pictures of the WTC Twin Towers Design and Central Core

The central core of the Twin Towers
The design of the Twin Towers WTC-2
Twin Towers Central CoreThe Reinforced core of the World Trade Center

The videos also show clips of other buildings that were hit by debris from WTC, including buildings where huge steel girders were embedded into their walls after being shot out sideways from the collapse.

How a fire could have caused enough pressure to do this I don’t know but these other buildings didn’t catch fire and then have a free fall like collapse as WTC-7 did. Therefore it is very odd how WTC-7 acted in the way it did when many other buildings were hit by the falling debris from WTC.

What explosives were used to destroy the Twin Towers

The numerous interviews with witnesses and bystanders from the day also talk about the military looking planes that hit the buildings.

There are multiple witnesses who saw the planes and detail how they were grey or very dark, and didn’t look anything like the red and blue American Airlines aircraft that supposedly hit the Twin Towers.

Remember that even back in the 60’s certain people in the Military and US government (Operation Northwoods) thought it was a good idea to stage a false flag attack and blame it on Cuba by automatically flying planes, sending out fake distress calls saying they had been hijacked by Cubans and then crash the planes. All this so that the US public would believe Cuba was at fault therefore legitimizing a war of aggression against the island. If the US could plan a false flag attack like that back in the 60’s then imagine what automated chaos they could instigate with modern technology.

Military Planes Used To Hit The Twin Towers

In the following video CIA whistle-blower, Susan Lindaur, gives a speech where she explains the war with Iraq wasn’t necessary and that before 9.11 Iraq was actually bending over backwards to help the USA. They even offered to provide the US Government with everything they wanted which negated any need for an armed conflict. She claims her back channel mission between the US and Iraq had provided a lucrative and unexpected bounty of gifts which has been kept secret from the US population.

This included:

  • Allowing the weapons inspectors into the country.
  • An FBI presence in the country to hunt down terrorists.
  • Llucrative oil and commercial contracts.
  • Even Saddam Hussein offering to stand down and hold free elections.

She also talks about her reasons for believing that both hijacked planes AND explosives were used to bring down the Twin Towers, the planes being a cover story for the demolition job. It is well worth listening to the story of a 9.11 whistleblower who tried to tell her story to the US government and the people but was instead jailed for a year under the nefariously named PATRIOT ACT.

As I say in my article 9.11 Sceptics versus logic and reasoning, what we need is a full criminal investigation with subpoena power into the events of 9.11.

Although much of the physical evidence has been destroyed a lot hasn’t and many witnesses and conspirators are still walking around freely.

Obama never brought the change the USA required after the criminal Bush administration therefore only a real concerted push by the people can bring around REAL change.

It’s either that or you continue to stick your heads in the sand.

Know your place. Do NOT ask questions. Keep quiet and suffer in silence as the war on terror is used to justify a massive crack down on civil liberties and the building of a new high-tech police state. Be monitored 24/7 and treated like criminals at airports. Be sheep on a slow walk to the slaughter house.

Or you can stand up for what you know is wrong. Fight the lies we are constantly being fed by our Government and their bought off media whores. Ask questions and don’t accept the official line. Do something worthwhile with your life whilst you still can.

Further reading on 9.11 from Dark Politricks:

9.11 Sceptics versus logic and reasoning

9.11 Remaining Questions and no answers

The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93

The Pentagon Attack

Video shows a missile hitting the Pentagon

Is The Pentagon Attack Finally Solved

View the original article A Video Compilation Of 9/11 Witness Testimony To Explosives Being Used At WTC-7 at


The 9/11 Pentagon Attack

June 29, 2013

The Pentagon Attack – 9.11

By Dark Politricks

If you know my thoughts on 9.11 then you know I have gone back and forth on the events many times.

Initially when the 9.11 attacks happened, like many people I started off believing the official conspiracy theory.

Then after a lot of reading up on the subject, discovering the questions over WTC-7, the Israeli spy rings following the terrorists around the USA, the repeated warnings about the attacks, The ABLE Danger Program and evidence of the stand down order provided by Norman Mineta I went the other way.

Recently I have been reading a lot more about building 7 and have been swaying back again due to the multiple computer program simulations they used to “prove” the collapse (by fire). However I am still not convinced and it still leaves a massive co-incidence theory instead of a conspiracy theory stuck right in my throat. One I am still not prepared to fully give up.

What I have always wanted is a proper, subpoena powered, proper investigation into the events of the day. Also proper logical answers to all the questions that remain, or haven’t been asked. Until that happens I am going to be raising questions and asking for answers.

When people put reputations on the line to raise questions then they should be listened to and numerous ex Government officials, intelligence officers, military men, first responders and families of the victims all have raised these questions.

Remember, this is not to say that these questions don’t have perfectly reasonable and logical answers to them, it’s just that many people including myself haven’t heard the answers, or that the provided answers don’t fit together to explain the events.

So until the point a new investigation is held I will always have a lingering doubt about the events of 9/11. This is especially due to the fact that you only have to look at the state of America now to see how the war on terror has been used to attack all our liberties and freedoms.

Whether the attack was a false flag attack or not, it certainly was taken advantage of, and used to implement what looks like a high tech police state in the once free America.

The PATRIOT ACT, NDAA, Prism, TRAPWIRE, Assassination Squads, Drones, Constant War, should I go on….

Some Questions

Just some of the “coincidences” and unanswered questions I still have are below – and God knows this is only a small subset of them!

  • 3 Steel framed buildings, the first to collapse from fire alone, all owned by the same person collapse in the same day, just after being taken over by a new owner and having massive insurance for terrorism put on them.
  • This is along with the hijackers all successfully taking over 4 planes with only rudimentary weapons. Not one of their planes being challenged in the sky, even after the first attack on New York was known about.
  • The Israeli spy rings that were following some of the hijackers about the USA. Did they tell anyone? We know Mossad has controlled al-Qaeda rings before (even setting up fake rings) – was this a controlled ring or a co-opted ring “allowed” to commit the attack. Both FOX News and German newspapers reported on this.
  • Why did so many Israeli agents get arrested in the aftermath of the attacks, held for months, then let go?
  • What did the Israeli’s caught filming the attacks across the river know about the attacks and why did they say they were sent to “document the event”? What foreknowledge did they have and why were they so happy to see the WTC burning?
  • Even if the attack was “allowed to happen” this is still a state crime as it means someone in the US Government had to order a stand down to NORAD.
  • We know the CIA / Mossad have had close links to al-Qaeda and bin-Laden, even the CIA visited him in hospital soon before the attacks. What was his real role apart from patsy in the attacks?
  • We also know the US consulate in Yemen was providing passports for jihadists to come to the US to be trained and then sent off to fight elsewhere. Why were the CIA engaged in such behaviour and what were the links to the Miami airports that were CIA “green zones”, areas that CIA planes were allowed to bring in drugs and arms. The links between the US intelligence community and our supposed enemy al-Qaeda are always murky and unclear. Who knows whether certain factions in the Government or the intelligence community knew the attacks were about to happen.
  • We know false flag attacks are a reality. We also know the PNAC document was written by the same people who were in government at the time. People who co-incidentally were involved in a massive financial scam involving the ex-USSR (see video below).
  • Dick Cheney is not exactly an angel, having talked about using false flag attacks in the Staits of Hormuz to go to war with Iran, plus his own assassination squads. If a stand down order was put out to NORAD then it was probably him who ordered it. The testimony of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta seems to corroborate this and it is strange that this was left out of the 9.11 commission report.
  • What about the ABLE Danger program that had identified the 9.11 hijackers months before the attack occurred and the many other warnings given by foreign intelligence as well as domestic agencies about the attacks. What about the warnings given to key politicians not to fly that day?

