In The New Pearl Harbor, David Ray Griffin says, regarding WTC7, "there is no evidence of any raging fire" (p.21). This claim, often repeated, must be modified. Debunking sites use images from Steve Spak's film Day of Disaster to counter the argument for controlled demolition. This evidence cannot be ignored. Here I would like to suggest a refined argument for WTC7, and I recommend downgrading its importance in the 911 Truth movement.

Hopefully, the screen captures I uploaded appear below. These images are from Spak's film and show the west side and the south side. Typically, Truthers show video of the north side collapsing. The west face shows at least one floor where the windows are broken and a "raging" fire is belching from the building. The south side shows a wall of smoke and some structural damage (we know the SW corner had a gash about 15-20 floors high).

Two points should be made about these pictures:

1. There is definitely an intense fire in WTC7, but we do not know how widespread it is.

2. The wall of smoke suggests but does not confirm a widespread fire. There is definitely structural damage to the south side of WTC7, and all of the smoke is being vented out that side. The north side, for example, shows little evidence of smoke or fire.

I sent a letter.

Hi NORAD,

I was hoping you can help me out. It's hard to find any information on this particular subject. In the event of an air emergency, what is the average response time of an intercept?

Any help you could give would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jon Gold

The response...

Sir: Unfortunately there are too many variables to give you an accurate answer. The bottom-line is we have alert aircraft at various locations throughout the U.S. (and Canada with NORAD) and it would just be a matter of minutes from the time they are notified until they where airborne. So then it depends on where our aircraft took off from and where is the "target" aircraft--you can look at our Air Force aircraft fact sheets on the F-15 and F-16 fighters (Canada uses mainly CFA-18 aircraft) to determine their speed and look up the speed of the target aircraft with a web search to roughly calculate the time and place the intercept would occur depending on the location of the aircraft. The fact sheets are located at this web site: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/

Here's a very rough example from a non-pilot (me): An F-15, with a top speed of 1,800 mph could intercept an aircraft 600 miles away flying parallel to where the fighter took off in 20+ minutes or so, now if the "target" aircraft is flying at 600 mph and heading toward the place where the fighter took off then the intercept would be at the 400 mile mark and would likely take only 13 minutes or so--theoretically, depending on winds and weather, etc...

Did anybody catch this Buzzflash editorial?

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/node/381/print

It looks like they are close to the tipping point. Not many comments posted, but it looks like the momentum is in our favor.

The Mexican People: Heroes of Democracy

The Mexican peoples’ democracy movement and their leader Andrés Manuel López Obrador are modern heroes of democracy and to all who demand clean elections. They recall the heroics of the Ukrainians with one important difference. There are no “great powers” supporting them. In fact, the American regime is hostile to a victory by Obrador and the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). The increasingly unpopular and isolated White House cadre may have done its best to obstruct such an eventuality in ways which by now are predictably familiar. The Mexican people are alone, on the street, fighting the brave fight for people everywhere who believe in the inherently inalienable and natural right of men and women to determine their own destiny through free, fair, and transparent elections.

Supporters of democracy in Mexico are making a stand in the nation’s capitol. They just had their third major demonstration with more than a million participants. The American press tried a theme of demonstrators growing weary recently, just before the latest seven figure gathering. The demonstrations tell Mexicans and the world that the election was so questionable, an investigation is mandated through a thorough review of the most direct evidence: the ballots. The PRD’s demand for a “ballot by ballot, precinct by precinct” recount is fully warranted.

