Support 911Blogger


Family Speaks Out About 9-11 Truth Group In KC

http://www.nbcactionnews.com/news/local/story/Family-Speaks-Out-About-9-11-Truth-Group-In-KC/xV4u-497b0uNk-ktRUnFXw.cspx?r...

Family Speaks Out About 9-11 Truth Group In KC
Reported by: Lindsay Shively
Email: Shively@nbcactionnews.com
Last Update: 10/27 6:10 pm
Local Family Speaks Out About 9-11 Doubt

* Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

SHAWNEE, Kan. - Bob and Shirley Hemenway have spent the last eight years dealing with the death of their son. ET1 Ronald Hemenway, 37, was killed when a plane crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

"People have come up to us and told us to our face that our son deserved to die because he was in the military," said Shirley Hemenway.

The Hemenways say they have seen and heard indisputable evidence that a group of men now detained at Guantanamo Bay plotted the attacks that sent hijacked planes crashing into the Pentagon in Washington D.C., a field in Pennsylvania, and the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City.

One group disputes the evidence given by the United States government about what happened on September 11, 2001.

The Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth say they have indisputable forensic evidence that contradicts at least part of the government's accounts of what happened.

The Hemenways deny the government that their son worked for is behind the attacks that killed so many American men and women.

"It just makes me angry that people can make money off of a tragedy like this by giving people ideas like it may have happened another way or all that kind of stuff," said Hemenway.

Ronald Hemenway is one of five victims whose remains have never been found.

To view the argument from the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, you can read it on their website: http://www.ae911truth.org/

Thank Lindsay Shively and Post a Comment
Email: Shively@nbcactionnews.com

People making money off of

People making money off of this tragedy-like those persons at the non-profit based organization at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth?

the people making money off 9/11

are those who orchestrated the whole thing, ie the war party and their banksters, big oil, arms manufactures and the private military corporations, not to mention corrupt politicians, drug barons, intelligence and security agencies, the pentagon and the mainstream media.

Another deceived family member

I was debating whether to post this as a blog entry; this is as good a place as any...

The Real 9/11 “Truth”

Article begins:

"As you may know, there’s a crazy fringe movement in America called “9/11 Truth.” The adherents are typically called “truthers” and they believe the United States government was somehow involved in, or responsible for the 9/11 attacks of 2001..."

And goes on to cite the opinions of a 911 Family Member who insists that the Islamic faith be properly blamed for the attacks, as if it hadn't already:

“Peter Gadiel wants everyone to remember his son, James, who was killed during the September 11 terrorist attacks.”

“And he also wants people to remember how he died: “Murdered by Muslim terrorists.”James Gadiel

“For Gadiel, any tribute to his son would be woefully incomplete without those words.”

“I think it’s important, because I think there’s a nationwide effort to suppress the identity of the people who were involved in the attacks,” Gadiel told Fox News.

Eight years ago, 23-year-old James Gadiel worked for Cantor Fitzgerald on the 103rd floor of the World Trade Center. He died when a hijacked plane crashed into the North Tower.

For years, Gadiel’s hometown of Kent, Conn., has wanted to honor the young man with a memorial plaque next to its town hall. But the tribute has hit a snag because James’ father wants to include the phrase, “Murdered by Muslim terrorists,” under his son’s name.

For Peter Gadiel, it is a central fact of the Sept. 11 attacks that is often left out.

“It isn’t just overlooked, it’s suppressed,” Gadiel said. “It’s simply wrong to imply that people just died. The buildings didn’t just collapse, they didn’t just fall down — they were attacked by people with a specific identity, a specific purpose.”

“Town officials call the phrase too controversial for a small town memorial, and they recently voted against erecting the plaque if Gadiel insists on the language.”

“We perceive ourselves as a very warm, loving town,” said Ruth Epstein, a Kent selectman and one of two town leaders to vote the plaque down. “To disparage any one ethnic group is just against everything that we stand for here.”

“Epstein noted that other Sept. 11 memorials, like the one at the Pentagon, don’t mention Muslim terrorists, and she said she does not want to alienate any members of her small and close-knit community.”

“We have at least one Muslim family living here with children and it — it would be just awful to have them see something like that,” Epstein told Fox News.”

--

In this family member's demented universe, Muslims have not suffered ENOUGH for 911.

Article ends, without a hint of irony:

George Orwell has never seemed so relevant.

http://americanglob.com/2009/10/28/the-real-911-truth/

Some truth here

In spite of himself, he's right on a couple of points:

' I think there’s a nationwide effort to suppress the identity of the people who were involved in the attacks,'

Yes, there is!

'The buildings didn’t just collapse, they didn’t just fall down'

Right again!

As for stories like this, and the one posted above, further confirmation that we are in the 'then they attack you' phase.

Then again...

Then again, it isn't all 'attack' when you consider that the NBC story does include a link to the Architects and Engineers site. Might this be an instance of a reporter trying to slip one past the editors under the cover of a hit piece?

TWO DIRECT LINKS!

If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?
http://www.northtexas911truth.com/

AE911Truth ! mentioned! and linked! (clever reporter)

This is the way to spin news.

Click...

Here, and here. We have to change the way people perceive us.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

Science is "hard evidence"

Since November of 2005 when a heroic physicist named Steven E. Jones came forward with his research and explained to the world that the laws of physics could not account for the collapse of three buildings on 9/11 the views of "most" 9/11 Truth researchers changed forever.. The argument that the U.S. government hid behind for negligence or incompetent no longer seemed plausible.