  • What about the ISI chief who wired money to the lead hijacker who was coincidentally meeting with top US military figures on the day of the attacks.
  • What about the planes which looked unlike commercial airliners, who were expertly piloted into the WTC by non-expert pilots. Were these planes remote controlled?
  • What about the white planes who were seen in the air over the White House when all planes were supposed to be grounded, who was flying these planes?

The Israeli Connection

We know that dozens if not hundreds of people arrested after the 9.11 attacks were from Israeli origin. After many weeks in detention they were all let go without charge.

Why were they held in the first place?

Who forced their release?

As for the Israeli’s caught across the river filming the attacks, caught hi-fiving each other, before being arrested. Why were they so happy to see the carnage unfold?

This is a clip from an interview they did on Israeli TV.

How did these Israeli’s, with links to Mossad, know to “document the event”? If they didn’t have pre-knowledge of the attacks then what event were they sent to document?

The 9.11 Commission

The 9.11 commission was a farce. Not only did they leave out the reasons that the terrorists themselves claimed that they attacked the USA, which is the USA’s foreign policy and their support for Israel, but they ignored evidence and questions such as the one posed above about the Israeli connection.

They also ignored key evidence which suggested a stand down order by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta and instead used the commission to push for war with Iraq.

Even 6 of the 10 commissioners have made statements that seem to suggest they were not happy with the outcome. Some even going as far as to suggest the White House lied, the CIA covered up evidence and even blocked access to key witnesses.

Some of these statements included:

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”

9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”

Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”“This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.

9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said that “We purposely put together a staff that had – in a way – conflicts of interest”.

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years.. This is not spin. This is not true.”

When no-one was even sacked or demoted due to the failings of intelligence which were supposedly the cause of the attacks and instead promoted then you must ask whether these people were doing their jobs correctly or not.

If doing your job badly, leading to the worst terrorist attack on mainland USA, leads to your promotion, then logically you have to consider that their job was to allow the event to occur.

Promoted people such as:

  • Richard Myers, in charge of the Pentagon on 9/11.
  • Ralph Eberhart, in charge of NORAD on 9/11.
  • Captain Charles J. Leidig, acting NMCC Director.
  • Brigadier General Montague Winfield.
  • Ben Sliney, in charge of FAA on 9/11.
  • Steven Abbot, coordinator of Dick Cheney’s task force on problems of national preparedness.
  • Michael Maltbie, the supervisor handling the case at the FBI’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit.
  • Pasquale D’Amuro, in charge of counter-terrorism in New York.

So yes I still have massive amounts of reservation before I can conclude that the official story is correct and until a proper investigation is held we will never know.

Project Hammer

This video is one I watched the other day and it gives some new context to the events of 9.11 as it infers that the attacks were co-ordinated to cover up a massive financial fraud involving the fire-sale of post USSR Russia in the 90’s.

Whether this is true or not only detailed investigation would prove but it is does a worthwhile job putting the pieces together and includes detailed links to names, aircraft bases and companies all possibly involved in the attacks.

Project Hammerview on

The Pentagon Attack

When it comes to the attack on the Pentagon I also still have doubts about that attack even though at first I thought it was one of the least suspicous parts of the story.

Even though I know many witnesses claim to have seen the plane hit the re-inforced walls of the Pentagon there are many questions that remain unanswered. This is mainly due to there not being any photographic or video evidence of a plane actually hitting the Pentagon and the refusal of the Government to release all the CCTV and other camera footage that would have caught the planes impact and lay these questions to rest.

Whilst I used to be on the side of those who believed the Pentagon “missile” attack was a diversion from the real conspiracy in New York I still want to know what exactly happened and how.

How did a plane that big, flying so low and fast by an inexperienced pilot, making expertly executed turns at speeds far above the planes supposed fastest speed manage to punch through 3 rings of the most secure building in the world – without being caught on a single camera?

I used to believe that witness statements should be given their due. If witnesses claimed to hear bombs go off in the WTC, or hear a countdown at WTC-7, or see cutter charges go off then they shouldn’t be dismissed at the Pentagon for claiming to see Flight 77 hit the building. It was just unfair to admit some witness testimony because it backed your argument then dismiss others that went against it.

However we all know that after big events, especially traumatic ones, witness statements often don’t match and even conflict with each other.

Therefore a plane could have easily flown low across the Pentagon giving the impression that it was about to hit it before a missile or bomb went off. The plane then could have rose up through the explosions and fire. It probably wouldn’t be seen or even if it was it would soon be forgotten about due to everyone concentrating on the flames and smoke rising from the Pentagon.

The only CCTV camera evidence from one of the most photographed and surveyed areas in the world has only revealed 5 frames of nothing but a flash from one camera. It doesn’t prove that Flight 77 hit the building at all.

If the Government wanted to kill conspiracy theories around the Pentagon once and for all they would release all confiscated camera and CCTV footage that was collected by investigators in the aftermath of the attack.

By not doing so they only lend credibility to conspiracy theories. This then assumes that they either want these theories to go on or don’t care about them as they offer some form of cover.

Evidence That A Plane Didn’t Hit The Pentagon

Not only do many pilots claim that the manoeuvre that was carried out by Flight 77 was impossible. Both being too fast for the type of plane to accomplish without falling apart but also too hard for even seasoned pilots to manage, let alone an amateur, but evidence exists that suggests the plane did in fact fly over the building.

Analysis of the flight data recorder from Flight 77 which supposedly hit the Pentagon shows a so far unexplained discrepancy between the altitude of the plane and what supposedly happened. Basically it means that the lamp posts which the plane supposedly hit would have had to have been 440 feet high for the plane to have brought them down – an impossibility!

It also suggests that the plane flew over the Pentagon NOT into it.

This is data which has been released by the National Transportation Safety Board and it means that the planes altitude is in direct conflict with the only CCTV footage that has been released of the impact.

Either the data from the black box is wrong somehow (e.g it was edited before being released) or the plane didn’t actually hit the lamp posts and then crash into the Pentagon. Which data-set is correct? I don’t know but it is a question that needs answering.

Then there is the size of the impact hole which was very small. To the sides of the hole there were no signs of wing marks or the huge engines that should have hit it. Even if the wings had folded back and crumpled into the body the huge engines should have been visible on the unscratched grass of the Pentagon.

