Will Vietnam Veterans of America JOIN Veterans for 911 Truth?
VVA's goals are to promote and support the full range of issues important to Vietnam veterans, to create a new identity for this generation of veterans, and to change public perception of Vietnam veterans.
Vietnam Veterans of America,
Please consider the following statements true and urgent:The Official story of September 11, 2001 is untrue. America is in great distress and peril!!!
SEE: Scholars for 911 Truth http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/index.html
I am calling on you VVA, JOIN: Veterans for 911 Truth
http://www.v911t.org/MissionStatement.php
MISSION STATEMENT, in part
"...In pursuit of our mission we have initially chosen to present evidence exposing the deception and lies that many in the military/intelligence/industrial/media establishment have been telling Americans and the world since September 11, 2001 concerning the events of that tragic day. Our mission includes seeking, discovering, and presenting evidence revealing the truth about the events of 9/11..."
We know everything takes time and it may be a while before you are ABLE to respond to this appeal. That's fine; we just hope you respond by researching the issues surrounding the events of '9/11' so that we can all succeed together in exposing the truth and lies of 9/11 and relieve America of the great distress and peril she faces today.
Thank-you for taking these matters in hand and reaching out to help resolve the issues surrounding the truth and lies of 9/11.
If it is the policy of VVA not to join groups or lend support to groups such as ours, would you allow us a mention in 'The Veteran'?
Veterans for 911 Truth patiently await your reply.
Sincerely Yours,
Ray Harvey Sanborn,Jr. aka titus
Mendocino County, CA.
- Login to post comments
typo in the v911t.org
typo in the v911t.org link
http://www.v911t.org/MissionStatement.phpQ
nix the Q
Fixed, thanks.
Fixed, thanks.
I think I just did something
I think I just did something very big, but I'm not sure... I can't tell you the specifics, but a very prominent person may write about what it is they question about 9/11.
Actually, he's a hero of
Actually, he's a hero of mine.
Dear ___________, I'm
Dear ___________,
I'm writing you today to ask you for a favor that I think will be tremendously helpful in changing the direction of this country. I have always respected and admired everything you've ever written. All of your articles, that I know of, have been posted, and promoted on my website. I am well aware of your many contributions to the 9/11 Truth Movement as far as participation in movies, congressional briefings, and events such as the D.C. Emergency Truth Convergence of July last year.
I'm asking you today if you could take some time, and write an article about all or some of the questions about 9/11 that you have. Written in the concise, eloquent way that you are known for.
A lot of people respect what you have to say ___________, but to my knowledge, nothing has ever been written by you about that fateful day. If I'm wrong, please point me to the article, but if I'm not, please consider what I'm asking you to do.
Thank you for everything that you have done. You are a hero.
Very Sincerely Yours,
Jon Gold
His response...
thanks Jon Mulling over what I might say that others have not.
My response...
If it's repetitive in anyway, I don't think it would matter... I think it matters more that you're writing it...
Thank you very much ____________.
Jon
BoneZ just posted this on my
BoneZ just posted this on my site...
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/5830/sunlightwtc5uk.jpg
Nice pic, during some
Nice pic, during some construction?
J. Gold - excellent picture
J. Gold - excellent picture of the Towers. Funny how the 9/11 Commission missed the center core that is so easily visible, isn't just so "funny?"
Rebel Patriot wrote, "J.
Rebel Patriot wrote,
"J. Gold - excellent picture of the Towers. Funny how the 9/11 Commission missed the center core that is so easily visible, isn't just so "funny?""
That picture helps show how much air made up the towers, and, no, NIST never missed the cores.
I'm so obvious.
I'm so obvious.
"That picture helps show how
"That picture helps show how much air made up the towers"
The towers were made of air?
S. King, your an obvious
S. King, your an obvious shill and denier of the obvious.
The 9/11 Commission of course mentioned the core, but misrepresented it as a hollow shaft. it didn't reference them as 47 gargantuan steel columns, no reference to the dimensions. But I also it strange that the Ommision Commission never made any reference to WTC-7, Silverstein and his admission, the numerous drills (excepting Vigilant Guardian they mentioned), the $100,000 wired from ISI breakfast buddy of Porter Goss and Graham, etc., etc..
