Tucker Carlson Resorts to Calling 9/11 Skeptics 'Quacks'
Tonight Tucker Carlson played one voicemail from a caller who thought he was wrong in his slander of Jones, and another from a FDNY firefighter who thought he was right, and that Steven Jones was a 'quack'. Tucker then said that 'he knew' that Steven Jones was 'a quack', and that 'it is because of people like you that I had qualms about that story in the first place, people who lived through that day' (referring to the FDNY caller).
Rather than continue to cover the ignorant views spewed from Carlson, tonight I'll just focus on responding to his actions and comments as related to 9/11 skeptics and Steven Jones.
Why not show the WTC7 footage?
When Steven Jones first appeared on 'The Situation' earlier this week his main intention was to explain his recent paper and to show the American people an alternative view of the collapses of 3 steel superstructures on 9/11, focusing specifically on WTC7.
Despite Carlson covering this story for 3 nights now, he has continued to refuse to show the footage of WTC7 sent in by Steven Jones. Perhaps this was a simple mistake, but the continued attacks and slander against Jones is completely unacceptable without at least showing the footage Jones had intended to show.
Since Carlson won't show the WTC7 footage, we will. Below is a clip from a recent documentary entitled '9/11 Eyewitness' (911eyewitness.com). This short clip is a quick and easy illustration showing why the speed of the collapse of WTC7 is worthy of scrutiny.
Why only respect those affected that agree with the official story?
Carlson stated that he had hesitated in covering Steven Jones in the first place in fear that he might disrespect those that died on 9/11. This statement goes along with his previous statement:
Ponder that for a second: The U.S. government killed more than 3,000 of its own citizens. For no obvious reason.
These two statements are similar in that he makes huge leaps in his assumptions. He assumes that those affected directly by 9/11 agree with the official story, and he assumes that alternative theories to 9/11 are unfounded because no motives exist.
To suggest that all of those directly affected by 9/11 agree with the 'official story' as presented by the 9/11 Commission Report is just plain ignorant. Numbers of people have come out in disagreement with the 'official story' who were directly affected by 9/11. A few quick examples include the 'Jersey Girls' who in July of this year called the 9/11 Commission Report a 'hollow failure', and William Rodriguez (20 year WTC worker) who testified to the commission that massive explosions occurred in the basements of the WTC towers. Other examples include Donna Marsh whose daughter was killed on 9/11, and countless scores of others who not only fought tooth-and-nail for a commission to be founded, but whom still today believe our government is covering up important details surrounding that fateful day.
The assumption that no motives exist as to why our government would allow, facilitate, or be solely responsible for 9/11 is another ignorant assumption as well. The major players of this administration had a virtual wishlist come to fruition, all of which would have been impossible without 9/11. From PNAC's desire to massively increase military spending and to secure permanent military bases in Iraq, to the removal of the Taliban who had halted Unocal's trans-afghan pipeline, to the increase of government powers, and the steady infringement of our personal rights, 9/11 has served as the ultimate trump-card to pass anything and everything desired by this administration. To suggest that no motives exist is to be ignorant of how 9/11 has altered our country, and our fellow citizens' mindsets to agree with things that our country previously would never have allowed.
Note to Carlson: Perhaps you can read over these possible motives of the Bush administration by Dr. David Ray Griffin. Maybe next week you could have another 20+ year professor on your show who questions 9/11 that you could bash?
Explosions did occur prior to the 'collapses' of WTC1 and WTC2
The video linked above is a sample from '9/11 Eyewitness', just one of a dozen different 9/11 documentaries that show massive explosions occurring before each towers collapse. What those explosions were, how they were planted, or what the motives were is of little consequence to the overwhelming fact that WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 were not brought down at freefall speeds by fires. You want to see a real skyscraper inferno? Check out the recent Madrid fire.
Whether you quote comments by William Rodriguez, or you reference this compilation or this compilation of FDNY firefighters and others commenting on the explosions, to suggest that none occurred is just an opinion, and a faulty one at that.
Conclusion
Had Tucker Carlson had any real intentions of covering the report from Steven Jones fairly he could have went about it a completely different way. First, he could have played the footage sent to him by Jones at some point in the last three nights. Second, he could have avoided slandering Jones by going over the points of his report instead of just calling him a 'quack' and resorting to attacks based on ignorance and emotion. And third, he could have pointed out that not only Jones, but large percentages of Americans question our government's involvement in 9/11.
Those that want to have a full understanding of 9/11 will do more than rely on a talking head like Carlson and will read any number of books on 9/11, watch any of dozens of videos on 9/11, and read years of 9/11 questioning archives available on the internet. To try to summarize 9/11 in a 8 minutes of prime time coverage is impossible, but to slander and attack the very idea of asking questions about 9/11 in that time is quite easy. While I hope that at some point our media will spend sufficient time covering the wide variety of questions surrounding 9/11, I am certain that it won't be done in 8 minutes of coverage, and that it won't be done by someone so ignorant of the issues surrounding 9/11 as Tucker Carlson.
Seems to me that someone should send The Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11 to Tucker.