The dimensions of the hole do not seem to fit those of a Boeing 757 and there is no sign of plane parts either in the hole, as attested to by witnesses at the scene, or on the grass outside which is evident from the first film footage shot of the aftermath. This footage was not requested by the 9.11 commission as the Jesse Ventura video at the bottom attests.

What Happens When A Plane Hits Concrete?

Here is a video which shows a test to prove whether a Japanese nuclear power station could withstand an airplane hitting it.

In the test they used a rocket-propelled, 27-ton F-4 Phantom jet, attached to a sled, aimed to hit a 3.7 meter thick slab of concrete at a speed of about 475 miles per hour which is the same speed that Flight 77 reportedly hit the Pentagon.

Notice how the plane does NOT go through the wall but disintegrates into chunks on the outside of the wall.

This is unlike the Pentagon attack where we are asked to believe that not only were the huge engines of a Boeing 757 not found imprinted on the wall of the Pentagon, they were seemingly not found at all.

In fact only small parts of a plane (or missile) were found and even Boeing employees when asked claimed that these parts did not belong to the suggested plane.

Also there is the question of how a plane made out of very lightweight materials could have a nose so strong that it punched through three rings of concrete as it supposedly did at the Pentagon.

Whereas the plane in the video above crumples up on impact with the concrete wall we are asked to believe that Flight 77 managed to punch it’s way through 3 rings of concrete at the Pentagon. Something a missile would do very well but a Boeing 757 isn’t capable of due to the weakness of the planes nose.

To go with this we are expected to believe that no passenger bodies were found at the scene. Instead only bodies of people from the Pentagon were recovered. It was only later at another location that the passengers were supposedly identified. These could have easily been faked.

We also have witnesses from within the building who claim not to have seen any signs of a plane at all, even being threatened (or “corrected”) in their assertion that a bomb had gone off (as the later video shows).

At other plane crash sites, bodies are found still in their plane chairs, however none were at the Pentagon. Multiple witnesses and journalists made statements that no evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon could be seen on the grass or even within the hole that many witnesses walked through on their way to safety.

Then there is the question of how a plane of that size reportedly flew 400 mph at only 30ft above the ground to hit the first floor of the building without hitting the ground first.

If experienced pilots claim this feat would have been impossible for them to accomplish, then how could an inexperienced pilot such as Hani Hanjour, someone who had been denied the usage of a small Cessna 172 because he was such a bad pilot, make such a manoeuvre.

Others believe that the the immense down-force from the plane would have prevented it from flying so close to the ground at such speeds and that it would have crashed into the ground leaving marks on the untouched Pentagon lawn way before the walls that it reportedly hit.

I have personal contact with someone who worked with aircraft all their professional life, working with Rolls Royce aircraft engines.

When asked how a plane that size could fly so fast and so low to the ground without toppling over due to the huge down-force he replied – “with difficulty and a great deal of skill”. Something which we know the pilot reportedly had none of.

Whether you think it’s a distraction or not lots of questions remain about the Pentagon.  In fact lots of questions remain around 9.11 as a whole. With the recent Prism scandal we should always remember that it was the events of 9.11 that has led to our current high tech surveillance state.

This is Jesse Ventura’s look into the Pentagon attacks.

View the original article “The Pentagon Attack – 9.11” at the main site

9.11 and the clash of civilisations

September 11, 2010

By Dark Politricks

“There can be no true friends without true enemies. Unless we hate what we are not, we cannot love what we are.” – Dead Lagoon

The clash of civilisations so aptly predicted by Samuel P. Huntington after the fall of the cold war seems to be approaching very quickly. Those of us who consider ourselves rationalists or atheists can only stand on the sidelines looking on in horror as those groups of people who have a dog in the fight ramp up the differences and stoke the fires that have inflamed many people of the Abrahamic faiths.

Just like the first world war which was basically a family feud between European aristocracy (The Kaiser, Tsar and King of England were all cousins), the current feud is between offshoots of the same religion. This is what makes it all so much more galling for those of us who can see the Bible, Torah and Koran for what they really are, books of allegories, written by people with no scientific perspective on the world who if they lived today would all be locked up in loony bins.

Why is it we can see the mad pastor Terry Jones for what he is really is, a fruit loop for claiming he has regular conversations with God and yet billions of people are happy to take as a literal truth the same claims from those who lived thousands of years ago. Why is Terry Jones just a nutter whereas Mohammad, Jesus, Issac and all the other prophets of lore who regularly claimed to converse with the almighty people to believe in?

In reality there is little difference between the ferocity of belief in those who make up the Phelps family or Iranian Mullahs dishing out Sharia justice by stoning adulterers to death.

There is no difference between Terry Jones burning Korans and the Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues.

There is no difference between the Muslims across the world who believe that the Christian West is on another crusade against Islam and those New Yorkers who believe that revamping a Muslim community center is on par with Hitler opening a Nazi Theme park next door to Auschwitz or those people who believe that Islam and not Al Qaeda attacked them on 9.11.

To me it’s the same ignorance and bull shit just a different face on the packaging.

It’s because of this dogma and refusal to think outside ones own narrow train of thought that makes religion so scary for those of us who put belief of fairies, Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy to bed forever at the age of 8 or 10. In fact when one thinks about it there is actually more reason to believe in the Tooth Fairy than there is God for at least we are left
with a physical sign of their presence in the morning when our tooth has gone only to be replaced with money!

What is clear though is that this rise in religiosity is being brilliantly exploited by those who have political aims. The two sides are being played off against each other by design and it is only going to get worse.

A western world that hates Muslims is one that goes to war without thinking first. They are armies that engage in the sort of rampant and wanton rape and destruction that only serves to drive up hatred on the other side ensuring that an eye for eye turns into an arm for an arm and a leg for a leg until there is nothing left to fight over.

An America that believe it was Muslims in general that attacked the USA on 9.11 is one that dismisses Wik iLeaked tapes of mass murder of civilians and the killing for fun attitude of their soldiers as nothing more than the excesses of war.

An America that believes Islam is the devils work, a cult of moon god worshippers whilst their country was the pinnacle of God’s creation is one that sees nothing wrong with the torture of prisoners, the suspension of the rule of law and the kidnap and indefinite detention of those considered enemies of the state.

On the anniversary of 9.11 it is clear that the intention of the attack has largely succeeded. If Bin Laden was behind the attack and thought that by striking at the heart of America he would help free Muslims from Zionist and American oppression around the world he was sorely mistaken for the exact opposite has occurred.

If however the intention was to enrage America so much that they would basically give carte blanche approval to a never ending war of imperialism and manufactured anti-Islamic rage across the Middle East then the act succeeded as planned.

The clear losers from 9.11 apart from those who died that day have been people of Islamic faith whether they be Afghanis, Iraqis, Palestinians or Americans.

More Muslims have died in the last 9 years than could possibly be known and because of the war on terror these deaths are somehow justified. Because we are supposedly doing good deeds by expanding the western sphere of influence, installing puppet dictators and propping up narco regimes the counting of “collateral damage” is not a necessity and the total figure is only ever mentioned as an after thought whilst every one of our own troops death is mourned as much as the last.