Also, the image shows how thick the cement floor pans were, and the air is also obvious in that it is not a fuel supply. Nothing monumental to burn to contribute to the alleged "inferno" that is the mythos of the Offical Fairy Tale.
Legal Scholars Say Bush Has
Legal Scholars Say Bush Has Ignored Over 750 Laws
1) Murder.
Can anybody refer me to a
Can anybody refer me to a line that someone said but i dont remember from whom it was from.
"they cant duplicate what happened in the buildings that day.."
or something to that nature....they were trying to say that the NIST or GOVT agencies could not duplicate what happened to the towers that day.
Professor Jones spoke of it
Professor Jones spoke of it in his lecture.
"Jones said that models
"Jones said that models conducted in tests since 9/11 have not been able to duplicate what happened to the buildings. He is not saying this is a proven theory, but rather a hypothesis. He wants a fresh new independent investigation."
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635160132,00.html
How many people want a fresh
How many people want a fresh new investigation.
An investigation that isn't lead by "Beltway Boys".
An investigation with absolutely no ties to anyone in the Administration.
An investigation that not only has subpoena power but USES it.
An investigation that is public from day one. In every way.
An investigation that is properly funded. The sky is the limit.
An investigation that has representatives from the family members.
Raise your hand.
What is the url for
What is the url for 911blogger's user statistics? Is it located somewhere on the front page?
I just got done watching
I just got done watching "Flight 93" and have to say that I feel sick. I feel sick that average Joe Citizen might actually take the wild speculation in this movie as fact.
This movie just goes to further try to shape the collective consciousness on the said "events" of this day. I have to question the timing of this movie, the company that put it out "Fox" and motives for such a release.
It is now more important then ever to try to educate people on the "questions" that remain regarding the official version of events.
I'm gonna go barf.
S. King... does this remind
S. King... does this remind you of anything?
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
The signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows:
New Hampshire
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts
John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
"He is at this time
"He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation."
"He has affected to render
"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power."
"He has refused his Assent
"He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."
"He has abdicated Government
"He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us."
I don't know, but it seems
I don't know, but it seems to me if our King George is doing any of these things... he should be held accountable. After all, it's these very reasons as for why this country was founded in the first place.
It should also apply to
It should also apply to ANYONE who's helped him to acheive these goals.
ANYONE.
I thought this veteran thing
I thought this veteran thing was never going to get off the ground, with the original initiator being a non-veteran, but looks like I was wrong, and erring in this direction is not a problem.
About the site -- Good, they don't link to any of the worst websites.
On the right sidebar, however...
"9/11 in Plane Site"
awww :(
*****
JG, good letter. Well written.
"'He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.'"
Actually, Emperor George never vetoes anything. (The first quote was great)
*****
"S. King, your an obvious shill and denier of the obvious."
But remember, don't waste too much time attacking him, refute him briefly and then move along.
S. King is just doing his
S. King is just doing his job, remember, as taxpayers, he works for us.
When is quitting time S??? See ya tomorrow, another long work week huh?
We already have the music--
We already have the music-- his cause is lost.
http://www.lizziewestlife.com/music/06%2019%20Miles%20To%20Baghdad.mp3
I make $6.75/hour :(
I make $6.75/hour :(
S. King, You can knock off
S. King,
You can knock off for the weekend, I'm on shift now....
Jon,
Now, how many structural engineers did you say agree with your conspiradroid theories?
Terrence: http://911research.
Terrence:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
Like All Skyscrapers, the Twin Towers Were Over-Engineered
One aspect of engineering that is not widely understood is that structures are over-engineered as a matter of standard practice. Steel structures like bridges and buildings are typically designed to withstand five times anticipated static loads and 3 times anticipated dynamic loads. The anticipated loads are the largest ones expected during the life of the structure, like the worst hurricane or earthquake occurring while the floors are packed with standing-room-only crowds. Given that September 11th was not a windy day, and that there were not throngs of people in the upper floors, the critical load ratio was probably well over 10, meaning that more than nine-tenths of the columns at the same level would have to fail before the weight of the top could have overcome the support capacity of the remaining columns.