"will go a long way to removing their direct influence into the affairs of the sovereign country of Iraq." said Brigadier General Michael Barbero of the 'supposed' Iran involvment in training Shiite militants to destabilize Iraq (extract taken from www.infowars.com site). Wow I thought. What a hypocrite! How rich and ironic that a General would say something like that when the US has just invaded Afghanistan (once a sovereign nation), Iraq (once a sovereign nation) and Vietnam. And now they want to invade yet another sovreign nation called Iran. Hahaha what a joker!. He must have been rehearsing for a comedy show because I dont think anyone outside of the US is buying that BS story. Sorry mate when you and your fellow war mongers start praticising what you preach to the rest of the world then maybe we might start to take you all seriously, but until then may I suggest you come up with a new punch line cause the jokes on you the military leaders and your puppet president along with his CFR cronies and the Illuminati puppet makers.
It is interesting to note that the line 'terrorists are under every bed' being touted by some seems familiar to the catch-cry of the 50's & 60's when there was supposedly a 'communist under every bed'.

I have been turned into a 9/11 truther only 6 months ago,but I learned a few things..ok lots..about deceptions of this current government. Needless to say,I am still getting an education on the meaning of psy-ops,because the deceptions that can be put out there is incredible. So as this goes along with the more info I come cross,there is also more info that is useless in getting to the WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. The useless info is meant to mislead,deceive, make us argue so that We may not see if one or the other's point is meant to do just that. There are people out there who have infiltrated these movements,since 9/11 was a well executed plan,then there also has to be the complete coup on the net.The MSM is complicit.That leaves the net to infiltrate and mislead as many as possible.Hell,when you live in an empire and the empire has a large security agency,a large intelligence agency,and been doing deceptions for many years,then there is no reason to be surprised. I believe Nico Haupt is on the right track. The NSA has been relatively passed over,and that is where Hayden came from. I think looking here is worth doing and won't be a waste of time.

I actually took a break for the first time in a few days tonight. Managed to grab a quick nap to catch up from all the late nights lately and even go out to dinner, w00t!

Did a couple things though:

• Fixed issue with Opera browser missing 3rd column on homepage
• Fixed issue with shoutbox displaying first XX entries instead of most recent XX entries
• Added google Adsense advertising to raise money for future ads

I am in dire need to hear from any users that are still having any formatting issues. If you are having any such issues please let me know so I can get some details and knock out any such issues that still remain.

I am weighing whether or not to disable the WYSIWYG editor.. it tends to cause some issues when it doesnt properly close its span tags.. does anyone use the WYSIWYG editor's features anyway?

The purpose of this blog is to suggest rhetorical strategies for refining the 9/11 Truth talking points. As more so-called debunking sites appear, we cannot ignore them and proceed in an echo chamber of self-congratulation. We must adjust our message to reflect a wider selection of evidence.

In this first entry, I would like to suggest dropping references to Larry Silverstein's famous "pull it" comment in the 2002 PBS documentary. Most Truthers believe Silverstein means "demolish building 7". Critics charge he really means "pull the personnel from building 7".

I recommend avoiding Silverstein's remark not because I think WTC7 fell via a gravitational collapse, but for the following reasons:

• both interpretations are plausible, so an audience is forced to accept one on the basis of predisposition alone
• it does not change the physical evidence one way or another
• for some, this charge reinforces the unfair accusation that 9/11 Truth is about "blaming the Jews"; notice, for example, how this reasonable argument devolves quickly into a discussion of "Zionist circles"; later, Killtown makes excellent points about Silverstein coincidentally having a doctor's appointment the morning of 9/11, but this information will be overshadowed in a debate by ad hominem attacks

Liquid Bombers Prove: "They Hate Our Freedoms!"
by Edgar J. Steele
August 19, 2006

"You can fool some of the people all of the time
And you can fool all of the people some of the time,
But you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
--- Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President (1809-1865)

"Fool me once, shame on — shame on you.
Fool me ... unnnhhh ... you can't get fooled again." (sound clip, click here)
--- George W. Bush, 43rd US President (Nashville, Tenn., 9/17/02)

My name is Edgar J. Steele. This is a Nickel Rant.

Muslims were planning to blow up a bunch of jetliners enroute from London to America - or so say George Bush and Tony Blair.

Muslims without tickets.

Muslims without passports.

Muslims without bombs.