9.11 is already a date that will be enshrined in history forever for a number of reasons. Not only was it the catalyst to the war on terror it was the straw that broke the camels back in terms of wakening people up all around the world for a number of reasons. Not only did it show the facade that liberal democracy was, how easily all our rights and civil liberties can be discarded when the government clicks its fingers it also woke many people up to the lengths supposedly free democratic governments will go to when it wants to go to war.

The original Pearl Harbour attack that brought the USA into World War Two led to eight investigations within the following four years to determine the events of that day. The New Pearl Harbour attack that seems to have led the USA into starting the war of civilisations was investigated once and very poorly at that.

Not only did 6 of the 10 commissioners complain about the Bush government withholding evidence, limiting the terms of inquiry and blocking legitimate questions it failed to answer the key questions that still remain to this day. Questions which must be answered if the government ever wishes to absolve itself of blame and remove the cloud of suspicion that has rightly fell upon it for refusing to investigate the matter properly.

Questions such as:

Why did NIST seemingly falsify their report into the collapse of WTC-7. The tower that wasn’t hit by a plane yet fell at breakneck speed into its own footprint later on that day. A collapse that for 2.4 seconds was at free fall speeds, a fact admitted by NIST and one which meant that they had to remove the label from their report that had proudly claimed it was “consistent with the basic principles of physics”. A fact that so far can only be explained by the use of controlled demolition of some sort which the NIST refused to even consider as a cause for the buildings collapse having preferred instead to doctor their computer model by overloading parameters that bore no relation to real world events to induce collapse.

Why did the government come out with the poor reasoning for the terrorists attack as “hating us for our freedoms” rather than the real reason which was USA’s support for Israel. Why can they not admit that their unswerving support of a nation that is propped up through their massive military support, financial donations, UN vetoes and their turning of a blind eye to the numerous executions, ethnic cleansing, piracy and aggressive foreign policy was the primary cause for the Al Qaeda attack on that day.

What did our ally Israel know about the attack and what information did they pass on to the Americans beforehand. It is a well known fact that the Israeli’s were engaged in a huge spying operation in the year leading up to 9.11. They were also following the hijackers around the country, living across the road from many and supposedly monitoring them. As the original reporter on this story, which was reported by Fox until it removed the story due to Israeli pressure, said when being interviewed on the matter of Mossad foreknowledge of the attacks “how could they not have known?”

If Israel did know about this terrorist plot, and the circumstantial evidence suggests they did, then why didn’t they tell US intelligence and if they did who did they tell and what was done with this info. It is not implausible to believe that elements of the US intelligence community and maybe some people in government did know about this plot beforehand and chose not to act because they could see the potential “benefit” to their PNAC plans of a successful attack occurring. We know the authors of the PNAC document were now in power and we know how much the neo-cons and their Israeli counterparts wanted a “new pearl harbour” type event to occur so that they could engage their plans for a “clean up” of the Middle East. Considering all the conspiracy theories around this event this is the most plausible and the easiest one to to pull off. It needs to be investigated thoroughly.

We are currently living through times in which rich pro-Israeli groups are deliberatley stoking up anti-Islamic sentiment and if we are going to spend the next decade continuing our current policy of destroying ourselves and most of the Muslim world in a pointless war of civilisations then we need to resolve all unanswered questions over the events that ignited this chain of events.

We need to for our own sakes as well as future generations otherwise school kids in a hundred years or so will be looking back at these times with disdain and horror in the same way as we now look back at 30’s Germany.

September Clues and the No Planes conspiracy theory

August 16, 2010

I have never been an active proponent of the “no planes” theory when it comes to 9/11 having tried to contain my questioning to those events that have a) are easily demonstrable as being false or illogical and b) are not too far out there in terms of what someone with little knowledge of the subject would regard. The reason being that it is very hard to convince someone who still believes the official story anyway and I would rather get them to question the obvious problems without putting them off by sounding far fetched. This is not to say that such theories don’t have merit just that other questions are much easier to prove such as:

Why did the three World Trade Center buildings all collapse so quickly. They were all owned by the same person who received a massive insurance payout and who was filmed in a documentary saying he wanted to “Pull building 7”. A recent hit piece on Jesse Ventura by a Fox News reporter who was at the scene on the day actually backed up Silverstein’s desire to pull the building by admitting he knew Larry had been on the phone to his insurance company trying to get permission to demolish the building. These were the only 3 tall steel framed skyscrapers to collapse from fire in history and they all happened on the same day to the same owner. Very unlucky indeed.

Apart from the obvious misfortune of having a record breaking day in having a mile and a half’s worth of building collapse in a few hours there is the problem of physics in that building seven, the one building that collapsed that hadn’t had a plane hit it, collapsed so quickly that there is a demonstrable 2.4 second period where the collapse was at free fall speed. The laws of physics dictate that this is impossible unless some kind of demolition had taken place to evenly remove the supporting columns at the exact same time around the building.

The NIST report into building sevens collapse claimed fire and thermal expansion was the cause of collapse and they initially claimed their report was consistent with the laws of physics. However once the 9/11 community and a high school physics teacher proved that the 2.4 second free-fall descent had occurred NIST conceded the point and promptly removed that claim from their report. Therefore the only report into the collapse of this building relies on science that has no grounding in fact and relies on physics that wouldn’t be taught in a high school classroom. It’s a hard choice for those who believe the official story to make and one they will avoid like the plague preferring to call us conspiracy theorists rather than try to explain their own delusions and religious like belief in the impossible and implausible.

Then there is the Pentagon attack. An attack that has not been recorded on any publicly available media for posterity and the only video that exists is from CCTV and shows a blur, a flash and an explosion but no Boeing 737. The problem with the Pentagon attack is that we are expected to believe that a plane the size of this large airliner managed to fly 20 feet above the ground at a speed of 400mph for some considerable time knocking over telegraph poles, managing to not blow the grass beneath it to kingdom come and then disappearing into the walls of the Pentagon to never be seen again.

Not only do many pilots not believe this is possible they also have not managed to replicate this feat on flight simulators therefore we are being asked to believe that a the hijacking pilots were able to carry out manoeuvres that the best of the US air-force cannot achieve themselves and we know from the Pilots who trained the hijackers how utterly incompetent and useless at flying they were as most of them were never even allowed near a small Cessna.

However the main problem for me apart from these points is that we are expected to believe that the whole US Intelligence apparatus had no clue that this attack was planned despite all the warnings from foreign countries, their own informers and agents within Al Qaeda and the Able Danger intelligence program that had already identified Mohammed Atta as a potential threat over a year before the attacks had occurred. Therefore we are asked to believe that the biggest intelligence apparatus in history failed so completely and so utterly and yet those people in charge of it were actually promoted rather than discharged and punished. Odd isn’t it?

Not only is there evidence that the American intelligence community knew the attacks were planned and allowed them for political purposes we also have evidence of foreign involvement in the attacks and not from Iran or Iraq but from a supposed friend aka Israel. Many people across the Muslim world believe the attacks were an Israeli plot to bring the USA into their war against Islam and whether or not this is true it’s certainly what has happened since. The question is whether any evidence supports it and undoubtedly there are some key pieces of the puzzle that point in Israels direction.