[b]
There is evidence that the Twin Towers were designed with an even greater measure of reserve strength than typical large buildings. According to the calculations of engineers who worked on the Towers' design, all the columns on one side of a Tower could be cut, as well as the two corners and some of the columns on each adjacent side, and the building would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind. 3
Frank Demartini's Statement
Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.
Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation.[/b]
The Richard Roth Telegram
On Feburary 13, 1965, real estate baron Lawrence Wien called reporters to his office to charge that the design of the Twin Towers was structurally unsound. Many suspected that his allegation was motivated by a desire to derail the planned World Trade Center skyscrapers to protect the value of his extensive holdings, which included the Empire State Building. In response to the charge, Richard Roth, partner at Emery Roth & Sons, the architectural firm that was designing the Twin Towers, fired back with a three-page telegram containing the following details. 5
THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS CARRIED OU BY THE FIRM OF WORTHINGTON, SKILLING, HELLE & JACKSON IS THE MOST COMPLETE AND DETAILED OF ANY EVER MADE FOR ANY BUILDING STRUCTURE. THE PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS ALONE COVER 1,200 PAGES AND INVOLVE OVER 100 DETAILED DRAWINGS.
...
4. BECAUSE OF ITS CONFIGURATION, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THAT OF A STEEL BEAM 209' DEEP, THE TOWERS ARE ACTUALLY FAR LESS DARING STRUCTURALLY THAN A CONVENTIONAL BUILDING SUCH AS THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING WERE THE SPINE OR BRACED AREA OF THE BUILDING IS FAR SMALLER IN RELATION TO ITS HEIGHT.
...
5. THE BUILDING AS DESIGNED IS SIXTEEN TIMES STIFFER THAN A CONVENTIONAL STRUCTURE. THE DESIGN CONCEPT IS SO SOUND THAT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAS BEEN ABLE TO BE ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE IN HIS DESIGN WITHOUT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE ECONOMICS OF THE STRUCTURE. ...
At the time the Twin Towers were built, the design approach of moving the support columns to the perimeter and the core, thereby creating large expanses of unobstructed floor space, was relatively new, and unique for a skyscraper. However, that approach is commonplace in contemporary skyscrapers.
The Boeing 707 that was
The Boeing 707 that was considered in the design of the towers was estimated to have a gross weight of 263,000 pounds and a flight speed of 180 mph as it approached an airport; the Boeing 767-200ER aircraft that were used to attack the towers had an estimated gross weight of 274,000 pounds and flight speeds of 470 to 590 mph upon impact.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/WTC_ch1.htm
Fankly, the structure was never designed to survive an aircraft that size moving at that speed - unless of course you think the building was hit by a hologram....
Powered then by four Pratt &
Powered then by four Pratt & Whitney JT3 turbojets, mounted under wings swept back 35 degrees, the Dash 80 established the classic configuration for jetliners to come. It also set new speed records each time it flew. This was illustrated March 11, 1957, when it streaked nonstop on a press demonstration flight from Seattle to Baltimore in 3 hours 48 minutes at an average speed of 612 mph.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/707family/index.html
weird that it put my name as
weird that it put my name as Anonymous but kept my other info
The designers assumed that
The designers assumed that the 707 would have been lost in fog, light on fuel and looking to land and near stall speed...
Terrence, give up already.
Terrence, give up already.
"The designers assumed that
"The designers assumed that the 707 would have been lost in fog, light on fuel and looking to land and near stall speed..."
hahaha...it says that where? got a link? got a document? you need to stop posting now. you are a true dumbass.
Jon Gold wrote, "The towers
Jon Gold wrote,
"The towers were made of air?"
In terms of volume, somewhere between 80% to 90%. I have to look up the exact figure.
But you put up the picture so presumably you can see.
Terrence and King wouldnt
Terrence and King wouldnt your time be better spent worshipping a 40 foot stone owl or something?
Rebel Patriot wrote, "The
Rebel Patriot wrote,
"The 9/11 Commission of course mentioned the core, but misrepresented it as a hollow shaft. It didn't reference them as 47 gargantuan steel columns, no reference to the dimensions."
Apparently you never even heard of the NIST investigation and that IT is the operative agency. Amazing.
