Little Pipe's blog

Explosions? What explosions??

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

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....

Counterpunch Special: "Why Did the World Trade Towers Fall?"

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?

"National Security Whistleblowers" fire broadside against 9/11 Commission Report

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..)

"Laughing Terrorists" Videos Are NOT The Threatened October Surprise

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)

"9/11 Graphic Novel - The Real Version" -- Part One of a truly hilarious series kicked off

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."

 

Hilarious 9/11 Truth Cartoon

 

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...

Thomas-Scott Gordon's mentioning of Kurt Sonnenfeld (who now is elsewhere dubbed a "whistleblower" too)

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."

Wayne Madsen reports "an unusually high rate of non-Hodgkin lymphoma" for 9/11 Ground Zero workers

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.

New 911 Truther Video: "911 Mysteries: Demolitions"

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).

"Top 25 Censored Stories" include Prof. Jones' paper on WTC collapse

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...

Can we have even *more* hard facts of physics and chemistry, please?

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?