The 9/11 Fact File - new major article
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,451741,00.html
The biggest political magazine in Germany, Der Spiegel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Spiegel), has a dandy new 911 article. It is increasingly hard to argue against 911 truth with a straight face as the article’s arguments against the demolition hypothesis proves. Here is just a couple of their ‘points’ and why they couldn’t be more wrong:
“Why did the towers fall so quickly?”, they ask, then they answer:
“flammable materials inside - such as carpets, curtains, furniture and plastics - helped increase the temperature at the top of the towers to almost 1,000 C”
- So ignoring the fact that the air temp of 1000c would NOT have resulted in a steel temp of 1000c, the main problem with this argument is that it does not answer the question. The question is how to make the ‘it just fell down’ hypothesis fit the evidence of the fall time.
“Could the towers have been blown up?”, they ask, then they answer:
“demolishing two buildings the size of the Twin Towers would have been a massive undertaking.”
- Do we even need to respond to this silly argument?
- believeyourowneyes's blog
- Login to post comments
This Spiegel article
was originally published in german language on Sep. 7th. 2006.
It was a hit piece, but some points have a lesser strengtness than before. In fact, after reading some of the points they made I didn't get their intention on it, as it partially contradicts the official version or leave conflicting theories.
I did a point by point reply in german language and sent it back, without a reply, as always.
You can find it here: http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=968722#post96...
Besides that, some users in Gerhard Wisnewskis forum did an analysis, too:
http://www.gerhard-wisnewski.de/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t...
My guess: The people behind "Der Spiegel" knew at least that is was an inside job, they did the split between further supporting the official theory and began raising little suspicions.
Sorry, It looks like a mix-up
from this older article and a new one.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,436054,00.html
amusing/frustrating article quotes
Mohammed Atta was "particularly devout and abstemious" -LOL
"Piece by piece, rescue workers and investigators scoured the site for clues - body parts, fragments of bone, teeth or personal items." But not for evidence of CD obviously.
"The 9/11 Commission Report said that the defense of U.S. air space was not performed in compliance with the existing procedures: 'What ensued was a hurried attempt to improvise a defense by civilians who had never handled a hijacked aircraft that attempted to disappear, and by a military unprepared for the transformation of commercial aircraft into weapons of mass destruction.'" *sigh*....
"To pull off such a staggering operation, an army of the complicit would be required: pilots, demolition experts, soldiers and air traffic controllers. With so many coconspirators, one of them surely would have talked by now." pilots, soldiers, and ATC? wtf? how about just a handful of demolition experts working over the course of several months and about two dozen top government, military, and intelligence officials. sound about right?
Fighting for G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, and Drugs) is available now for pre-order on Amazon.
This SPIEGEL article is an utter joke
An insult to anyone's intelligence:
officials placed their first call to Atlantic City,
whose response center had been defunct for some time.
who writes this shit?
more bizarre news-paper items:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/12/weird-stuff-in-press.html
Maybe not as bizarre as the belief that aeroplanes that do this --- can smash into a steel building and vanish.
Oh yes, I forgot the "blade of grass that cut into a tree after being accelerated by a tornado.
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/12/weird-stuff-in-press.html