Special thanks to the creators of 9/11 Eyewitness for their high quality continuous footage of 9/11 which was recently released, and to Jon Gold for tonights capture of 'The Situation'.
NOTE: I had to switch this to an external thanks to someone hot linking the video and racking up 28GB worth of transfers in 2 days.. please always link to the topic incase servers change.
- Login to post comments
I don't quite understand how
I don't quite understand how how you came up with the ball going along with the tower. What determined that speed?
Also how come you got such different
numbers than Jones' 6.6 sec. fall?
Also why aren't you showing the damage to the building on the other side of the building. For example
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_fire.html
In fact here's one account from a firefighter Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years
"...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 oÂ’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 oÂ’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse."
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html
scott, 1) the footage
scott,
1) the footage showing the ball falling that speed is an example of the physics involved in galileo's law of falling bodies. a 47 story building falling at that speed is impossible unless the structure beneath the topmost floors exerted no resistance, and none of the falling force/momentum was exerted in breaking up the structure below. the details of the analysis done in 9/11 eyewitness is on that DVD, but you can find similar analysis on several other sites that discuss WTC7..
2) we have discussed WTC7 over the last 15 months of this site several times, discussing every single point surrounding WTC7 in a quick response to tonight's tucker episode is impossible, but there is plenty out there to look over.. we could've included silversteins 'pull it' comments, Indira Singh's comments on WTC7 while working in rescue operations at it's base, or gone over its occupants list, etc.. but the fast free-fall speed collapse of the otherwise stable superstructure was the point of Jones, and what was quickly covered in this topic.
Certainlly if your using the
Certainlly if your using the fall time as a strong tool one difficulty here is a standard. If someone says 6.6 sec and someone says 4.5, or 5.5, Then clearly you have a problem with any claim of "free fall".
I would be more than happy to discuss
silversteins 'pull it' comments.
In fact its been discussed a few times and he has tried to explain what he ment
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_pulled.html
I also posted more links in the below thread. I hope this helps. Honestly!
At least this discussion will move this debate forward. I believe I can answer MANY of your so called unanswered questions.
Best Scott
Scott wrote: Why don't you
Scott wrote: Why don't you show the other side of the building?
If you're referring to the South facade of Building 7, there are no pictures available. It's alleged that there was 25-percent of the building's depth scooped out of the South facade from falling debris, however, there have never been any photos produced by the people (NIST) that have made those allegations. I'm not saying that it's not true, but they haven't produced photographic evidence to support their claims.
There is a photo of the Bankers Trust building that shows damage to it from falling debris, however, it did not collapse from this damage. It remained standing:
http:// http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/FEMA3988_lg01b.jpg
The only photos available of damage to WTC7 are of the SW corner:
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5_files/fig-5-16.jpg
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/wtc_7sw.jpg
And a photo of some minimal rooftop damage:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/av.caesar/wtc/wtc7_3.jpg
And here is a picture of what looks like minimal fires coming from the North face of WTC7:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/av.caesar/wtc/wtc7_1.jpg
Scott, if you have a photo of damage to the South facade of Building 7, please post it.
Also, Scott, were you aware that rescue workers were told to evacuate the area around Building 7, because it was going to be brought down?
From an interview with rescue worker, Indira Singh:
Radio host Bonnie Falkner: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?
Indira Singh: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possibleÂ… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stationsÂ… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down... I do believe that they brought Building 7 down... By noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.
Bonnie Falkner: Did they actually use the word "brought" down and who was it that was telling you this?
Indira Singh: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."
The entire interview can be listened to at the link below. The excerpts from above can be found approximately 10 minutes into the interview.
Guns & Butter Radio interview w/ Indira Singh hosted by Bonnie Falkner - April 27th 2005:
http://tinyurl.com/7dww8
And Scott, are you aware of what award winning photographer, Tom Franklin has stated about WTC7 (Franklin is the photographer who snapped the photo of the firemen raising the flag at Ground Zero)? He was allowed to photograph Ground Zero on 9-11 before WTC7 fell down. Here's what he said about it:
Much of what happened to me on September 11 is a blur, but this moment I clearly remember: It was 4:45 p.m., and all the firemen and rescue workers were evacuating Ground Zero after word came that a third building -- WTC 7 -- was ready to fall. I had only a few frames left, and an entire day's worth of pictures to develop, so I prepared to head back to New Jersey.
Link to article:
http://archives.cjr.org/year/02/2/franklin.asp
Ready to fall?!
Building 7 fell at approximately 5:20pm. on 9-11. Are we supposed to believe that when Tom Franklin was told at 4:45pm that Building 7 "was ready to fall" that it was just a lucky guess by the people who told him that???
Scott, here are Silverstein's statements that HE made in a PBS documentary:
Larry Silvertein: "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."