"But I also it strange that the Ommision Commission never made any reference to WTC-7, Silverstein and his admission,..."
I find it particularly strange that you are clueless that NIST has finished the investigation of WTC 7, that you actually believe the utter nonsense about the Silverstein quote. It only demonstrates the desperation of 9/11 conspiracists.
Now, go here and learn something from structural engineers.
"Also, the image shows how thick the cement floor pans were, and the air is also obvious in that it is not a fuel supply. Nothing monumental to burn to contribute to the alleged "inferno" that is the mythos of the Offical Fairy Tale."
Only in your imagination. The concrete floors were four inches thick, held up by metal trusses, and the fact that the volume of the towers was mostly air destroys your precious conspiracy theories about controlled demolition and the amount of energy needed to crush the floors.
Another day, another debunking.
Terrence and King why do
Terrence and King why do figure the North Tower didnt collapse rite when the South Tower went down?If these buildings were so damaged wouldnt 100+ floors collapseing cause the building rite next to it to fall at that time? Seeing as these buildings were built from the ground up (rather than from the sky down) what does it matter that the upper floors were damaged? If these upper floors collapsed due to damage dont you think at some point the rest of the building should have provided some resistance? Why do we bother with controlled demolitions planting thousands of explosives when you could just recreate the impact these planes provided with a singal bomb.? Amazeing the first 20 floors of those towers could support the 80 floors above them for decades yet when something happened to the upper floors the rest of the building crumbled. Im trying to figure this shit out and its just not working for me. What do you slapdicks make of it?
Jon Gold wrote, "Jones said
Jon Gold wrote,
"Jones said that models conducted in tests since 9/11 have not been able to duplicate what happened to the buildings."
He means his models only. Curious, isn't it? You DID know that, Jon, right?
Structural engineers know otherwise.
"He is not saying this is a proven theory, but rather a hypothesis."
You're so gullible, Jon. Remember what his press release says, the one that contradicts his statement you quoted? Need a reminder?
Here it is. Read it carefully before you write Jones to ask him about his own contradictions:
"Physics research establishes that only controlled demolitions are consistent with the near-gravity speed of fall and virtually symmetrical collapse of all three of the WTC buildings."
Did you catch the "only", Jon? Do you realize what that means? Don't you ever question how you're being used by Jones, Jon?
Jon Gold wrote, "How many
Jon Gold wrote,
"How many people want a fresh new investigation."
You're losing confidence, Jon, for someone claiming to know what happened.
But you won't get one unless you can give solid reasons why.
Sorry.
"The captain of emergency
"The captain of emergency medical services said "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" (page 15 -- pdf file; Google's web version is here)"
"Similiarly, the Assistant Fire Commissioner stated "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. . . ?” . In the same statement, the Assistant Commissioner recounts how a lieutenant firefighter he spoke with independently verified the flashes."
Find it all here:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10/ga_karin_deshore.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Grego...
Jon Gold wrote, "S. King...
Jon Gold wrote,
"S. King... does this remind you of anything?"
It reminds me of the intelligence, rational thinking, selflessness of the Founding Fathers, who crafted the Declaration of Independence and Constitution that gave us individual rights and the freedom of speech so that we can publicly and freely express our views about frauds and charlatans and protect ourselves from the mystical religious views of those who choose not to think or act rationally, but have their own selfish political self-interests at heart.
You could learn from those documents, Jon - if you would only choose to.
One question for you. Mr
One question for you. Mr King.
If the government has nothing to hide,
why has it sought to destroy the physical evidence, sought to silence discussion of the issues and sought to ridicule those who dare to say that the 911 Commission is inadequate?
"Jon Gold wrote, "The towers
"Jon Gold wrote,
"The towers were made of air?"
In terms of volume, somewhere between 80% to 90%. I have to look up the exact figure.
But you put up the picture so presumably you can see."
I see massive steel columns that aren't made of air.
Jon Gold wrote, "Jones said
Jon Gold wrote,
"Jones said that models conducted in tests since 9/11 have not been able to duplicate what happened to the buildings."
He means his models only. Curious, isn't it? You DID know that, Jon, right?
So you're saying NIST was able to duplicate what happened? Please let me see where. Thanks.
Structural engineers know otherwise.