The first piece of evidence is the dancing Israelis who were arrested on the morning of September 11th after a witness had seen them dancing and high fiving as the the WTC burned with cameras setup recording the attack. These Israelis were detained for some considerable time before being deported and on an Israeli TV show they admitted to having been sent to “document the event”.

Document what you might ask. How did they know the attacks were going to happen unless they either had knowledge or were involved in some way? Well another piece of evidence suggests just that as during the year leading up to the attacks Israel was engaged in a massive intelligence gathering operation within the USA.

Posing as art students. the spies were trying to access government buildings, document facilities and steal information from across the country. The troubling aspect of this operation is that the locations of a number of the spy rings correlated to the locations of the supposed 9/11 hijackers including the ringleader Mohammed Atta.

The question that needs to be answered is whether the Israelis were monitoring or helping Atta and his cohorts. As a supposed ally you should have at least expected the Israelis to have informed it’s friend the USA of it’s intimate knowledge of the Arab terrorists in its midst therefore the question is why didn’t they OR if they did why didn’t the US act on this intelligence.

As you can see there are a number of troubling questions that raise many uncomfortable problems for the official conspiracy theory without even going into the realm of some of the other theories which many including myself have found to be far fetched up until now.

The No Planes theory regarding the World Trade Centre attacks always seemed one of those theories that would have been just too hard to pull off without a number of mistakes or a leak somehow and up until now I have been firmly in the camp of those who believe certain sections of the US government knew the attacks were going to happen and then ensured they did for political purposes. There would have just been far too many witnesses on the ground who would see the planes hit the buildings for there not to be any planes at all.

As with most intel operations plausible deniability is the key aspect and I always believed that there was no point in carrying out the attacks yourself when you could just ensure that the plans of your enemies came to fruition on their own (with a little behind the scenes help of course).

However the following two videos which I have just recently watched have raised a number of important questions which must be answered by those who are still following the official events of the day:

The FOX news clip from the morning of the attacks in which the camera does a 3 stage zoom in on the twin towers before the second plane appears from the right and hits the tower. When the tape is rewound the plane is nowhere to be seen as it should have if it were a real clip. Was the plane inserted into the footage?

All of the major TV stations footage seems to be from the same stock. The same shots and audio are used the only main difference is the colouring of the footage. Even the various privately shot footage of the attacks seems to come from a shared stock of imagery that the producer of the video shows has had a lot of editing and image tampering.

The nose in, nose out shot is particularly disturbing and seems to suggest video manipulation. The shape of the nose from the plane is the exact same shape as when it entered the other side of the building (100% exact) which seems to be impossible when one considers how much damage would have occurred. The other troubling point is that the footage cuts out for a second as if someone had realised their mistake before cutting back in.

The number of eye witnesses who saw a plane hit the building is surprisingly low and the majority of those that did claim to see an American Airline 737 hit were all media professionals working for the big TV companies. Other witnesses claimed to see a missile hit, a small plane or a type of plane they had never witnessed before.

Whilst I am not 100% convinced as of yet of the no plane theory these videos do raise some questions that demand answering and I would love to hear some more views (especially opposing views) that try to explain these oddities. I have no doubt at all that the modern US media is and has been for some time controlled by a powerful elite and technology is such that a deception on such a scale is possible.

The problem with such a theory as with all conspiracies is the amount of people that would need to be kept quiet for the ruse to be maintained. Whilst false flag conspiracies that involve intelligence agencies are committed all the time once you start involving non military personnel such as TV crew members, producers, presenters and so on you would massively increase the risk of a leak. Therefore whilst I admit these theories raise some important questions I am keeping an open mind on this aspect of the 9/11 story. However I would recommend that you watch both these videos and spread the link whether you believe in the official story or not.

NIST Admits their report is not consistent with basic principles of physics

August 1, 2010

By Dark Politricks

This snippet of David Ray Griffins essay is specifically about the 2.4 second free fall decent of WTC-7 which if one believes the official 9/11 story means that a miracle occurred when this building collapsed as it ignored the laws of physics for over 2.4 seconds.

Even if some readers question whether the two previously discussed features of the collapse of WTC 7, when understood within the framework of NIST’s fire theory, imply miracles, there can be no doubt about a third feature: the now-accepted (albeit generally unpublicized) fact that WTC 7 came down in absolute free fall for over two seconds.

Although members of the 9/11 Truth Movement had long been pointing out that this building descended at the same rate as a free-falling object, or at least virtually so, NIST had long denied this. As late as August 2008, when NIST issued its report on WTC 7 in the form of a Draft for Public Comment, it claimed that the time it took for the upper floors – the only floors that are visible on the videos – to come down “was approximately 40 percent longer than the computed free fall time and was consistent with physical principles.”52

As this statement implied, any assertion that the building did come down in free fall, assuming a non-engineered collapse, would not be consistent with physical principles – meaning basic laws of Newtonian physics. Explaining why not during a “WTC 7 Technical Briefing” on August 26, 2008, NIST’s Shyam Sunder said:

“[A] free fall time would be [the fall time of] an object that has no structural components below it. . . . [T]he . . . time that it took . . . for those 17 floors to disappear [was roughly 40 percent longer than free fall]. And that is not at all unusual, because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place. Everything was not instantaneous.”53

In saying this, Sunder was presupposing NIST’s theory that the building was brought down by fire, which, if it could have produced a collapse of any type, could have produced only a progressive collapse.

In response, high-school physics teacher David Chandler, who was allowed to submit a question at this briefing, challenged Sunder’s denial of free fall, stating that Sunder’s “40 percent longer” claim contradicted “a publicly visible, easily measurable quantity.”54 Chandler then placed a video on the Internet showing that, by measuring this publicly visible quantity, anyone understanding elementary physics could see that “for about two and a half seconds. . . , the acceleration of the building is indistinguishable from freefall.”55 (This is, of course, free fall through the air, not through a vacuum.)

In its final report on WTC 7, which came out in November 2008, NIST – rather amazingly – admitted free fall. Dividing the building’s descent into three stages, NIST described the second phase as “a freefall descent over approximately eight stories at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.25 s[econds].”56 NIST thereby accepted Chandler’s case – except for maintaining that the building was in absolute free fall for only 2.25, not 2.5, seconds (a trivial difference). NIST thereby affirmed a miracle, meaning a violation of one or more laws of physics.