Muslims without a clue ... and they aren't the only ones, it turns out. Without a clue, that is.

What kind of bombs? TATP bombs, short for triacetone triperoxide. What's more, Bush and Blair told us that Muslims favor the TATP bomb, mixed on the spot with separate liquids. With that lie, both Bush and Blair foreclosed any possibility that the Muslims involved actually were guilty. With that lie, both Bush and Blair disclosed themselves for the treasonous, lying criminals that they are. Why? Glad you asked.

So this is my first blog entry and it's only fitting that I advertise my first web site: www.911faq.org

I've spent a long time researching and putting together the site. I learnt a lot about information and how the one piece of evidence can be argued both for and against a particular theory. I think my factual evidence is generally correct, but I'm not so sure about the calculations I did. I've tried getting some people to read through it from various 9/11 sites, without luck. It's also failing to show up in search engines, even though I've had a "page holder" on the domain for a few weeks.

Really I'd like some people to have a look and perhaps leave a comment or two. I'm interested in any mistakes or disagreements people have and hope that we can work together to get to the truth, whatever it is.

The main focus of the site is to avoid long drawn out rants, as other places are more suitable, like here! It's generally a site to get the quick facts from official sources, with some analysis thrown in for good measure. I try to leave it up to the reader to make his/her mind up also, so the bulk of the site avoids trying to prove conspiracy theories.

So what's my official stance on 9/11, I hear you ask. Well it's probably somewhere inbetween "It was all the U.S Government's fault" and "It was all the terrorist's fault". I can only hope that more evidence is released to prove or disprove theories, because at the moment there is a surprising lack of evidence to support any theory, let alone the official one.

July 6, 2006

According to a July 6 2006 Rumor Mill News article titled Very Strange 9/11 Aircraft Registrations there are some very disturbing irregularities in the way the airlines or the FAA handled documentation associated with the flights allegedly hijacked on September 11, 2001. The registration for both United Airlines flights involved was only cancelled on September 28, 2005, over four years after 9/11. Hence a very pertinent question:

How can American Airlines flights show the planes destroyed and the registration cancelled, while both United flights show the planes as simply being cancelled without explanation 4 years after they allegedly were destroyed? Why?

The following are registration details on all four airplanes:

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	08:47
Location:	New York City, New York
Operator:	American Airlines
Flight #:	11
Route:	Boston - Los Angeles
AC Type:	Boeing 767-223ER
Registration:	N334AA
cn / ln:	22332/169
Aboard:	92 (passengers:81 crew:11)
Fatalities:	92 (passengers:81 crew:11)
Ground:	2583
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked shortly after it left Logan International Airport in Boston. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and deliberately crashed it into the north tower of the World Trade Center between the 94th and 99th floors at approximately 450 mph. After 102 minutes, the building collapsed. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

---

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		22332		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		01/06/2000
Model		767-223		Mode S Code		50722254
Year Manufacturer		1987		Cancel Date		01/14/2002
Reason for Cancellation		Destroyed		Exported To

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	09:03
Location:	New York City, New York
Operator:	United Air Lines
Flight #:	175
Route:	Boston - Los Angeles
AC Type:	Boeing B-767-222
Registration:	N612UA
cn / ln:	21873/41
Aboard:	65 (passengers:56 crew:9)
Fatalities:	65 (passengers:56 crew:9)
Ground:	2583
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked shortly after it left Logan International Airport in Boston. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and deliberately crashed it into the south tower of the World Trade Center between the 78th and 84th floors at approximately 550 mph. After 56 minutes, the building collapsed. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		21873		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		01/18/1984
Model		767-222		Mode S Code		51773757
Year Manufacturer		1983		Cancel Date		09/28/2005
Reason for Cancellation		Cancelled		Exported To

---

Aircraft Registration prior to Deregistration

Name UNITED AIR LINES INC Street BOX 66100 City CHICAGO State ILLINOIS Zip Code 60666 County COOK Country UNITED STATES

