Thursday, September 9, 2010

Former senator, engineers offer ‘proof’ of 9/11 controlled demolitions exclusive:
"The nine-year-old body of 9/11 conspiracy theories includes many improbable (and sometimes contradictory) claims, everything from remote-controlled planes flying into the World Trade Center, to a missile hitting the Pentagon, to mass kidnappings of air passengers.

But a group of more than 1,200 architects and engineers is building what it hopes is a scientifically sound argument about one 9/11 claim: That the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed not by fires caused by the airplane collisions, but by a controlled demolition."

Read more.


  1. The other day tree fallers took down some big pines. As the 12' sections hit the ground, the houses a full street away, 300-500', not only shook and rattled, but things actually jumped up off counters and tables. That's from one relatively small log.

    We all commented actually, that it made us realize what the impact of those towers hitting the ground would be like, and it is not hard to imagine other buildings coming down from the force of it.

    I cannot fathom anyone not understanding the result of fuel laden jets flying through two buildings. Why do you need conspiracy theories? Because the reality of what is still against us is too scary to face. That's the only explanation.

  2. The problem with posting stories like this is that things happen to my computer and blog. The RawStory link for Read more got sent to my home page for complete access to my blog. I caught it within about 10 minutes and changed it back to RawStory but I now have to change the password.

  3. Rose have you seen the video to the right of my blog just below Peter B. Collins?

    Steel doesn't melt like that. Those buildings were designed to withstand a direct hit from the largest jet flying at the time.
    The building was build like a giant radiator and the jet fuel didn't last that long. The molten steel seen falling from the building in the video doesn't show the consequences of jet fuel or furniture fires.

    I thought you looked at things from a more scientific point of view. Houses shaking from huge trees hitting the ground are different from engineered sky scrapers being hit by jets and ones near them falling at free fall speeds that weren't hit by the jets.
    I know if you just look into this with innocent eyes and an open mind that you won't be able to buy the b.s. that is being peddled.
    I don't know what happened but what we saw was controlled demolition and alcmoms razor would seem to back that up.

  4. From the RawStory article:

    "-- Rapid onset of "collapse"
    -- Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a second before the building's destruction
    -- Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration
    -- Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
    -- Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional
    -- FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

    WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
    -- Slow onset with large visible deformations
    -- Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
    -- High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never "collapsed".

  5. Actually, it is probably long lost in some archives somewhere, but right after it happened, there was a story on why and how it could happen and it has to do with the way the guy who designed the building set it up - something to do with an outer shell, and an open inner core. They went over the reasons he did that, and why it worked so well - until the support system was severed by the planes.

    As for the "steel doesn't melt" thing - are you kidding me? Have people lost their minds?

  6. What? Are steel beams carved out of granite-like steel mountains somewhere or something? Who knew.

  7. In videos you can clearly see molten steel pouring from the building before it's collapse.

    Are you saying jet fuel and furniture burn hot enough to smelt steel in that short amount of time? The jet fuel burned off after about 20 minutes, after that it was carpet, furniture, drywall and lots and lots of asbestos.

  8. As a combat engineer specializing in demolition, I always maintained that it was a timed controlled explosion.

    I'm not surprised to see that there are clear-thinking people with expertise who believe the same thing. You can't write off reality, even though people try to.

    Some people would rather keep their heads in the sand over 9/11...that's their business.

    But ignorance is not the answer in understanding the physics of what happened to the twin towers.


Nuclear Waste Water Fukusima From A Drone

G.W. Bush On Explosives At WTC

US Senator Joe Liberman, WTC 7 Did Not Occur