Why this would be a miracle was explained by Chandler, who said: “Free fall can only be achieved if there is zero resistance to the motion.”57 In other words, the upper portion of Building 7 could have come down in free fall only if something had suddenly removed all the steel and concrete in the lower part of the building, which would have otherwise provided resistance (to make a considerable understatement). If everything had not been removed and the upper floors had come down in free fall anyway, even if for only a fraction of a second, this would have been a miracle – meaning a violation of physical principles. Explaining one of the physical principles involved, Chandler said:

“Anything at an elevated height has gravitational potential energy. If it falls, and none of the energy is used for other things along the way, all of that energy is converted into kinetic energy – the energy of motion, and we call it ‘free fall.’ If any of the energy is used for other purposes, there will be less kinetic energy, so the fall will be slower. In the case of a falling building, the only way it can go into free fall is if an external force removes the supporting structure. None of the gravitational potential energy of the building is available for this purpose, or it would slow the fall of the building.”58

That was what Sunder himself had explained, on NIST’s behalf, the previous August, saying that a free-falling object would be one “that has no structural components below it” to offer resistance. But NIST then in November, while still under Sunder’s leadership and still defending its fire theory of WTC 7’s collapse, agreed that, as an empirical fact, free fall happened. For a period of 2.25 seconds, NIST admitted, the descent of WTC 7 was characterized by “gravitational acceleration (free fall).”59

Besides pointing out that the free fall descent of WTC 7 implied that the building had been professionally demolished, Chandler observed that this conclusion is reinforced by two features of the collapse mentioned above:

“[P]articularly striking is the suddenness of onset of free fall. Acceleration doesn’t build up gradually. . . . The building went from full support to zero support, instantly. . . . One moment, the building is holding; the next moment it lets go and is in complete free fall. . . . The onset of free fall was not only sudden; it extended across the whole width of the building. . . . The fact that the roof stayed level shows the building was in free fall across the entire width. The collapse we see cannot be due to a column failure, or a few column failures, or a sequence of column failures. All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed . . . simultaneously, within a small fraction of a second.”60

For its part, NIST, knowing that it had affirmed a miracle by agreeing that WTC 7 had entered into free fall, no longer claimed that its analysis was consistent with the laws of physics. Back in its August draft, in which it was still claiming that the collapse occurred 40 percent slower than free fall, NIST had said – in a claim made three times – that its analysis was “consistent with physical principles.”61 In the final report, however, every instance of this phrase was removed. NIST thereby almost explicitly admitted that its report on WTC 7, by affirming absolute free fall while continuing to deny that either incendiaries or explosives had been employed, is not consistent with basic principles of physics.

Accordingly, now that it is established that WTC 7 came down in absolute free fall for over two seconds, one cannot accept the official theory, according to which this building was not professionally demolished, without implying that at least one miracle happened on 9/11.

George Monbiot, as we saw, described members of this movement as “morons” who “believe that [the Bush regime] is capable of magic.” Unless Monbiot, upon becoming aware of NIST’s admission of free fall, changes his stance, he will imply that al-Qaeda is capable of magic.

Matthew Rothschild said he was “amazed” at how many people hold the “profoundly irrational and unscientific” belief that “Building 7 . . . came down by planted explosives.” Given the fact that progressive members of the 9/11 Truth Movement “so revere science on such issues as tobacco, stem cells, evolution, and global warming,” Rothschild continued, it is “more than passing strange that [they] are so willing to abandon science and give in to fantasy on the subject of 9/11.”

NIST’s report on WTC 7, however, provided the final proof that the 9/11 Truth Movement had been right all along – that those progressives who credulously accept the Bush-Cheney administration’s explanation for WTC 7’s collapse are the ones who “abandon science and give in to fantasy on the subject of 9/11.”

View the full essay at Dark Politricks

Top Construction Firm: WTC Destroyed By Controlled Demolition

May 26, 2010

Veteran Middle East correspondent Alan Hart: Largest engineering firm studied collapse of twin towers and said there was no doubt it was a controlled explosion

Top Construction Firm: WTC Destroyed By Controlled Demolition 260510top2

Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Respected Middle East expert and former BBC presenter Alan Hart has broken his silence on 9/11, by revealing that the world’s most prominent civil engineering company told him directly that the collapse of the twin towers was a controlled demolition.

Speaking on the Kevin Barrett show yesterday, Hart said he thought the 9/11 attack probably started as a Muslim operation headed up by Osama Bin Laden but that the plot was subsequently hijacked and carried out by Mossad agents in collusion with elements of the CIA, adding that since its formation, Israel has penetrated every Arab government and terrorist organization.

“My guess is that at an early point they said to the bad guys in the CIA – hey this operation’s running what do we do, and the zionists and the neo-cons said let’s use it,” said Hart, making reference to how top neo-cons like Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their fellow Project For a New American Century authors had called for a “catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor,” the year before 9/11.

“The twin towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion, not the planes,” said Hart, adding that this view was based on his close friendship with consultants who work with the world’s leading civil engineering and construction firm.

Hart asked the company to study the collapse of the twin towers, after which they told him directly, “There’s absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion.”

Hart then explained how the five dancing Israelis seen celebrating the attack on the World Trade Center in New Jersey as it unfolded, who turned out to be Mossad agents, proves at at a minimum Israel knew the attack was going to happen. Hart went further in speculating that the planes had been fitted with transponders and that the Israelis were guiding them in to the towers.

Host Barrett pointed out that to carry out the successful controlled demolition of three of the biggest buildings in history, the conspirators would have to ensure that they were hit, making the use of remote controlled airliners a distinct possibility. In addition, Barrett mentioned the fact that he had interviewed numerous pilots who dismissed the chances of accurately guiding a huge commercial airliner into a building while flying at sea level at around 600 miles per hour, especially considering the alleged 9/11 hijackers struggled to even fly basic Cessna light aircraft.

“Sounding a chilling note, Hart added that the U.S. is in grave danger of an Israeli-instigated false-flag nuclear attack, perhaps using an American nuclear weapon stolen from Minot Air Force Base during the “loose nukes” rogue operation of August, 2007. The motive would be to trigger a U.S. war with Iran, and perhaps to finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine under cover of war–which Hart is convinced the Zionists are planning to do as soon as the opportunity presents itself,” writes host Barratt.

Given his biography and standing, Hart’s comments are not to be taken lightly. Hart is a former Middle East Chief Correspondent for ITN News and has also presented for BBC Panorama specializing in the Middle East. He was also a war reporter in Vietnam and the first journalist to reach Suez Canal with the Israeli army in 1967. Over the decades, Hart has developed close relationships with numerous high profile political figures, including the Shah of Iran, Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres.

Hart has been a successful author for years and has no reason to fabricate the fact that a top construction firm told him point blank that the towers were brought down in a controlled demolition.

In forwarding this information, Hart joins legions of other credible experts who to some extent or other have all publicly challenged the official 9/11 story, with many outright stating that the attacks were an inside job, people like 20-year decorated CIA veteran Robert Baer, who told a radio host that “the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job.

In addition, no less than 1198 architectural and engineering specialists have signed a petition demanding Congress re-open an official investigation into the 9/11 attack and the collapse of the twin towers.

Listen to the full interview with Alan Hart below. The 9/11 discussion begins at around the 35 minute mark.

Question – Do you deny the laws of physics?

April 4, 2010

By Dark Politricks

This article and the videos contained within should be compulsory viewing for anyone who believes that any talk of controlled demolitions in relation to the World Trade Center is the crazy talk of tin foil hat wearing loons. Its a collection of clips, news stories, talks and links that cover the collapse of the World Trade Center on September 11th. The aim of the article is not to accuse anyone behind the attacks but to show that logic and science backs the view that the buildings did not fall from the hijacked planes alone.

