I've expressed my conviction before, that this last election was tampered with no less than the ones of 2000 and 2004.(for example here). That the "D" part won this time does not disproof the fact that the "R" part has massively intervened with fraud, hacking and manipulations. It's just that their efforts were still not good enough to keep off all of the pro-"D" swing that happened in the electorate desperately seeking for an alternative (and believing the "D" to be one such).

Now there is even some evidence for my assumption: the Election Defense Alliance (EDA) have now released a preliminary report about their ongoing investigations which made OpEdNews.com. Editor Rob Kall write a background article.

The Election Defense Alliance has this to say:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Major Miscount of Vote in 2006 Election:
Reported Results Skewed Toward Republicans by 4 percent, 3 million votes

Election Defense Alliance Calls for Investigation

Some people have already shed some light on 74yr-old Rumsfeld's successor, Robert Gates (63 yrs). Who used to be the CIA director when George W. Bush's father was president. Who is a close friend to the Bush family since decades.

But did you know this? Robert Gates...

....was on the board of directors of VoteHere, a strange little company that was the biggest elections industry lobbyist for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). VoteHere spent more money than ES&S, Diebold, and Sequoia combined to help ram HAVA through. And HAVA, of course, was a bill sponsored by by convicted Abramoff pal Bob Ney and K-street lobbyist buddy Steny Hoyer. HAVA put electronic voting on steroids."

(read more....)

Strange, how close all these threads run to each other...

Writing down these thoughts from my European perspective. The last couple of weeks a peculiar theory has materialized in my brain.....

Can't help but thinking that "Republicans" and "Democrats" are not the 2 biggest electoral parties in the U.S. There are 2 other parties, bigger, mightier, more influencial than the "D" and "R" camps. They are both secret. They both don't have a publically known name. At least not an official one. Dunno if they have a formal organization, Dunno if they have their own funding and financial structures. What are their names? Easy: one is "Demopublican Party", the other is the "Republicrats". They probably don't even need their own funding.... because they have secretely subverted the old "pure" parties, and taken control of the commanding heights already. In any case, these bodies do only club together to fiddle with offices, foster their Red Tape and advance their personal careers. Whoever is voted into offices -- nothing much changes fundamentally for their voters (just for those who were lucky to make it into their seats).

Sometimes one or two or 50 don't get re-elected. Sometimes a Defense Secretary, aged 74 years, looses his office. He'll be replaced by someone with similar "qualifications"....

Today's reading recommendation #2. Extracts:

Steal Back Your Vote
Published by Greg Palast November 6th, 2006 in his blog

A lot of advice we’re getting from our progressive friends is to take photos of your ballot and silly stuff like that. Well, that’s all about how to complain after they steal it. I have a better idea: Win, don’t whine.

The regime’s sneak attack via vote suppression [see, "How They Stole the Mid-Term Election"] will only net them about 4.5 million votes. You should be able to beat that blindfolded. As that will cost about 5% of the vote. That means you can’t win with 51% of the vote anymore. So just get over it. If you can’t get the 55% you need for regime change, then you’re just a bunch of crybaby pussycats who don’t deserve to take charge.

#1: Vote Early, Vote Often

Vote today — at early voting stations — so you can spend tomorrow bringing out others to vote. Also, if you’re challenged, you’ve got another day to bring in more ID or scream bloody murder to your county elections board about your missing registration.

#2: Gang Vote

Arrive with five! Never go bowling, make love or vote alone. And volunteer at get-out-the-vote operations. It’s worth it just for the stale donuts, cold coffee and hot democracy.

#3: Tell Them to Take Their Provisional Ballot and...

If they try to hand you a "provisional ballot," scream bloody murder. If there’s a problem with your ID or registration, demand adjudication from a poll monitor, come back with proper ID, or demand appeal to the county supervisor of elections.

But don’t just walk away. If it’s provisional or nothing, take it — then return for the count to defend it.
[....]
       ( ----> more)

Today's reading recommendation #1. Extracts:

HOW THEY STOLE THE 2006 MID-TERM ELECTION
by Greg Palast, for The Guardian (UK), Monday November 6, 2006

Here’s how the 2006 mid-term election was stolen.

Note the past tense. And I’m not kidding.