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	09:45
Location:	Arlington, Virginia.
Operator:	American Airlines
Flight #:	77
Route:	Washington D.C. - Los Angeles
AC Type:	Boeing B-757-223
Registration:	N644AA
cn / ln:	24602/365
Aboard:	64 (passengers:58 crew:6)
Fatalities:	64 (passengers:58 crew:6)
Ground:	125
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked after taking off from Dulles International Airport. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and deliberately crashed it into the Pentagon. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		24602		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		05/08/1991
Model		757-223		Mode S Code		52072030
Year Manufacturer		1991		Cancel Date		01/14/2002
Reason for Cancellation		Destroyed		Exported To

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	10:03
Location:	Shanksville, Pennsylvania
Operator:	United Air Lines
Flight #:	93
Route:	Newark - San Francisco
AC Type:	Boeing B-757-222
Registration:	N591UA
cn / ln:	28142/718
Aboard:	44 (passengers:37 crew:7)
Fatalities:	44 (passengers:37 crew:7)
Ground:	0
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked after taking off from Newark International Airport. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and turned the plane towards Washington D.C. A struggle ensued between the passengers and hijackers after which the plane crashed at a high rate of speed into a field in the Pennsylvania countryside. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		28142		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		07/01/1996
Model		757-222		Mode S Code		51721341
Year Manufacturer		1996		Cancel Date		09/28/2005
Reason for Cancellation		Cancelled		Exported To

---

Aircraft Registration prior to Deregistration

Name UNITED AIR LINES INC Street 1200 E ALGONQUIN RD City ARLINGTON HEIGHTS State ILLINOIS Zip Code 60005-4712 County COOK Country UNITED STATES

These problems with the official account of the events of 9/11 are by far neither the most glaring not most severe. They might simply be an indication of a very severe bureaucratic dysfunction on the part of the United Airlines, or the FAA, or possibly both. There are plenty of other irregularities conclusively proving that for events to take place the way we are told by the Administration or the 9/11 Commission is for all intents and purposes impossible.

However, it is still in my opinion important to note these aircraft registration irregularities as they prove, among other things, that there is hardly any aspect of the official 9/11 narrative that is not suspicious. What adds to the suspicion is that apparently none of the aircraft were positively identified by the serial-numbered parts in the wreckage.

In his article on the subject titled Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True retired US Air Force Colonel and an expert aircraft accident investigator George Nelson states:

The Real Economy Of Free Frade, And The Money Which Always Pretends To Measure It.

Hello All:

Please add comments and responses below, that advance and develop concepts on the rebuilding of social and civic infrastructure, and the economy of trade. This question, is what I see as the inevitable outcome of either the truth OR fantasies stemming from the punctuating events of 9/11.

Although I may often obscure by innocent confusion or the intentional absurdity of my comments.... to say it simply; I can not swallow the prevailing interpretation of September 11th 2001 as advanced through the mainstream media and popular dialogue as of this fifth anniversary. Simpler than that; 9/11 was first a crime against Americans, perpetrated by those who seek domination and control of all others who resist subjugation.

"America", no matter how distant she has become, represented one of the greatest obstacles of subjugation and control, and thus a prevailing Motive behind 9/11. She HAS been critically wounded, but she is not "out" of the fight for life.

If I retain a single unwarranted dream, it would be the one where I fancy the ideas espoused in the American Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights as my best and final check against bastardization of constitutional law. The first and second of those rights in that bill, are my beginning and end. Further, I do not need any such paper or parchment, to know that I may eternally voice these ideas myself.

Another day, another site notes posting..