Larry Silverstein, commenting on the demolition of Building 7 in the PBS documentary "America Rebuilds", which aired in September of 2002
Video: http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/wtc7_pbs.WMV
Audio: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/PULLIT.mp3
Continued: In the same
Continued:
In the same documentary, America Rebuilds, a clean up worker at ground zero uses the term "pull" when preparing for the demolition of Building 6 weeks later:
"... we're getting ready to pull Building 6"
Audio: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pull-it2.mp3
And here are some videos of Building 7 falling down that MSNBC apparently doesn't think you or the people of the United States should see:
WTC 7 "Collapse" videos:
WTC 7 "Collapse" videos:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc-7_cbs_demolition.mpg
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/WTC7_Collapse.mpg
http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc7dem2/911.wtc.7.demolition.window.wmv
And Scott, were you aware of some of the statements from witnesses who said they heard explosions at the WTC on 9-11? FYI, none of these statements were included in the 9/11 cOmmissions final report:
# From THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Assistant Fire Commissioner: "I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they . . . blow up a building. . . ?”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Grego...
# NYC firefighter: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e originally had thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.”
Link to quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Cachi...
# From The San Francisco Chronicle / SFGate.com:
Captain of Emergency Medical Services: "somewhere around the middle of the world trade center there was this orange and red flash coming out ... initially it was just one flash then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode ... and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides ... as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building"
Link to quote:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10/ga_karin_deshore.pdf
# "When we got to about 50 feet from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go...
...There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down. I stood there for a second in total awe, and then said, "What the F###?" I honestly thought it was Hollywood."
- Eye-witness Jeff Birnbaum, president of Broadway Electrical Supply Co., New York
Link to quote:
http://september11.ceenews.com/ar/electric_broadway_electrical_supplys/
# Member of the FDNY:
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov
# Firefighter:
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv
# Firemen recall "detonations" in South Tower:
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
Video: http://911research.com/wtc/ evide...n_firehouse.mpg
# September 12, 2001, New York City, People.com
Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building....
Link to article:
http://prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.htm
# NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson:
[Albert Turi the Chief of Safety for the New York Fire Department] received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place, and then an hour after the first hit, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion that took place in one of the towers here, so obviously according to his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.“
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv
# MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez:
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the WTC besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.police.found.explosives.wmv
# War Corespondent, Jack Kelley:
"Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time..."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.truck.bombs.fbi.jack.kelley.rm
# MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson:
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building and the chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes we were covered again with more soot and more dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last.."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.ann.thompson.intermediate....
# Street Reporter:
"45 minutes into the taping we were doing, there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was and the whole building at that point bellied out in flames and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv
# Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv
# Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv
# Terror in the City, September 12 , 2001, Notes from Robert Ivy, FAIA Editor-in-chief
...we felt a rumble like faraway thunder and turned. The impossible was happening. The south tower of the World Trade Center shook, and in what resembled an elemental act, fell to earth in a mighty shout. The entire dissolution, the changeover from solid elements to ash, took only seconds, and it was gone...
Link to article:
http://www.archrecord.com/news/f.../ 0109terror.asp
# An Eye-Witness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks
from Neil deGrasse Tyson
The following is the text from an email Neil deGrasse Tyson sent to his family and friends on 12 September 2001. Neil witnessed the attacks on the twin towers from his apartment only six blocks from the World Trade Center. He is Director of the Hayden Planetarium of the American Museum of Natural History, which is located in New York City. Neil also serves as The Planetary Society's Vice President...
From: Neil deGrasse Tyson
Sent: 10AM, Wednesday, 12 September 2001
Subject: The Horror, The Horror
...4) As more and more and more and more and more emergency vehicles descended on the World Trade Center, I hear a second explosion in WTC 2, then a loud, low-frequency rumble that precipitates the unthinkable -- a collapse of all the floors above the point of explosion. First the top surface, containing the helipad, tips sideways in full view. Then the upper floors fall straight down in a demolition-style implosion, taking all lower floors with it, even those below the point of the explosion...
...6) I decide it's time to get my daughter, who was taken by the parents of a friend of hers to a small office building, six blocks farther from the WTC than my apartment. As I dress for survival: boots, flashlight, wet towels, swimming goggles, bicycle helmet, gloves, I hear another explosion followed by a now all-too familiar rumble that signaled the collapse of WTC 1, the first of the two towers to have been hit. I saw the iconic antenna on this building descend straight down in an implosion twinning the first...
Link to Neil deGrasse Tyson's email:
http://www.archrecord.com/news/fromTheField/archives/0109terror.asp
Stallion4 I have already
Stallion4 I have already delt with most all of your claims/comments.
Gosh, I feel like I'm spaming the blogger site here says the same things over and over.
Also see the other thread in which we spoke
http://www.911myths.com/html/silverstein___wtc7.html
I have no problem with those statements regarding thaht they knew building 7 was coming down.
There were large fires
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_fire.html
"...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 oÂ’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 oÂ’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse."
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html
Continued: "...I saw
Continued:
"...I saw everything from my balcony in Soho. The first plane tried to veer off the tower but slammed straight into it, followed by the second plane," Nadine Keller of New York City wrote in an e-mail to BBC News Online.
"There was smoke everywhere. I heard the bomb and saw both buildings crumble like biscuits," Ms Keller said.
The BBC received more than 1,300 e-mails from witnesses and other concerned readers within the first few hours after the attack.