And shoot me for saying this, but it won’t be stolen by jerking with the touch-screen machines (though they’ll do their nasty part). While progressives panic over the viral spread of suspect computer black boxes, the Karl Rove-bots have been tunneling into the vote vaults through entirely different means.

For six years now, our investigations team, at first on assignment for BBC TV and the Guardian, has been digging into the nitty-gritty of the gaming of US elections. We’ve found that November 7, 2006 is a day that will live in infamy. Four and a half million votes have been shoplifted. Here’s how they’ll do it, in three easy steps:

Theft #1: Registrations gone with the wind

On January 1, 2006, while America slept off New Year’s Eve hangovers, a new federal law crept out of the swamps that has devoured 1.9 million votes, overwhelmingly those of African-Americans and Hispanics. The vote-snatching statute is a cankerous codicil slipped into the 2002 Help America Vote Act — strategically timed to go into effect in this mid-term year. It requires every state to reject new would-be voters whose identity can’t be verified against a state verification database.

Sounds arcane and not too threatening. But look at the numbers and you won’t feel so fine. About 24.3 million Americans attempt to register or re-register each year. The New York University Law School’s Brennan Center told me that, under the new law, Republican Secretaries of State began the year by blocking about one in three new voters.

How? To begin with, Mr. Bush’s Social Security Administration has failed to verify 47% of registrants. After appeals and new attempts to register, US Elections Assistance Agency statistics indicate 1.9 million would-be voters will still find themselves barred from the ballot on Tuesday.
[....]

(more)

Is anybody from the ranks of the frequent 911bloggers able to create a well-written (and sourced) essay that explains "gag orders" and "whistleblowers" and how they influence the search for 9/11 truth?

While writing, please bear in mind that overseas readers are not at all familiar with both terms (and that above Wikipedia links do not necessarily serve to enlighten newcomers about their relevance to the 9/11 truth struggle).

Please explain about whistleblowers and gag orders in a comprehensive way. Simplify as much as necessary, but not more.

So what exactly are gag orders? Who can order a gag? Under which circumstances? For how long? With which consequences in case of breach? Is there a possiblity to overcome such a gag order at all?

What are "whistleblowers"? How many of them are known in relation to 9/11 truth? What are their names? Are they all gag ordered?

I believe if you are able to write such a piece in a way that makes a few stupid Europeans such as myself understand these 2 terms, you'll have a piece that will also enlighten quite a number of U.S. citizens.

Somebody posted a link to Paul Thompson's "Complete 911 Timeline" to Digg. It currently stands at 138 diggs and 38 comments, and currently is displayed on the front pages of the "View All" as well as the "World & Business" categories. Let's help it along some more:

Thanks!

 

A DailyKos blogger has transcribed an interview with Daniel Ellsberg ("Pentagon Papers" whistleblower of fame) that has some interesting revelations.

Also note, that the published transcription is not complete. It even contains a hint about this:

"[SNIP - for 20 minutes Ellsberg discusses martial law & the shredding of the constitution, 'the next 911, the Reichstag fire')"

I'm glad that dz posted hints and links to an incredible Amazon.com book review to the 911blogger.com front page.

The review is about Webster G. Tarpley's "9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA". Authored by Robert D. Steele, the Number 1 reviewer of non-fictional books at Amazon.com and a former CIA clandestine case officer, this is how he summarizes his impressions:

'I sit here, a 54-year old, liberally educated, two graduate degrees, war college, a life overseas, 150 IQ or so, the number #1 Amazon reviewer for non-fiction, a former Marine Corps infantry officer, a former CIA clandestine case officer, founder of the Marine Corps Intelligence Center, and I have to tell anyone who cares to read this: I believe it. I believe it enough to want a full investigation that passes the smell test of the 9/11 families as well as objective outside observers. I believe it sufficient to indict Dick Cheney and other neo-cons. Sadly, the Executive is now in the service of corporations that benefit from high crimes and misdemeanors, rather than in the service of the American people who suffer great ill from these terrible mis-deeds.'

Click here to read the full review at Amazon, plus some other reviewers' take s well.

Click here to digg this 911blogger story.

This 911.blogger.com Blog entry (reproducing the online petition of 9/11 widows) just made it to the Digg frontpage (with 132 diggs right now). It may soon be off again from the "all diggs" frontpage, but it will likely stay for a few more hours on the "politics" frontpage.