• New fixed width theme named '911bloggerCSS_1024fixed' ¹
• Fixed annoying bug where the main textbox for story/blog entries would go behind the side panels in Internet Explorer
• Added Shoutbox ²
• Updated '911blogger3col' theme ³
• Fixed issue where upcoming events with same start and end date (but different times) would be listed in a from/to span instead of a single date

Detials:

1. The first thing I got done tonight was a fixed width theme for our low resolution users. The new theme is named '911bloggerCSS_1024fixed' and as the name implies forces the site to a fixed width of 1024 (1000px actually). This theme also has a reduced comment font size as well. This theme should help out our low resolution users a bunch as they will now have a center column that is forced to be a reasonable size, and their comments text will be smaller so that they can see more comments and have less risk of the responses getting too thin to read.
2. After seeing another comment today about missing the old haloscan comment I thought a bit about why some are not liking the new system. There are a couple reasons. First, people with low resolutions are getting small center columns which causes the comments to be squished, and responses even more so (this issue has been taken care of with the new fixed width theme mentioned above¹). The other complaint is that when posting comments users now have to respond to a specific comment (or the initial post), and then have to scour the comments again later to find other responses to their post, in turn slowing down how quickly they can carry on a conversation via the comments sections. The thing I noted is that the comments section is intended to be comments about the initial post or blog entry, not for carrying on real time chat - the way it was used on haloscan. So, I figured that adding a Shoutbox window would allow users to have this semi-instant conversation, and keep the comments sections from becoming what they were on the old site. You should find the new Shoutbox on the right hand panel, give it a try.
3. The '911blogger3col' theme is a table based theme (instead of CSS floating panels). This helps out a good bit for browsers which have issues with CSS, but is mostly available so I can access the site better from my mobile phone

Got a good ways to go, but with the addition of the new fixed width theme there should be a viable solution for all users at the moment - except perhaps Safari users. If you are still having formatting issues (more than just opinions on the color scheme) please get me some details!

Don't forget to stay on top of the todo lists here:

• bugs
• suggestions
• todo

 

www.nytimes.com By CARL HULSE and MARJORIE CONNELLY Published: August 22, 2006

WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 — Americans increasingly see the war in Iraq as distinct from the fight against terrorism, and nearly half believe President Bush has focused too much on Iraq to the exclusion of other threats, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The finding that 51 percent of those surveyed see no link between the war in Iraq and the broader antiterror effort was a jump of 10 percentage points since June. It came despite the regular insistence of Mr. Bush and Congressional Republicans that the two are intertwined and should be seen as complementary elements of an overall strategy to prevent domestic terror attacks.

Should the trend hold, the increased skepticism could present a political obstacle for Mr. Bush and his allies on Capitol Hill, who are making their record on terrorism a central element of the midterm election campaign. The Republicans hope the public’s desire for forceful action against terrorists will offset unease with the Iraq war and blunt the political appeal of Democratic calls to establish a timeline to withdraw American troops.

more... (subscription)

The Truth about the "Terror Plot".... and the new "pseudo-terrorism"

 
by Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed

Monday, August 21, 2006 

I am disappointed to say that so far there has been very little serious critical discussion, grounded in factual analysis, of the alleged “Terror Plot” foiled on the morning of Wednesday, 10th August 2006. Except for a few noteworthy comment pieces, such as Craig Murray’s critical speculations published by the Guardian last Friday, the mainstream media has largely subserviently parroted the official claims of the British and American governments. This is a shame, because inspection of the facts raises serious problems for the 10/8 official narrative.

No Imminent Plot

On the basis of the “Terror Plot”, Prime Minister Tony Blair is planning “to push through 90-day detention without charge for terror suspects.” Home Secretary Dr. John Reid has ordered the draft of new anti-terror legislation that would suspend key parts of the Human Rights Act 1998, to facilitate the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects in the UK without charge or trial. The law is planned to apply also to British citizens. And since 10th August, Britain was on its highest “critical” state of alert, which indicates the threat of an imminent terrorist attack on UK interests. Only in the last few days was it lowered back down to “severe”.