Link to article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm
# 9/11 Survivor Describes Multiple Explosions
"There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. I was afraid to go down Church Street toward Broadway, but I had to do it. I ended up on Vesey Street. There was another explosion. And another. I didn't know where to run."
Source: "Teresa Veliz: A Prayer to Die Quickly and Painlessly," in September 11: An Oral History by Dean E. Murphy (Doubleday, 2002), pp 9-15. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/veliz-bombs.htm
# 9/11 hero, William Rodriguez, who was the last person out of the north tower, states that there was a massive explosion in the North Tower BEFORE the plane hit:
"When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and it everything started shaking
"Seconds after the first massive explosion below in the basement still rattled the floor, I hear another explosion from way above... Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane hitting the tower, it occurred moments after the first explosion.
"I know there were explosives placed below the trade center.
"I have tried to tell my story to everybody, but nobody wants to listen. It is very strange what is going on here in supposedly the most democratic country in the world. In my home country of Puerto Rico and all the other Latin American countries, I have been allowed to tell my story uncensored. But here, I canÂ’t even say a word.
"I met with the 9/11 Commission behind closed doors and they essentially discounted everything I said regarding the use of explosives to bring down the north tower.
"And I contacted NIST previously four times without a response. Finally, this week I asked them before they came up with their conclusion that jet fuel brought down the towers, if they ever considered my statements or the statements of any of the other survivors who heard the explosions. They just stared at me with blank faces and didnÂ’t have any answers."
Link to quotes:
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/28031.htm
“Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”
- CBS News anchor, Dan Rather, commenting on the collapse of Building 7, September 11, 2001 at approx 5:20pm EST.
Video: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc-7_cbs_demolition.mpg
And here are what some experts have said about the WTC buildings:
# "If you've seen many of the managed demolitions where they implode a building and they cause it to essentially to fall vertically because they cause all of the vertical columns to fail simultaneously, that's exactly what it looked like and that's what happened"
- Matthys Levy, Structural Engineer and co author of Why buildings Fall Down
Video: http://www.freepressinternational.com/discovery.html
# Why WTC Steel Towers Collapsed at One Blow
September 20, 2001
english.people.com.cn
Professor Shi Yongjiu, director of civil engineering department of Qinghua University and an expert on steel structure, guesses that the lower part of the WTC twin towers may got seriously damaged.
According to steel structure's mechanical nature, the towers shouldn't collapse as late as an hour later after the planes slammed into. What's more, it should be in a way to topple over gradually instead of crashing down as seen in videotapes. It looks more like a directional blast in doing the job of destruction, so he feels that huge damages must have been done at the lower part of the towers.
Link to article:
http://english.people.com.cn/english/200109/20/eng20010920_80655.html
# Explosives Planted in Towers, New Mexico Tech Expert Says
Albuquerque Journal, September, 2001
"My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the
airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some
explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the
towers to collapse
"It would be difficult for
something from the plane to trigger an event like that
"It could have been a relatively small
amount of explosives placed in strategic points
- Van Romero, Vice President for Research and Economic Development at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology and a major authority on the effects of explosions on buildings (Romero has since retracted his statements only days later, saying "Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail.").
Original Link to quote
http://www.abqjournal.com/aqvan09-11-01.htm
Archived link of Romero's quote:
http://www.world-action.co.uk/explosives.html
New Mexico Tech Explosives Expert 'Flip-Flops' On WTC Controlled Demo Theory; Refuses To Explain Why
http://news.baou.com/main.php?action=recent&rid=20284
Romero receives promotion soon after he recants his "bombs brought down the WTC" statements - January 11, 2002:
http://infohost.nmt.edu/mainpage/news/2002/11jan05.html
Romero also happens to be a Co-Chair to the Presidential Advisory Commission:
http://www.yic.gov/paceea/adcom/bios.html
Taking a Closer Look: Hard Science and the Collapse of the World Trade Center
by David Heller
BS: Physics Bard College
MA: S. F. Inst. Architecture
Architect and Builder
http://www.garlicandgrass.org/issue6/Dave_Heller.cfm
# The fact that WTC-7 fell down symmetrically, onto its own footprint very neatly, even though fires were just observed on one side of the building. A symmetrical collapse, as observed, requires the simultaneous "pulling" of support beams. By my count, there were 24 core columns and 57 perimeter columns in WTC-7. Heat transport considerations for steel beams heated by fire suggest that failure of even a few columns at the same time is very small. Adding in the Second Law of Thermodynamics ("law of increasing entropy") leads to the conclusion that the likelihood of near-symmetrical collapse of the building due to fires (the "government" theory) -- requiring as it does near-simultaneous failure of many support columns -- is infinitesimal. Yet near-symmetrical collapse of WTC-7 was observed.
"I have performed other analyses regarding the WTC collapses on 9-11-01 which may be of interest --let me know if you're interested. The matter is highly interesting to me as a physicist -- and as a citizen of the United States. I conclude that the evidence for pre-positioned explosives in WTC 7 (also in towers 1 and 2) is truly compelling."
- Steven E. Jones, Professor of Physics/BYU, in an email sent to his colleagues concerning the World Trade Center collapses
Scott, what do you think about all of these witness statements?