Here is the reproduction of the "Public's Right To Know - Declassification and Release of Documents" petition created by and written by Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken:

 

View Current Signatures
  -  
Sign the Petition

To:  U.S Congress; Press/Media

We, the undersigned, demand the immediate declassification and release of all transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice. It has been alleged that this urgent and out-of-the-ordinary meeting was called to discuss the increasingly dire warnings of an imminent al Qaeda attack within the U.S.

Given that much of the July 10, 2001 meeting has already been made public in Bob Woodward’s newly released book, “State of Denial”, it is unacceptable to continue to keep these documents and transcripts hidden from the American public’s view.

In addition, we again call for the declassification and release of both the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI) and the CIA Inspector General’s report, “CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks”.

The disastrous nature of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks warrant the release of all of this information so that the American public may learn what its government did or did not do to protect them. Had this nation been properly warned of the looming and imminent terrorist threat, life saving choices could have been made that day.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

In a lengthy interview with CBC, Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission co-chair makes some stunning revelations. Remember, Hamilton is the guy who felt it necessary to co-author a book "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission". The journalist who asks some sharp questions is Evan Solomon. The interview was done back in August.

Here are some interesting tid-bits:

Question: Now, one of the stipulations, you write in the book, one of the ways that you thought that this ought to be successful, this report, the Commission Report, is on page 23, you said if the American people would accept the results as authoritative, and the recommendations.

And when I measure that against a Zogby poll done in May, that says now 42% of Americans say that "the U.S. government, and its 9/11 Commission, concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts the official explanation of September 11th, saying there's a cover-up" - 42%, Mr. Hamilton - what does that say to you about the efficacy of the Commission's report?

The new (and high-rated) video "Improbable Collapse", directed by Michael Berger, is now also available as a BitTorrent download (699.15 megabyte) through mininova. See here:

http://www.mininova.org/tor/446155

The video sports interviews with Prof. Steven E. Jones, whistleblower Kevin Ryan, 9/11 truth research pioneer Jim Hoffman and Dr. David Ray Griffin. For some full reviews of it.... hmm, I don't know of any (yet). Just watch it yourself. It is probably the best one that is out there right now, if you look for something to show to 9/11 truth newbies (like your Aunt Tillie, or your Uncle Sam).

Who said only the mainstream media are capable of doing propaganda??

We can do it too... :-)

I haven't looked at the South Park episode dealing with 9/11. However, this 911blogger website's traffic statistics seem to suggest that it served huuuuuuuuuugely to direct curious people to look up for "truther" sites. I wonder how many hits 911truth.org did get as a result (after all, one character was wearing a T-shirt with their address on it, and 911blogger.com did only reap the "side effect")?

Second, I've come across an interesting an interesting article at www.opednews.com ("Analyzing South Park's 9/11 Show"). It's really worth a read:

'One thing I've found over the last few years is that media will often write a "9/11 hit piece" and then weave within it many links and information that gets the reader curious about the fact that the official story doesn't really make sense, when you look at it. This harkens back to the old KGB run Soviet Union, where journalists would "hide" facts within stories, and the Soviet people were savvy enough to get the "real" message.

A few months after 9/11 a Canadian newspaper writer did just this, writing what looked like a 9/11 hit piece, but working major disturbing facts in it, and then giving my email address findtruth40@hotmail.com for those wanting more information. When I called him, he apologized for the hit piece quality, but said that's the only way he could get the facts to the public, past his editor. The result was amazing. I got hundreds of emails from angry Canadians who believed that 9/11 was an inside job, and who'd read past the Trojan horse hit piece aspect and saw the facts within the article.'

Sometimes, a simple question combined with an image speaks louder than 1,000,000 words or 1000 elaborate articles. Look at this brilliant example:

Can't this simple thingie (made by someone from www.legalwar.org) get more people to think and re-think what they have been told all over the last 5 years by the mainstream media?? We just need to show it....

When one of the comments on this 911blogger.com site pointed to the CounterPunch page with the statement of the Anti-Minutemen protesters at Columbia, my curiosity was prompted by this ad line:

Special Investigation: Why Did the World Trade Towers Fall?