The first video is a 10 minute condensed overview of a much longer talk held by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth that detail the many flaws in the official story as well as the evidence that points towards controlled demolition in World Trade Center 7.

This is the building which many in the 9/11 truth movement treat as the smoking gun that proves complicity in the attacks and by the end of the article you will see why. Remember this is the 47 storey skyscraper that was not hit by any plane and was the third steel beamed tall building to collapse that day, supposedly from fire alone.

Leave aside co-incidences that all 3 buildings were heavily insured and owned by the same person who “admitted” that building seven was pulled.

Also leave aside the damage to the American psyche that was obtained through the collapse of the huge potent symbols that the WTC represented to the world and leave aside all talk of NORAD stand downs, US training for the terrorists and ignored warnings as well as a desire to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq that required a pretext for doing so. Lets just look at the buildings:

Now I am not an engineer or architect but I would take their educated opinion on matters relating to how buildings are built and how they are destroyed over most other groups of people. These are all well educated people at the height of their chosen profession who have chosen to make a public stand against the official story. Given a choice between following the evidence and keeping quiet to avoid being labelled a conspiracy nut or “truther” they have bravely chosen the former and gone on the road to convince others.

Having looked at the flaws in the NIST report into the collapse of WTC-7 myself I know that the official explanation by NIST does seem to be a blatant attempt to coverup some form of collusion in the collapse of the buildings.

Questions of who and how doesn’t matter right now as it only allows for far fetched theories to propogate and detract new people from investigating the main issues revolving around the evidence that proves demolition. Remember just because there is evidence of controlled demolition it does not logically equate to George Bush being in on it or a huge conspiracy involving lots of people sworn to secrecy. To see why please read the following article of mine on the type of conspiracy involved.

The NIST report into WTC-7 came out not long back and although proponents of the offical story tried to claim it was the final nail in the coffin regarding the smoking gun it did not take long for people to see the various lies, omissions and bad science that the report was based on.

Leaving aside all the lies about their being no witnesses to the explosions at any of the towers when there were many:

Rich Banaciski — Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22]
… and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.

Greg Brady — E.M.T. (E.M.S.) [Battalion 6]
We were standing underneath and Captain Stone was speaking again. We heard — I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now, 1 World Trade Center.

Ed Cachia — Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 53]
we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.

Frank Campagna — Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 11]
You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down.

Kevin Darnowski — Paramedic (E.M.S.)
I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

Dominick Derubbio — Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Division 8]
It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion …

Karin Deshore — Captain (E.M.S.)
Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode.

Brian Dixon — Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
… the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because the whole bottom I could see — I could see two sides of it and the other side — it just looked like that floor blew out. I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out.

and leaving aside the lie that there were no witnesses or evidence of molten steel:

and leaving aside the peer reviewed scientific study by 25 phsycists that provides evidence that explosives, namely Thermite, was used in the collapse of the World Trade Center:

“Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

and leaving aside the dodgy computer model used by NIST to explain the collapse of WTC-7 in which they loaded the input parameters to create a model that didn’t fit the events on the day.

A model for which they still haven’t released the data so that it can be analysed independently.

A model in which the different parts of the building were heated differently causing unnatural thermal expansion and a model in which parts of the building that were in early NIST reports disappeared from the final report.

In all it was a model in which all computer programmers can attest proves that if you put shit data in you get shit data back out. As the non peer reviewed report didn’t even consider controlled demolition or the use of accelerants then it does seem to be an attempt to push a preconceived outcome on the public.

Leaving aside all those inconsistencies and problems I have still not been told by anyone who believes in the official story how a building as large as WTC-7 can collapse at almost free fall speed without having some form of demolition to remove the path of least resistance.

Even the NIST admit that the building falls at free fall speed for a couple of seconds! Saying in their final report that they had found a 2.25-second period in which the center roofline exhibited a “freefall drop for approximately 8 stories.”

This obviously defies all logic unless something had caused the resistance to magically disappear. However without controlled demolitions as the cause of this free fall path it leaves proponents of the official story in a very sticky place having to defend an event that defies all the known laws of physics .

As this famous YouTube video created by a high school physics teacher shows, the building fell at a speed indistinguishable from gravity for over 2 seconds.

Unless the laws of physics are updated soon to give an alternative explanation we are left with the fact that only a controlled demolition can explain this event.

And if we accept that fact then we also have to accept that 3rd parties colluded with the terrorists on that day to ensure these buildings fell.

Obviously this leaves believers in the official conspiracy with an awkward decision.

Either to accept the laws of physics or to deny them because they cannot face the alternative.

Which choice do you make?

Neocon Says Obama Should Save Presidency By Attacking Iran

February 2, 2010

Neocon Says Obama Should Save Presidency By Attacking Iran 020210Obama

Compares notion of Obama bombing Iran to political impact of 9/11

Steve Watson
Tuesday, Feb 2nd, 2010

A Neoconservative commentator and scholar has stated that Obama can save his presidency and turn around his plummeting approval ratings by bombing Iran.

Pro-war fanatic Daniel Pipes, has penned a despicable piece on conservative website National Review Online, calling for preemptive airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“Here is an idea for Barack Obama to salvage his tottering administration by taking a step that protects the United States and its allies,” Pipes writes.

“He needs a dramatic gesture to change the public perception of him as a light-weight, bumbling ideologue, preferably in an arena where the stakes are high, where he can take charge, and where he can trump expectations.”

“Such an opportunity does exist,” Pipes adds. “Obama can give orders for the U.S. military to destroy Iran’s nuclear-weapon capacity.”

“Just as 9/11 caused voters to forget George W. Bush’s meandering early months, a strike on Iranian facilities would dispatch Obama’s feckless first year down the memory hole and transform the domestic political scene,” he continues.

“It would sideline health care,’ he continues, “prompt Republicans to work with Democrats, make netroots squeal, independents reconsider, and conservatives swoon.” Pipes states.

Pipes was a staunch supporter of the Vietnam war and a strong advocate for the invasion of Iraq. He is also supports Israel in the Arab-Israeli conflict and is completely opposed to any form of Palestinian state.

Despite this, Pipes, who rejects the term “neocon”, referring to himself as “plain conservative”, was nominated to the board of the United States Institute of Peace by George W. Bush in 2003.

He is also the head of a think tank named the Middle East Forum, and its website Campus Watch, which has been fiercely criticized as anti-Islamic. Campus Watch was also accused of “McCarthyesque intimidation” of professors who criticized Israel when it published “dossiers” on eight professors it thought “hostile” to America.

With regards to Iran, Pipes has advocated that the U.S. “unleash” the right-wing terrorist organization Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) against Iran. It is well known that that MEK has direct ties to the CIA, and there is already evidence relating to use of the group against Iran in covert operations.

Pipes occupies a long list of neocon policy wonks and academics who share the same fetish for more war and more terrorism in the name of “uniting the country”, seemingly unphased by the complete ignorance of their comments and the depth of their depravity.