You even had Dan Rather?
You even had Dan Rather? LOL!
I believe that various explosions in the building certainly sounded like bombs.'
What did you think of my links with photos and witnesses, etc?
Scott quoted from Firehouse
Scott quoted from Firehouse mag:
"...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 oÂ’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 oÂ’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse."
According to Indira Singh, she was told that Building 7 was going to be brought down between the hours of noon and 1pm.. How can you be so sure that the Firehouse quote that you posted is indeed a FACT? Is it not possible that was a story that was made up to cover someone's azz?
So, Scott, are you calling
So, Scott, are you calling the FBI, FDNY, NYPD, news rporters all liars when the said that there were bombs planted in the WTC on 9-11?
Scott, is all of this just
Scott, is all of this just my imagination?
NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson:
[Albert Turi the Chief of Safety for the New York Fire Department] received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place, and then an hour after the first hit, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion that took place in one of the towers here, so obviously according to his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.“
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv
# MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez:
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the WTC besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.police.found.explosives.wmv
# War Corespondent, Jack Kelley:
"Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time..."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.truck.bombs.fbi.jack.kelley.rm
September 12, 2001, New York City, People.com
Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building....
http://prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.htm
"According to your quote she
"According to your quote she said
"By noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down."
The link I had stated "by about 2 oÂ’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse."
Its really not that far off in time. One person could simply be mistaken about the time, or that it was a rough estimate, or that some suspected that it would fall at a slightly earlier time because of the bulge. I don't see anything really wrong here. How do you know Indira Singh is perfectly correct?
But you do acknowledge that
But you do acknowledge that she and other rescue workers were told to move away from Building 7, because it was going to be brought down, according to Singh?
What is you explanation
What is you explanation about Tom Franklin being told a 4:45 that Building 7 "was ready to fall"? Are you saying that it was just a lucky guess??
Because the building came
Because the building came down shortly after 5pm.
Where are YOUR pictures of
Where are YOUR pictures of Building 7's South face damage?
Funny how you haven't really
Funny how you haven't really commented much on my information. But I'll continue. I'm sure various people thought there were bombs at first. I don't have a problem with this.
So you believe there was a bomb in a car/truck now also?
That's a new one. Well certainly the FBI doesn't believe that there was a van with explosives anymore. I don't think the terrorists needed to do that.
But anyway this link might help a little also.
http://www.911myths.com/html/basement_bombs.html
Photographers were allowed
Photographers were allowed to take pictures all day long before 7 fell. Where are the photos of the damage to the buildings south face that NIST's lead investigator, Shyman Sunder, claims that there was 25-percent of the buildings depth on the south face scooped out?
This is the only photo and
This is the only photo and video I have shown. I haven't shown any more. But I believe there are more I could fish out.
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_fire.html
Scott wrote: I'm sure
Scott wrote: I'm sure various people thought there were bombs at first. I don't have a problem with this.
I have a problem with it. And I also have a problem with the 9-11 cOmmission's final report not including any of them.
Dont forget Captain Chris
Dont forget Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years
Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didnÂ’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didnÂ’t look good.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, weÂ’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html
Scott wrote: So you believe
Scott wrote: So you believe there was a bomb in a car/truck now also?
That's a new one. Well certainly the FBI doesn't believe that there was a van with explosives anymore.
How do you know what the FBI believes?
9-11 hero, William Rodriguez
9-11 hero, William Rodriguez testified that explosions occurred in the North Tower some seconds BEFORE the plane impacted. He told this to the 9-11 cOmmission. He also asked NIST if they had considered his testimony and they did not answer say that they had. This was most likely the truck bomb exploding that was reported on the morning of 9-11.
Well, do you see them
Well, do you see them pushing the bomb in a car/truck story?
Rodriguez was in the
Rodriguez was in the basement at the time of the 9-11 attack. He said that the explosions he heard and felt were from below, not above. Others have testified to this.
Scott wrote: Well, do you
Scott wrote: Well, do you see them pushing the bomb in a car/truck story?
I see a BIG lie being pushed.
Honestly I haven't seen many
Honestly I haven't seen many pushing the bombs in a car/truck. But I doubt there were bombs in the basements as the Towers basement wall was solid.
http://www.911myths.com/html/basement_bombs.html
"I see a BIG lie being
"I see a BIG lie being pushed."
I'm sure you do, or you wouldn't be here. Yet clearly we have seen that the "truth movement" has been lieing, or at the very least not doing a good job of research.
Scot, how do you feel about
Scot, how do you feel about the mainstream media's coverage of Building 7?
I've learned far more from
I've learned far more from the "truth movement" about it than from the mainstream media and the government. How 'bout you?
Scott, were you aware of
Scott, were you aware of most of the info that I posted before I posted it? If so, how did you hear about it? From the mainstream media? Or from the 9-11 truth movement?
Yes I was aware of most of
Yes I was aware of most of this information. Honestly I've researched this for sometime. Mainstream media certainly has problems. Why do you think bloggers are getting so popular? LOL! Anyway good night.
