911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news, posts in the blogs section are the responsibility of the poster, readers are encouraged to check the facts and form their own conclusions.
|Written by Adam Taylor|
|Thursday, 19 July 2012|
In order to understand what nanothermite is, we first must understand what ordinary commercial thermite is. Thermite is a mixture of a metal and the oxide of another metal, usually aluminum (Al) and iron oxide (Fe2O3), in a granular or powder form. When ignited, the energetic Al-Fe thermite reaction produces molten iron and aluminum oxide, with the molten iron reaching temperatures well in excess of 4000° F. These temperatures are certainly high enough to allow cuts through structural steel, which generally has a melting point of around 2750° F.
There is also a variant of thermite known as thermate, which is a combination of thermite and sulfur, and is more efficient at cutting through steel. This form of thermite is believed to have been used in the demolition of World Trade Center Building 7. Although conventional thermite has the capability to cut through structural steel, it is technically an incendiary and not an explosive.
By Kevin Ryan
July 21, 2012
“Terrorism is theater.” – Brian Michael Jenkins
For many years prior to 9/11, two Americans were in unique positions to originate and frame the national conversation about terrorism. Those same two people, Brian Michael Jenkins and L. Paul Bremer, played extraordinary roles related to aviation security and World Trade Center (WTC) security in the few years before the 9/11 attacks. Could Bremer and Jenkins have been front men for a program that hyped the threat of terrorism while at the same time manufacturing terrorist events for political purposes?
If so, it would not have been the first time that the American people were subject to the hard sell of a threat to national security only to discover that the threat was overblown or non-existent. The Soviet military threat to the U.S. after World War II is now widely known to have been a fabrication hyped for political and financial gains.
The propaganda that drove the Cold War was effective in establishing government policy primarily because it was effective in framing the national conversation about what threats were important to consider, and in controlling the media. The same has been true for the propaganda driving the War on Terror. A short review of the people and reports that promoted the Soviet communist threat is helpful in understanding the “Islamic terrorist” threat that has evolved from it.
According to the theology of one of the leading experts of "9/11 truth," America is in the grips of a struggle with "demonic evil."
Alternet / by Jan Frel
July 18, 2012
David Ray Griffin holds high status in the 9/11 Truth community as its leading scholar and advocate. Over his career, Griffin has metamorphosed from a long-time professor of philosophy, religion and theology into a 9/11 publishing machine, selling well over 100,000 copies of a slew of exhaustively annotated conspiracy theory books, and writing many dozens of papers and articles. Griffin figures in two of the most-popular documentaries of the past decade. He is credited as a script editor for Loose Change: Final Cut, the best-known, most-watched 9/11 Truth film of all time, and has a starring role in what may be the most-watched documentary series of all time, Peter Joseph's Zeitgeist.
Asked in a 2005 interview with the L.A. Times about his “role as a 9/11 dissenter depart from [his] life's work as a scholar and theologian,” Griffin responded, “At first glance it may seem strange, but the task of a theologian is to look at the world from what we would imagine the divine perspective, [which] would care about the good of the whole and would love all the parts. [So] 9/11, if it was brought about by forces within our own government for imperial reasons, is antithetical to the general good.”
The judge refused to recuse himself Tuesday from the trial of the alleged Al-Qaeda operative accused of masterminding the 2000 suicide attack on the USS Cole.
Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri faces the death penalty over the bombing of the US Navy destroyer off Yemen in October 2000 that killed 17 sailors and an attack two year later that killed one person on the French oil tanker MV Limburg.
Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the suicide attack on the USS Cole, which saw militants riding an explosives-laden skiff blow a 30-by-30-foot (10-by-10-meter) hole in the ship.
Nashiri’s lawyers had called on Judge James Pohl to recuse himself from the Guantanamo military tribunal trying the case, pointing to a judicial and financial conflict of interest.
But at a pre-trial hearing on Tuesday, Pohl — the longest-serving judge in the US military — said his impartiality could not be questioned and refused to stand down.
Self-confessed 9/11 “mastermind” falsely confessed to crimes he didn’t commit
U.S. Drugged Detainees, Which Interfered with their Ability to Tell the Truth
The Inspector General for the the U.S. Department of Defense reports that the military heavily drugged some detainees in a way which impaired their ability to provide accurate information:
Detainees in custody of the US military were interrogated while drugged with powerful antipsychotic and other medications that “could impair an individual’s ability to provide accurate information,” according to a declassified Department of Defense (DoD) inspector general’s report.
Over the past decade, dozens of current and former detainees and their civilian and military attorneys have alleged in news reports and in court documents that prisoners held by the US government in Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan were forcibly injected with unknown medications and pills during or immediately prior to marathon interrogation sessions in an attempt to compel them to confess to terrorist-related crimes of which they were accused.
World Premiere Tour of 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Final Edition, Tampa FL, introduction by Richard Gage, Director/Architect, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (www.AE911Truth.org).
Video Archive: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/wkoalive
Chris Steiner, Organizer, We Are CHANGE Tampa (www.WeAreCHANGETampa.org)
New NSA docs contradict 9/11 claims: “I don’t think the Bush administration would want to see these released," an expert says...