(top of the page).

Really?

And this thingie is not just a paraphrase of FEMA / NIST reports? Or one that re-phrases what Popular Mechanics tries to tell us?

It really is a "special investigation"?

Man, I'm impressed.... these guys must now be under a lot of pressure if they feel the need to take up the topic from their "gatekeeper" angle....

And whaaaaat?? This "Special Investigation" is available in the subscriber version only?!?

Anyone here able to post lots of quotes on some website (under "fair use" terms, of course, blah blah)? Anyone seen a public response to this CounterPunch special already?

Did you see this? It is a month old already, but it may have slipped everyone's attention:

"[...] we, the National Security Whistleblowers, want to go on record
one more time to reiterate the significant issues and cases that were
duly reported to the 9/11 commission by those of us from the intelligence,
aviation, and law enforcement communities, but ended up being censored
and omitted."

Sibel Edmonds and William Weaver enumerate 13 whistleblowers by name who have attempted to testify their knowledge before the now infamous "Ommission Commission". Their details are mindboggling. None of their people were called into hearings by the Commission's own initiative; all of them had to insist being heard and interviewed. Most failed to get a hearing -- and those who did, have seen their testimonies omitted in the final report.. This is truely smashing evidence for a cover up job being well executed by the commission.

Hmm.... maybe I better reproduce a full copy of the original publication in here (with some added highlighting by myself), so it gets wider circulation: (Has this ever been picked up by DailyKos and similar "alternative" outlets?)

The 9/11 Commission: A Play on Nothing in Three Acts

by Sibel Edmonds and William Weaver

A wag once famously said that Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot was a play where nothing happened… twice. The two former co-chairmen of the 9/11 commission report, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, have released a new book, Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission. This book goes Beckett one better – it is the third act of veneer over substance, self-aggrandizement over serious analysis, and cliché over perspicacity. It is another calculated attempt by the former commissioners to place themselves in the media spotlight, and to overcome the humiliation of their widely criticized and mostly debunked report. It is a vapid and substanceless attempt to claim moral high ground and present the cochairmen as heroes of honesty. It would be a farce, except that it has no story line, save the aggrandizement of the authors. At least they are consistent in doing nothing and proclaiming that to be a sign of their devotion to the country and the government. Beckett once said that "habit is the ballast that chains the dog to its vomit," and by this measure the chain restraining Kean and Hamilton is a short one indeed.

(more after the jump..)

Steve Watson from Infowars.com, looking at MainStream Media reports on the latest Atta/Bin Laden videos thinks that "Karl Rove's promised October surprise has arrived nice and early."

I don't think this is the threatened "surprise". Too lame. Don't underestimate Rove, just don't!

I personally think, the surprise is still ahead. (While the Neocons last week have had their unpleasant little surprises on their own now -- see the Bob "I'm Now Connecting 2 Or 3 Dots" Woodward book, and the Republican conngressman Mark "If I Were One Of Those Sickos" Foley revelations -- they can do better. And they will!)

Don't forget: a major "strike group of ships", including nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine escort and supply ship are already on their way to Iran's western coast, expected to arrive on October 21st...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Our enemies [....] never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
               — George W. Bush (found in "President Signs Defense Bill " on www.whitehouse.gov)

http://blog.abovetopsecret.com/wecomeinpeace/2006/09/911_graphic_novel_the_real_ver.html:

"Recently, Oceania's Ministry of Truth produced The 9/11 Report: A Graphic Adaptation - a propaganda comic book reiterating the official story for kids, the illiterate, and the incredibly bored. I noticed there were some parts of the novel that perhaps weren't entirely accurate, so here I present the first part of a 9/11 Graphic Novel Redux."

This is truly hilarious! Excellent way to expose lots of the many little lies that surround the Big One. I'm really looking forward to the second (and later) parts. :-)

P.S.: Who is going to translate that into Spanish, French, German, Arab, Chinese,...?

P.S.S.: Be prepared for this thing to draw a lot of heat by the "opposition". Spread it around. Link to it. Mirror it. Back it up. Support it. Digg it (hmm... how does that work at all?)

Update 1: Let me try if this works: Digg this!

Update 2: Looks like the site went down. Let's see if it comes back up soon...