Scott
Scott, are you saying that
Scott, are you saying that firemen and others seeing orange and red flashes at the base of the towers then hearing explosions coming from the buildings isn't similar to controlled demolition?
# From THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Assistant Fire Commissioner: "I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they . . . blow up a building. . . ?”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Grego...
# NYC firefighter: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e originally had thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.”
Link to quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Cachi...
# From The San Francisco Chronicle / SFGate.com:
Captain of Emergency Medical Services: "somewhere around the middle of the world trade center there was this orange and red flash coming out ... initially it was just one flash then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode ... and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides ... as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building"
Link to quote:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10/ga_karin_deshore.pdf
# "When we got to about 50 feet from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go...
...There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down. I stood there for a second in total awe, and then said, "What the F###?" I honestly thought it was Hollywood."
- Eye-witness Jeff Birnbaum, president of Broadway Electrical Supply Co., New York
Link to quote:
http://september11.ceenews.com/ar/electric_broadway_electrical_supplys/
# Member of the FDNY:
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov
# Firefighter:
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv
# Street Reporter:
"45 minutes into the taping we were doing, there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was and the whole building at that point bellied out in flames and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv
# Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv
# Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv
Scott, are you honestly saying that this information doesn't warrant further investigation into bombs being used to bring the buildings down?
Scott is an idiot who doesnt
Scott is an idiot who doesnt even understand gravitational constants and hes trying to "answer the unanswered questions"
What a maroon!
"Fucker Carlson" Hahaha,
"Fucker Carlson" Hahaha, that's the funniest thing I've seen all day.
Scott, what color is the sky
Scott, what color is the sky in your world?
How can a building which supposedly had 25% of it "scooped" out of the side fall straight down symmetrically into its own foot print and be reduced to dust in the process??
Time to take off the training wheels and think for yourself.
"Fucker Carlson" was ALL
"Fucker Carlson" was ALL me... ;)
I'm not 100% sure, because
I'm not 100% sure, because right now the sound on my computer is not working, but it seems to me that the video linked to above is claiming FASTER than free fall speed of collapse of WTC 7.
IF so, then be aware that this is DISINFO, and somebody is making a fool out of you. Faster than free fall time implies additional downwards forces other than gravity. The "vacuum" hypothesis is rather unlikely, since explosives (the likely source of demolitions) would create overpressures due to EXPANDING gasses, which is practically the opposite of a vacuum.
A similar trick has already been played before, with Hufshmid still pushing the claim, posted on reopen911.org, that "There is a sequence of photos in Eric Hufschmid's Painful Questions on pages 50 to 55 showing big steel beams falling in the air where the explosives are staying ahead of the falling beams. " (In other words, in essentially free fall time.) People naturally conflated this statement (which is wrong to begin with) with the statement that the COLLAPSE of the building occurred in essentially free fall time. (Indeed, if memory serves, Hufschmid himself has conflated the two.) I warned reopen911.org about 2 weeks ago that this was definitely wrong. You can read my analysis at physorg.com, where I post under the name metamars.
There is no need, WHATSOEVER, to believe in free fall, or, God forbid, FASTER than free fall time FAIRY TALES in order to see that the FEMA version of collapse is also a Fairy Tale.
You can find a more realistic apprasial of the collapse times at Hoffman's http://911research.wtc7.net/ . Note that even the realistic collapse time of 12 - 16 seconds is extremely quick, and highly suggestive of demolition.
However, as an isolated fact, it is neither proof, nor disproof, of demolition.
great comments guys.. as for
great comments guys..
as for the clips, they really need to be seen in the context of the whole video.. i believe the continuous footage of wtc1 and 2 prior to collapse proves that multiple explosions could be heard even a mile away.. the wtc7 clip perhaps needs more of the preliminary discussion as that short clip doesn't show the context it was in.. but i thought it showed a good enough segment to get the gist across as to why many question its collapse.. there is a ton of stuff out there on it, and i too would suggest looking at hoffman's work on his site, and the radio interviews he has done.. do a search on the left panel for 'hoffman' for more..
if anyone can host these videos and be a mirror, or upload them to free services like putfile and provide the links here it would be much appreciated.. we are using up a good bit of bandwidth.. and i will post the mirrors in this article once i get a few in..
thanks for the comments guys, keep it goin.
dz, Does the wtc 7 video
dz,
Does the wtc 7 video claim a faster than free fall time, or not?
Scott, The caller into
Scott,
The caller into Fucker's show was certainly a disinfo agent. He states building 7 was on fire for "several days", when in truth the building went down at 5:20 on September 11th. Then he calls the professor a quack, to which Fucker responds in the affirmative.
Scripted disinfo. No doubt.
All the best,
http://www.911myths.com/html/
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_pulled.html
FULL OF HOLES AND ASSUMPTIONS.
To sum it up lightly.
For example... As noted
For example...
As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.
The basis of the argument being Silverstein meant pull the people away from the building when he said 'pull it'. Who the hell says guys the buildings coming down pull it! PULL WHAT?
And then your using the FEMA report...good lord do you know who is the head of FEMA?