“I don’t think the Bush administration would want to see these released," an expert tells Salon
Tuesday, Jun 19, 2012
Over 120 CIA documents concerning 9/11, Osama bin Laden and counterterrorism were published today for the first time, having been newly declassified and released to the National Security Archive. The documents were released after the NSA pored through the footnotes of the 9/11 Commission and sent Freedom of Information Act requests.
“I have no desire to attack the Pentagon; I want to liberate it. We need to save it from itself.” Donald Rumsfeld, September 10, 2001
The official account of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 leaves many questions unanswered. The work of independent investigators has also failed to address those questions. In an attempt to find answers, an alternative account of the Pentagon attack is considered.
An alternative account would be more compelling than the official account if it explained more of the evidence without adding unnecessary complications. Considering means, motive and opportunity might allow us to propose a possible “insider conspiracy” while maintaining much of the official account as well.
A few of the more compelling unanswered questions are as follows.
- How could American Airlines Flight 77 have hit the building as it did, considering that the evidence shows the alleged hijacker pilot, Hani Hanjour, was a very poor pilot?
- Why did the aircraft make a 330-degree turn just minutes before hitting the building?
- Why did the aircraft hit the least occupied one-fifth of the building that was the focus of a renovation plan and how was it that the construction in that exact spot just happened to be for the purpose of minimizing the damage from a terrorist explosion?
- Why was the company that performed the renovation work, just for that one-fifth of the building, immediately hired in a no bid contract to clean-up the damage and reconstruct that area of the building? (Note: The same company was also immediately hired to clean-up the WTC site within hours of the destruction there.)
- What can explain the damage to the building and the aircraft debris or lack thereof?
- Why were the tapes from the surveillance videos in the area immediately confiscated by the FBI and never released?
These questions should be considered along with the fact that U.S military and “Homeland Security” expenditures since the 9/11 attacks have totaled approximately $8 trillion. This paints a picture that calls for an in-depth investigation into the people running the Pentagon, to see if they might have had the motivation and ability to plan and execute the attack.
A creepy collection of 911 premonitions.
BY SHAWN BOBURG
The Port Authority will pay former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff’s consulting firm more than $1.2 million for a review and overhaul of the agency’s security operations, under a recent extension of the firm’s no-bid contract.
The Chertoff Group’s contract extension — the second in six months — was quietly approved last week without discussion at a public meeting of agency commissioners.
The firm will be paid an additional $650,000, on top of the $600,000 already approved, to advise the Port Authority on the hiring of a new security director and to help create the agency’s first-ever security department, a Port Authority spokesman said Wednesday.
NEW YORK — A group representing some Sept. 11 family members says it agrees with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo that spending for the memorial museum at Ground Zero is out of control.
The group commended the governor Wednesday for saying "a tremendous amount of money" has been "wasted" at the site.
The 9/11 Parents and Families of Firefighters and WTC Victims said it "never asked for the world's most expensive memorial and museum." Members said they would have been "thankful for a simple, dignified, above ground monument to the lives and deaths of 9/11 victims."
They said the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey's decision to increase tolls to pay for the project was "unacceptable."
Their statement follows the announcement this week that the memorial foundation and the site's owners are close to an agreement to resume construction of the museum.
Thanks To We Are Change
1. Tony Blair
2. Lawrence O’Donnell
3. Alan Greenspan
Please help promote these events. Let's try to fill the Theatre and get the media involved.
Ideas and tactics for publicity and invitations welcome.
PRESS RELEASE: Please attend the following event. Lively Discussion. Thanks!
U.S. Labels ALL Young Men In Battle Zones As “Militants” … And American Soil Is Now Considered a Battle Zone
All Military-Age Men Are Labeled “Militants” In Areas of Conflict
Glenn Greenwald has two must-read posts on the reason that virtually everyone the U.S. kills is called a “militant” or “suspected militant”.
He wrote Monday:
Virtually every time the U.S. fires a missile from a drone and ends the lives of Muslims, American media outlets dutifully trumpet in headlines that the dead were ”militants” – even though those media outlets literally do not have the slightest idea of who was actually killed. They simply cite always-unnamed “officials” claiming that the dead were “militants.” It’s the most obvious and inexcusable form of rank propaganda: media outlets continuously propagating a vital claim without having the slightest idea if it’s true.
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were a turning point in world history. We have been told that these attacks were planned and implemented by nineteen Arab Muslim hijackers under the direction of the leaders of al Qaeda. According to the official account, this criminal conspiracy received no help or funding from any government.
Unfortunately, this explanation fails to address a majority of the evidence and leaves most of the critical questions unanswered. In fact, the reports that constitute the official account do so little to explain what happened that it is possible that, to this day, we know very little about who was behind the attacks. That fact is alarming to many people, given that so much war and unprecedented change has been driven by the official account.
On closer inspection, the 9/11 Commission Report provides only 90 pages of discussion about what actually happened on the day of 9/11, found in chapters 1 and 9 of the report. The remainder of the report is devoted to promoting a myth behind the organization called al Qaeda, and suggesting what to do about it.