You may have read reprehensor's hint to Thomas-Scott Gordon's affadavit on the demolition of the WTC. Thomas-Scott Gordon mentions (in not too friendly a context) one certain Kurt Sonnenfeld, who he suspected to be following him arround (accompanied by one Jim Chestnut) on behalf of the FBI.

That name rang a bell. Because some more Info about that same Sonnenfeld I found here:

Kurt Sonnenfeld - FEMA's WhistleBlower?" (at http://signs-of-the-times.org/)

According to the story, Sonnenfeld now is in Argentina (read link to find out the bizarre details). In an interview with Argentine daily newspaper El Pais on September 10th 2006 he is supposed to have said (about his work as a photographer for FEMA on Ground Zero, during the "remove the rubble" cleanup operation)::

"I was the only person, with camera in hand, with total and absolute access to any area of Ground Zero and the WTC. Any other cameras that were within that area would have been confiscated and the the (sic!) person carrying them arrested. [....] What I saw at certain moments and in certain places...is very frightening, I don't know who (sic!) to put it in words, what I saw leads me to the terrible conclusion that there was foreknowledge of what was going to happen."

I've not seen this story elsewhere, and I'm not sure about how reliable the source usually is (Wayne Madsen Report) -- but the content is worth to be researched more and possibly verified (or not). See:

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

Sept. 12, 2006 -- According to sources who worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) at Ground Zero on and after 911, residents of southern Manhattan and rescue and clean-up workers involved in the recovery operations at the site of the former World Trade Center are experiencing an unusually high rate of non-Hodgkin lymphoma -- a cancer that is common among individuals who have been exposed to extremely high levels of ionizing radiation, such as that from nuclear blasts and major nuclear reactor leaks. In addition to the respiratory problems among rescue workers at Ground Zero who breathed toxic "pulverized" concrete and other debris into their lungs, the radiation cancer is of extreme interest to researchers who suspect that the World Trade Center towers and Building 7 were brought down with the help of high energy releases. WMR spoke to a number of individuals who were at Ground Zero on 911 who are now experiencing symptoms resulting from severe damage to their immune systems -- a condition that is common among those exposed to high levels of radiation.

Sources close to FEMA in New York confirmed to WMR that the lymphoma cases are believed to be the result of a release of extremely high levels of radiation from a series of nuclear events on the morning of 911. They believe that explains the reason for the "pulverization" of concrete, molten metals, pyroclastic surges and fallout, and other anomalies resulting from the catastrophe. It was also pointed out that some vehicles parked on the west side of the World Trade Center were "fused" on the sides facing the towers -- the doors being melted into the body frames. Other cars parked nearby were not similarly affected. There is also evidence of explosions and fires on top of the Woolworth Building, three blocks away from the World Trade Center, during the attack on the towers.

FEMA officials from Washington, DC were quick to ban any unofficial photography in southern Manhattan in the weeks following 911. Any photographers who had not received prior permission from FEMA to be in southern Manhattan found their photographic and filming equipment confiscated by the government.

Watch these (new?) documentary videos:

1. 911 Mysteries: Demolitions (Part 1 of 3) [30 minutes]
2. 911 Mysteries: Demolitions (Part 2 of 3) [31 minutes]
3. 911 Mysteries: Demolitions (Part 3 of 3) [30 minutes]

Brilliantly made, mostly sticking to known facts. Well explained science background. Poses most of the important questions. Good stuff for passing along to "not-yet-truthers" amongst your neighbourhood, family, workplace, friends....

I believe these are quite newly released (never before encountered them).

Project Censored is "a media research group out of Sonoma State University" in California. It just published its annual "Top 25 Censored Stories".

Guess what? They made Prof. Steven E. Jones' paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" their #18 in the list, and they even publish a direct link to it.

However, there are even more goodies for 911 Truthers in this list. It also brings to light...

• ...that Halliburton sold nuclear technologies to Iran. You know, that very Halliburton company, which is a Texas-based multinational, employing 100.000+ persons and making a 20+ billion $US revenues p.a. Oh, and which also still pays a 200.000 $US p.a. (deferred) salary to US Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney used to be Halliburton's Chairman and CEO. He still owns quite a large chunk of their stock options. [Story #2]
• ...that last year alone, Cheney’s Halliburton stock rose by over 3000 percent. Not bad at all. And lots of more interesting facts in their Story #24...