Wow, my head hurts from reading this.
anon, the segment on wtc7
anon,
the segment on wtc7 goes through several illustrations with that ball drop physics website.. he shows how the air density of air versus a vacume can affect the freefall time, and how the fall of wtc7 is faster than freefall in air, and close to freefall in a vacume.. it goes on to say that this type of collapse is only possible by causing negative pressure forces (not sure exactly the technical wording atm) to 'pull' down the building such as is seen in controlled demolition..
hope that is a decent answer.. i wish i could just host the whole video..
to follow up on
to follow up on silverstein's 'pull it' comments, it couldn't have refered to firefighters because they had evacuated that building in the morning and decided not to go after its fires.. that was in the fema report..
How can a building which
How can a building which supposedly had 25% of it "scooped" out of the side fall straight down symmetrically into its own foot print and be reduced to dust in the process??
Time to take off the training wheels and think for yourself.
FINALLY someone points out the obvious to Scotty. He keeps pushing this huge hole but doesn't try to explain how a asymmetrical destruction would cause a symmetrical collapse....at free fall.
tell me why would anyone pay millions of dollars to demolish buildings if small, well-placed fires do the job just as well?
remember it takes time to set up all charges, but a fire, on 9-11 and 9-11 ONLY, takes a couple of hours to do the same job.
911myths.com is a CIA run
911myths.com is a CIA run website o debunk all the 9/11 truth movements claims. its obvious the 9/11 truth movement is getting way too much traction, so they were forced to step into action on debunking 9/11 and promoting the official government story. hell, even the state department website has a debunking section now.we are making progress Scott, and there is NOTHING you can do about it but post links to a CIA run website.
322 | 11.17.05 - 11:17 am | #
Mike from NY said he
Mike from NY said he definitely knows there were no explosions underneath the towers and WTC7 was on fire for "several days" ... uhh. WTC7 collapsed the same frickin day.
i wish i could just host the
i wish i could just host the whole video..
dz,
if you have the right program, you can extract the video from dvd's and save them as smaller mpeg files. then you could host it.
hell send me a copy (i'll pay the postage) and i'll do it for you.
Somebody should ask Tucker
Somebody should ask Tucker if he has seen the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal today, and whether he thinks Louis Freeh is a quack.
whatreallyhappened has
whatreallyhappened has posted a response for tucker as well:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.html
bb, care to elaborate?
rayrayjones, its not an
rayrayjones,
its not an issue of know how, but bandwidth and permission.. thanks for the offer though.. send me an email..
This is fucking crazy. I
This is fucking crazy. I don't know how ANYONE can trust ANYTHING our government is saying.
WE ARE THE BIGGEST BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES IN THE WORLD.
Listening to democracy now, I'm hearing one of our soldiers describe white phosphorus being used. Women and children being burned alive, I can't even describe what I'm feeling right now.
Right, Saddam's developing chemical weapons. Let's stop him by using chemical weapons against him.
I AM SICK.
Louis Freeh ripped into the
Louis Freeh ripped into the 9/11 Commission re: Able Danger in the WSJ today, and cited family members and others calling for a new investigation. Its serious, he had strong language. Lots of suits and ties must have read it this morning.
Louis Freeh just wants to
Louis Freeh just wants to pin 9/11 on Clinton.... that's my sense.... anybody else think that investigating Able Danger is not necessarily good news for the 9/11 truth movement? I mean, the people calling for this are Repugnicans, after all....
And, I'm not suggesting that
And, I'm not suggesting that Clinton wasn't part of the problem with 9/11 -- because I don't trust either political party on this -- BUT, this does seem to be a politicized call for an investigation into Able Danger. That makes the Repugnicans' intentions suspect....
YO PEOPLE, maybe Tucker
YO PEOPLE, maybe Tucker isnÂ’t a fucker after all check this link, I don't know if itÂ’s been put up already but it's titled "Questioning what happened on 9/11", I think him and msnbc might actually be trying to help in a big way here;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10053445/
They've also got the video of the program with proff.Steve Jones up for stream on the same page;
http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?f=00&g=9d06140d-6e7e-4c83-ba21-481991123...
80 Democrats have signed
80 Democrats have signed onto Curt Weldon's petition for further investigation, along with over 100 Republicans, not that being a Democrat or a Republican adds a great deal of credibility to anything.
bb, thanks for that info --
bb, thanks for that info -- I certainly haven't been following the story carefully, but couldn't help notice that the call for investigating Able Danger seems to be emanating from the right.... I'd be interested to know who those 80 Dems are. Perhaps the same types who voted for the Iraq war?
Dem Bruce Lee Styles --
Dem Bruce Lee Styles -- that's not the latest from Tucker Carlson -- that's the original show.... now Carlson is showing his true colors.
Among the Democrats on the
Among the Democrats on the Weldon petition is John Murtha (PA), a 'defense hawk' who just called for the U.S. to pull out of Iraq, while 'fighting back tears' (AP).
Scott: You can't prove a
Scott:
You can't prove a negative. For example, people who were in the underground AN HOUR later than William R. and others heard the explosion, and Felipe David was BURNED from it in no way prove or disprove that event.