"He is not saying this is a proven theory, but rather a hypothesis."
You're so gullible, Jon. Remember what his press release says, the one that contradicts his statement you quoted? Need a reminder?
Here it is. Read it carefully before you write Jones to ask him about his own contradictions:
"Physics research establishes that only controlled demolitions are consistent with the near-gravity speed of fall and virtually symmetrical collapse of all three of the WTC buildings."
Did you catch the "only", Jon? Do you realize what that means? Don't you ever question how you're being used by Jones, Jon?
I don't see his name on that press release. I see Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurty, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas Von Buelow. As a matter of fact, he wasn't the one to write that press release, yet, you're passing it off as if he had. Obviously whoever wrote it has an opinion about the theory regarding Controlled Demolition. That doesn't mean it's the same opinion of Professor Jones.
In other words, you lied.
"Jon Gold wrote, "S. King...
"Jon Gold wrote,
"S. King... does this remind you of anything?"
It reminds me of the intelligence, rational thinking, selflessness of the Founding Fathers, who crafted the Declaration of Independence and Constitution that gave us individual rights and the freedom of speech so that we can publicly and freely express our views about frauds and charlatans and protect ourselves from the mystical religious views of those who choose not to think or act rationally, but have their own selfish political self-interests at heart.
You could learn from those documents, Jon - if you would only choose to."
Obviously, if you think, "so that we can publicly and freely express our views about frauds and charlatans and protect ourselves from the mystical religious views of those who choose not to think or act rationally, but have their own selfish political self-interests at heart." is the only thing that document says, then YOU obviously have something to learn "from those documents".
S. King lied? IMAGINE that.
S. King lied? IMAGINE that.
S. King waited from 4:48 to
S. King waited from 4:48 to 9:33 to respond, after two more stories were added, hoping the thread would "die", to respond to what people are saying in the hopes that we wouldn't see his attempt at discrediting us with his LIES.
He's a lying coward.
google groups: "Sky
google groups: "Sky King"
Sky King proves he's a worse liar than he thought
Sky King tells 9/11 Denier, Starliar, to shut up or put up.
9/11 Denial Movement member, Sky King falls flat on his face
Where does Sky King's delusions end?
SKY KING RUNS AWAY
Jon Gold wrote, "How many
Jon Gold wrote,
"How many people want a fresh new investigation."
You're losing confidence, Jon, for someone claiming to know what happened.
Not at all... in regards to WTC7, I'm 100% sure it was Controlled Demolition. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and looks like a duck, chances are, it's a duck. However, Rudy Guiliani ordered the evidence removed so I can't prove it.
In fact, Larry Silverstein told me it was "pulled", and then they watched the building collapse, so whom am I going to believe? The owner of the building, or some lying troll on a blog?
But you won't get one unless you can give solid reasons why.
Sorry."
Because I want to know what Sibel Edmonds has to say. I want to know exactly how many Wargames were taking place that day, and I want to know exactly what took place during each. Who planned them, and who the so-called, "Maestro" was. I want to know why Norman Mineta's testimony was omitted from the 9/11 Report. I want to know why Senator Mark Dayton told us that we were lied to. I want to know why family members are unsatisfied with the commission and it's report.
Good enough reasons?
It appears that there are a
It appears that there are a lot of disinfo agents who are also "lost in fog, light on fuel, looking to land, and near stall speed".
The mounting pile of evidence, assembled, vetted and coalesced thanks to the tools of the Internet,
will soon bring down Bush and Cheney at near free fall speed.
I spent hours last night reading in the archives at "rigorous intuition".
I wonder how much time S. King and Terrence have spent reading the information assembled at the best of the web sites devoted to 9/11 and related issues.
I wish we could get 100 Congressman and 50 top journalists to spend a day perusing the "cooperative research" timelines.
Today is "May Day".
M'aider.
M'aider.
M'aider.
Share that info with us,
Share that info with us, Mssr.Jouet!
Posted in the comment
Posted in the comment section above
Hey Guys I Need Help.
Where does it say the average time NORAD took to intercept a plane before 9/11? I know about the 67 times..but someone is trying to tell me it took over an hour to intercept Payne Stewarts Plane..and most intercepts take over an hour.