Other interesting stories include...

• ..."#1 Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media",
• ..."#4 Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US",
• ..."#6 Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy"
• ..."#7 US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq"
• ..."#8 Pentagon Exempt from Freedom of Information Act"
• ..."#14 Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US"
• ..."#17 Iraq Invasion Promotes OPEC Agenda"
• ..."#22 $Billions in Homeland Security Spending Undisclosed"

From 9th of September 2001, for nearly four and a half years, I was more or less a believer in the official conspiracy theory. You know, the one that says: it was a gang of 19 arab Muslims (plus their puppet masters hiding in Bagdad and an Afghan cave) who managed to make the 2 WTC towers collapse with the help of 2 airplanes crushing into the buildings and burning lots of jet fuel. (Uhmm, the only thing where I had my doubts from the beginning may be summarized as follows: "Probably not even in their wildest dreams would the hijacker-perpetrators have imagined they could completely bring down the towers themselves. The most they may have hoped for was an irreparable damage, and a globally visible wound they inflict on these symbols of Western capitalism... No-one, not even structural engineers could have predicted these total collapses").

Anyway, it was only half a year ago that I encountered for the first time a story about WTC7 (the third WTC building to collapse on that very day, also a high-rise steel structure, albeit only 47 storeys high) -- and that one additional fact made me re-consider the whole story. By now, I've seen most of the videos available on the 'net, read most of the articles, am familiar with most of the unofficial conspiracy theories...

What I am missing are a few more hard facts. Proofs based on the laws of physics that will shake the official theory to pulverized dust. Facts that can be verified by any student of physics or chemistry.

What I found and saw so far was merely "common sense physics" applied. Arguments like "Why did the collapses happen in near-freefall speed?", "What did transform all the buildings concrete into very fine dust?", "Why were there these 'squibs'?", "Why did that pulverized dust originate from the top?" etc.

I'm very familiar with the fact that a solid piece of concrete will *not* pulverize into dust if you throw it out of the 7th floor window onto a yard with a concrete surface -- it will only shatter into a few dozen (still solid concrete) pieces and very little "dust". Because I tried it....

However, I feel this is not convincing enough for still many, many people. Can't we do better?

Aren't there knowledgeable people, scientists, engineers around, who could just start to calculate the required amounts of energy to cause all the evidence that can be seen in the videos, in the satellite pics taken of Ground Zero, etc.? So that the argument "At least for 9/11 in 2001, Almighty Allah changed the universal laws of physics for one spot of the earth in New York, to let happen once what elsewhere and at other times is impossible to happen" can be admired in its full beauty?

To make it more specific:

* Take a 1 kg cube of concrete: how much energy is required to transform it into pulverized dust of [use appropriate figure]-sized mini particles? Hence, how much total energy would be required to pulverize 50% of the concrete that was built into WTC2? What about 100%?

* How much energy would one have to put into that created concrete dust in order to make it behave like a "pyroclastic flow" and spread over all of Manhattan as a 1 inch layer of "snow"? (That one will probably have to make use the "ideal gas law", PV = nRT ...)

* How much energy is required to heat all of the steel columns (built into one WTC twin tower) to 100° Celsius? To 200° C? To 300° C? To 500°, 800° C? How much of its load capacity does steel loose at 300° C? What temperature is required to make it loose 50% of its load capacity?

* How much "potential energy" was in one 110 storey WTC building that would be transformed into kinetic energy and released if it came down in freefall speed? How much energy could the jet fuel release if it burnt under "ideal conditions"? How much was the kinetic energy of the planes flying at 500 mph? How much energy can the standard office equipment/furniture/paper/files release in a fire conflagration?

* What other major providers (and consumers) of energy would need to be covered to explain the evidence experienced during 9/11?

Such an overall balance sheet of energy released and consumed on 9/11 will probably lead to many new surprises if conducted in a sober way... Just apply this one fundamental law of physics about the conservation of energy to the situation.

Of course, these calculations would not need to be totally exact. They could be made with different ("optimistic" and "pessimistic") assumptions, covering upper and lower ends of a possible range of outcomes.

Is there anybody up to this task? Engineers, physicists, chemists, vulcanologists?