Similarly, those who spoke of the rumbling above as the tower collapses don't DISCOUNT the other stories of explosions as the tower fell.
The ONLY credible thing I've noticed from your posts is the speed of WTC 7. The clip from 9/11 Eyewitnesses, IMHO, miscalculates the total collapse time that they say is 5.6 secs by just under a second. They count the end point to be the bottom of the video frame, but there are still a number of floors below that point.
From what I've been able to figure out, an approximate 6.3-6.5 collapse time is more accurate, as some other 9/11 Truth sites have calculated.
Even with this greater time frame, it's STILL way too fast for just about anything but a controlled collapse, and don't bother linking NIST reports about the diesel in the basement, because that was found almost completely intact (although Offical Story believers often misrepresent that fact).
KW, Cheers for that!
KW, Cheers for that! Although my point is the title "Questioning 9/11" is very optimistic sounding, and I think fucker might have been deliberately told to be a bit of a fucker because they might be trying to break the nation in slowly to such a shocking realisation.
Heh... ;)
Heh... ;)
"I don't care what Congress
"I don't care what Congress thinks, I own congress" - Ariel Sharon
Somebody should ask Tucker
Somebody should ask Tucker if he has seen the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal today, and whether he thinks Louis Freeh is a quack.
bb | 11.17.05 - 12:09 pm | #
got a link? or at least some qoutes?
Scott, what do you do for a
Scott, what do you do for a living? You keep promoting basically one site, 911myths. Sure, there's tons of "information" out there that supports the official theory- but it doesn't address the holes and lies in the official conspiracy theory. David Ray Griffin in "The 911 Commission Report: Ommissions and Distortions" uses the Commission's and the Administration's own words, plus mainstream sources and common sense, to destroy the official story and the Commission's treatment of it. If you're looking for the truth, and you're not really a disinfo agent, read this book and discredit it. You can put forth all the evidence you want, but until you can make all the evidence disproving the official theory go away, and kill all the people whose minds have been opened, the numbers of those who doubt the official story and are calling for a new investigation into the unanswered questions is going to continue to grow. http://www.911independentcommission.org. How can you say these questions are not important?
No offense to Tucker, but I
No offense to Tucker, but I suggest we stop giving him the attention, and the ratings he's been getting over the last 3 days. What's done is done, it's time to move on... just a suggestion.
We know that Professor Jones is credible, and has a good hypothesis (Which I've read). Now all we have to do is get him, and Dr. Griffin, and every other willing "expert" to come forward, etc... Try and get them the spotlight somehow... and it's time for you to get outside to spread the word...
Believe me, it works.
"to follow up on
"to follow up on silverstein's 'pull it' comments, it couldn't have refered to firefighters because they had evacuated that building in the morning and decided not to go after its fires.. that was in the fema report.."
According to various sites the time was 11:30 so I really see nothing wrong.
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/pullit.html
Scott
[this is the letter sent to
[this is the letter sent to Tucker]
Tucker,
I usually get to see your show because I Tivo "Countdown" and the cable
box stays on MSNBC before I bother to change it. I thought *your*
performance was "epically bad" though no worse than normal. Prof. Jones'
contention would have been rather easy to explain had you just co-operated
and ran his short footage or at least asked pertinant questions based
on his assertions. Instead, you bungled the segment and claimed that *he*
is the one who was the cause of all the broadcast awkwardness and
discomfort.
And now on your blog you make an argument from incredulity. I feel Bush
and others have done countless deceitful and criminal things but do not
have the luxury of just packing it up and hitting the trail as you
proposed. Regarding your disbelief that our government could act in such
an unethical manner, refresher course or not, is there not even one
instance in our history you can point to where government officials
acted in a wholly disgraceful way? Certainly on a local level (The
Tuskeegee Experiments for example). Considering that national
representatives are not some separate species, pure of heart and mind,
from the planet "Federal", it is conceivable that national
administrators are capable of just those type of things you are in
denial over.
For the lies that you are perpetuating, you'd have to be incredibly
stupid or astonishingly corrupt. Even when I disagreed with positions of
yours in the past, I did not think that you were ignorant, just
manipulatively selective of your facts. Now it seems that the facts
themselves are your enemy. Rachel Maddow notwithstanding, I hope your
program dies a merciful death and soon. Your attemps at disseminating
information are a blight on our nation.
Regretfully,
LT [real name]
5th time Hey everybody, I
5th time
Hey everybody,
I just nominated Steve E Jones
"wings of justice" person of the week
here http://www.wingsofjustice.com/nominate.html
at BuzzFlash
peace,pw
dz, Does the wtc 7 video
dz,
Does the wtc 7 video claim a faster than free fall time, or not?
Anonymous | 11.17.05 - 10:39 am
______________________________----
The discrepancy from the Eyewitness video fall time to the official time of 6.5 seconds +/- .1-.2 seconds is that the Full collapse was 6.5 seconds. The video shows the collapse to the visibile roofline of the other building. It was still collapsing for 2 seconds after that. The video does not show the collapse to the street, just to the roofline of the surrounding buildings.
He sees nothing wrong?
He sees nothing wrong?