The stark truth is that the “Terror Plot” narrative has been thoroughly, hopelessly, politicized. There was never any evidence of an imminent plot. A senior British official involved in the investigation told NBC News on 14th August that:

“In contrast to previous reports… an attack was not imminent, [and] the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.”

If British security officials knew that an attack was not imminent, the decision to raise the alert level to critical, indicating an imminent threat, was unjustified by the available intelligence -- this was, in other words, a political decision.

Other British officials told NBC News that many of the suspects had been under surveillance for more than a year, since before the 7th July 2005 terrorist attacks. “British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence” -- as it was clearly lacking. But: “American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner.” An American official also confirmed the disagreement over timing.

Brits Opposed Arrest and Torture of Key Informant

The NBC News report further reveals, citing British security sources, that British police did not want to yet arrest Rashid Rauf, the alleged mastermind, al-Qaeda facilitator and key informant on the details of the plot: “British security was concerned that Rauf be taken into custody ‘in circumstances where there was due process,’ according to the official, so that he could be tried in British courts. Ultimately, this official says, Rauf was arrested over the objections of the British.”

However, the arrest of Rashid Rauf is at the crux of the case, as it purportedly triggered the ensuing wave of arrests, with Rauf providing in-depth details of the plot to his interrogators in Pakistan. Among the details attributed to Rauf is the idea that the plotters intended to mix a “sports drink” with a gel-like “peroxide-based paste” to create a chemical explosive that “could be ignited with an MP3 player or cell phone.”

The problem is that several Pakistani newspapers reported on 13th August that “Rauf had ‘broken’ under interrogation.” The reports were described by a Pakistani human rights group “as confirmation that he had been tortured.” According to the Guardian, “Asma Jehangir, of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, said that it was obvious how the information had been obtained. ‘I don’t deduce, I know -- torture,’ she said. ‘There is simply no doubt about that, no doubt at all.’”

That most of the details about the plot came from Rauf, who has been tortured and “broken” while under interrogation in Pakistan, raises serious questions about the credibility of the story being promoted by the British and American governments.

Torture Precedents: the “Ricin Plot”

The revelation bears hallmarks of a familiar pattern. It is now well-known that the interrogation of terror suspects using torture was responsible for the production of the false “Ricin Plot” narrative. In much the same way as Pakistan has done now, Algerian security services alerted the British in January 2003 to the alleged plot after interrogating and torturing a former British resident Mohammed Meguerba. We now know there was no plot. Police officials repeatedly claimed they had found plastic tubs of ricin -- but these claims were false. Four of the defendants were acquitted of terrorism and four others had the cases against them abandoned. Only Kamal Bourgass was convicted, but not in connection with the “Ricin Plot”, rather for murdering Special Branch Detective Constable Stephen Oake during a raid. Indeed, the “rendition” of terror suspects orchestrated by Britain, the United States, and other western states, attempts to institutionalize and legitimize torture as a means for the production of fundamentally compromised information used by western states to manipulate domestic public opinion.

It is perhaps not all that surprising then to learn that, according to a Daily Mail headline, the Pakistanis have found “no evidence against ‘terror mastermind’”, despite two weeks of interrogation under torture and forensic combing of Rauf’s home and computer. The plot “may not have been as serious, or as far advanced, as the authorities initially claimed”, observes the Mail somewhat sheepishly, and belatedly. “Analysts suspect Pakistani authorities exaggerated Rauf’s role to appear ‘tough on terrorism’ and impress Britain and America.” I wonder if the paucity of evidence has something to do with why, as the Independent on Sunday reported: “Both Britain and Pakistan say the question of Mr Rauf’s possible extradition [to the UK] is some way off.” Indeed. A spokesman for Pakistani’s Interior Ministry gave some helpful elaboration, telling the Mail that extradition “is not under consideration.”

The extradition to Britain of the alleged chief mastermind of a plot to kill thousands of Americans and British citizens by simultaneously blowing up multiple civilian airliners has, in other words, been ruled out indefinitely...