The past few days have seen an intensification in rhetoric regarding the geopolitical situation in the Persian Gulf. Last week Obama warned Iran of “growing consequences” with reference to the country’s nuclear ambitions.

The Iranian government then stated that the nation will deliver a harsh blow to “global arrogance” on February 11th, the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.

The U.S. has retaliated to what it sees as Iran’s growing missile threat by deploying a land and sea-based missile shield to protect American allies in the Gulf, according to administration officials.

Iran’s government responded by calling the deployment a “puppet show”, adding that it represents “nothing except a new political ploy to increase the [American] military presence at the expense of others.”

Ex-Malaysian premier still says 9/11 inside job

January 23, 2010

Press TV
Saturday, January 23rd, 2010

Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamad has once again stated that the September 11 attacks were a staged event, rejecting claims that his comments are a publicity stunt.

“What do I gain from a publicity stunt? I am merely going by a public statement. I am not going to be a Prime Minister anymore unless you (pointing to a journalist) want me to …” the former Malaysian prime minister told reporters on Friday.

After watching a three-hour video of the attack on the World Trade Center buildings, Mohamad, had suggested earlier in his blog that the twin towers had collapsed “demolition style.”

Later on Friday, Mahathir also called on local television stations to show the three-hour video.

“It sounds logical to me. Until today, you cannot even find scraps of the plane that crashed into the World Trade Centre and there is no picture of the other plane, which was supposed to crash.”

“The way the tower came crashing down was also funny. People who saw it were also not ordinary people. They were professional engineers and what they say is quite credible.”

“I wish some television stations would consent to show the video as it is not long and only three hours. You can then see what I saw.”

Mahathir also said some people were afraid of saying anything critical about the governments of powerful countries or accusing them of doing something wrong.

“But the government of powerful countries said lies to go to war,” he added

“I have great respect for the Arabs but for them to hijack four planes is not very Arab. Just imagine the amount of planning that would be involved.”

Rejecting claims that he was being insensitive to the victims, Mahathir stressed that he was “being more sensitive to the victims” as he was saying the attacks were carried out “deliberately.”

The former Malaysian prime minister also said that his views about how 9/11/2001 attacks were carried out would not affect Malaysia’s chances of attracting foreign investment.

“I have said this many times even when I was the prime minister. But we still have the foreign direct investment. However, we cannot rely on foreign direct investments alone. We must build on our own system,” he said.

Mahathir made the comments at a debut held for a book titled Civilizations, Nomadic Migrations, Empires and The Trail of Islam, at the Islamic Arts Museum in Kuala Lumpur.

The book which entails the history of mankind, origin and commonality of major religions, is authored by Syed Salem Albukhary.

View the original article at Press TV

Barbara Honegger comments on ‘The Bush Legacy, a decade of pain’

January 19, 2010

Jerry Mazza
Online Journal
Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

It’s always a pleasure to receive a positive comment from a reader about your work. When the comment is a story itself that further illuminates your article in a whole new way, then that is something special. And when that reader happens to be an author, 9/11 patriot, and someone who was in the Pentagon on that day, noted by David Ray Griffin in his book, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, you take pause to say thank you.

First, here is Griffin commenting about one of Barbara Honegger’s observations on what happened in the Pentagon on 9/11, from page 104, paragraph two of his book . . .

“First, the day before 9/11, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld stated at a press conference that the Pentagon was missing $2.3 trillion dollars. Second, one of the most damaged areas was the Army’s financial management/audit area. This combination of facts had led Barbara Honegger to ask: ‘Were the auditors who could “‘follow the money,”’ and the computers whose data could help them do it, intentionally targeted?

“According to Honegger, she discussed this issue with Michael Nielsen, the aforementioned civilian auditor for the Army—who in fact was working in the Operations Office of the Army’s Financial Brand and probably survived only because he had gone back to his own (temporary) office shortly before the attack, which killed most of the people in the Operations Office. When she asked Nielson whether he believed that the Operations Office might have been targeted because of the missing money, he replied in the affirmative, according to Honegger, adding that the records then were, in fact, destroyed. In any case, this hypothesis is one that should be considered if and when a true investigation takes place.”

This is among several stunning insights that Honegger provided as a witness of that tragic day’s events inside the Pentagon.

TuneUp Utilities 2010

Here is Ms. Honegger’s email to me on another crucial subject, published with her permission . . .

Jerry –

Re the close of your outstanding A Decade of Pain,

Mr. Bush, You were a crook from day one, when you and yours bought the Supreme Court and bought Judge Scalia, who handed you victory over a recalcitrant Al Gore, who should have had every vote in the state of Florida recounted and come out with the five-figure win that three newspapers in their subsequent recount printed clear as day.It’s vital to realize that the three-newspaper consortium’s recount of the Florida ballots was slated [to] come out just before 9/11, and what that means. The hard copy Newsweek that arrived in subscribers’ mailboxes on Sept. 11 had a sweating and worried Bush on the cover in anticipation of the about-to-be-released proof that he was the loser in Florida and thus the election and that Gore should be taking over 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in the immediate future.

Given Bush and Cheney rigged and stole the election in Florida, and thus the country, to begin with, they had to have a back up plan in case proof of the theft came out or the results were brought into serious question after Bush took office – i.e. 9/11, which Bush-Cheney clearly engineered, was that ‘back up plan.’ 9/11 immediately squelched – ‘embargoed’ — release of the newspaper consortium’s recount results ‘for national security’ reasons, and by the time they finally were released, not only did what should have been earthshattering news get hardly any press; even if it had, Gore wouldn’t demand his rightful office ‘because we were at war.’

If you’re not already aware of it, see my attached Pentagon Attack Papers, which has been published in New York Times bestselling author Jim Marrs’ 9/11 Truth expose The Terror Conspiracy, and is also under my entry in the ‘Government, Military and Intelligence’ category at at

Barbara Honegger
Also author of October Surprise (Tudor, 1989)

Here is a section on Barbara Honegger from the above, JM.

Barbara Honegger, MS – Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the Department of Defense’s advanced science, technology and national security affairs university (1995 – present). Graduate of the Naval War College master’s program in National Security Decision Making (2001). Former White House Policy Analyst and Special Assistant to the Assistant to President Ronald Reagan (1981 – 1983).

Former Director of the Attorney General’s Anti-Discrimination Law Review, U.S. Department of Justice (1982 – 1983). Author of the pioneering Irangate expose October Surprise (1989). Author of the chapter “The Pentagon Attack Papers“ included in The Terror Conspiracy: Deception, 9/11 and the Loss of Liberty by Jim Marrs (2006).

  • Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement:“Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise—including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots—have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned.They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations.Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response.

    We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now—not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books—so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed.

    We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media.”

  • Contributing author to The Terror Conspiracy: Deception, 9/11 and the Loss of Liberty 9/6/06: “The US military, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11. . . .A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, high−speed 280−degree dive towards the Pentagon that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the “Friendly” signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti−aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building.Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response system.”

Again Barbara, many thanks for your insights and courage in speaking out now as then.

View the original article at Online Journal