As the U.S. government continued to spin its web of incompetence and "We Didn't Know!" No matter how many previous warnings that the U.S. had before 9/11. No matter how many U.S. visas were issued in Saudi Arabia to known terrorists. No matter how many times that NORAD changed it's story to the 9/11 Commission. No matter how many FAA and military protocols were broken on 9/11. No matter that Guiliani used the excuse that he was getting rid of the steel and debris from GroundZero quickly in order to get NYC back up and running. No matter if Mohammed Atta, a supposed 'Islamic fanatic', liked to do lines of coke, drink alcohol, lap dances and hang out in strip bars. The "laws of physics" stand firm and are not questionable.

Simple science proves the inside job aspect of 9/11. Both WTC towers fell at near 'freefall acceleration'. Freefall acceleration is described as the time it would take to drop an object a given distance until it reaches the ground with only gravity as the downward force. Ex: the time it would take to drop a baseball off the top of one of the 110 storey World Trade Center buildings until it hit the street below with only air as the resistant force. (About 9.2 seconds.) Therefore, as each tower collapsed, how is it physically possible for them to collapse at this speed with all of the massive steel and concrete support structure below giving NO RESISTANCE? Also, what was the energy force that caused massive multi-ton steel support columns to be ejected laterally outward up to 600 feet embedding them into nearby buildings? What was the energy force that caused all of the concrete to be pulverized into a fine powder covering all of lower Manhattan? The Physics Law of Conservation of Momentum does not allow for this. You can't have it both ways. If the Official Government Conspiracy Theory claims that the weight of the part of the building above the plane impact area crushed the lower structure how can it also have the energy to eject the steel outward and pulverize the concrete too? Simple answer. It can't.

It's simply science. The only way the three WTC buildings could fall at this rate is that the structure columns were being removed (demolished using explosives) as the buildings fell causing no resistance. The laws of physics don't/can't lie. Governments and their paid propagandists can and do.

Then take into account the 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe', a peer-reviewed scientific paper and the scientific evidence or "hard evidence" is indisputable. Unlike the negligence and incompetence stories.

The next question to be asked is "How is it possible for large quantities of high-tech nanothermite to be placed in the Twin Towers and WTC 7?" Only a thorough and independent 9/11 investigation will bring those answers.

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

I'm not...

Talking about the "science" so please don't bombard me with arguments about how a "Controlled Demolition" took place at the towers, and building 7 (something I'm not qualified to tell you about one way or the other). I'm talking about the way people perceive us. You know... cause I want us to succeed as opposed to arguing about how those buildings came down for all eternity. That fact is, true or not, there has been a concerted effort over the years to make 9/11 Truth synonymous with "Controlled Demolition." Something that is VERY HARD for MOST people to believe. I realize that my view isn't popular. This isn't a popularity contest. This is an effort to end the murder, mayhem, and fascism taking place as a result of that day. "Controlled Demolition" isn't cutting it. People need to understand WHY we are fighting, moreso than WHAT we are fighting about. That's why I made this flyer yesterday, and plan on making more.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

And sometimes...

The truth is just the truth, and the truth is we were lied to about the day that created the "Post-9/11 World." A world that is a detriment to humanity.

You shouldn't have to be a scholar to understand the need for 9/11 Truth.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

I can't imagine a good reason why somebody would down-rate this

I can't imagine a good reason why somebody would down-rate your comment. Apparently, some people hold grudges against you.

The soapblox software used at, e.g., openleft.com keeps track of who up-rates and down-rates somebody's comments. Too bad 911blogger doesn't have a similar capability.

http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org

Show "It's very simple..." by Jon Gold

I agree the voting system

I agree the voting system here is worthless.

I don't think it necessarily needs to show who votes which way on comments. Although that would be the most transparent system of all! However such a system might lead to an even higher level of grudges among the ranks!

But it would be nice to have a transparent system like, say, Amazon or Digg, where we can see the total number of votes: How many people voted up and how many people voted down the comment. If 15 people vote up a comment and then another 15 vote it right back down, it's ridiculous that the final display should simply say "0 points" as if no one ever voted on it at all. It's important for viewers to see that 30 people voted on the comment!

Digg has a "thumbs up" icon followed by a number, right next to a "thumbs down" icon followed by a number. Amazon has a comment voting system which, as an example, reads: "7 of 12 people think this post adds to the discussion."

I made these concerns known to Justin Keogh several months back. His first response was that, yes, the system was flawed and it was on their agenda to fix it. About a month later, he did a 180, saying he thinks the en totale youtube style system we have is good enough, that the movement had many important things to focus on, that it would take time and computer programming to change the system, and that sorry, it is not on the agenda any time soon. I only wrote Justin though, this was before I knew the [deleted by mod; 911blogger] email address. Perhaps it's time to refresh these concerns to the team as a whole.

For the record, I did not downvote the above comments.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

Well vote me down

My tentative hypothesis is that you and Jon just don't like it when you get downvoted on Flight 77 and CD.
Maybe there should be a lower default viewing threshold, at least. The up+down thumbs style sounds good too.

Yes we were lied to...

What I am saying is that the government and their propagandist shills continue to use the negligence/incompetence theory to cover up "everything" about 9/11. But the science is indisputable. That's why they won't attempt to factually discuss the science.

Remember Michael Chertoff being bombarded with 9/11 questions on C-SPAN recently? Although people mentioned the scientific evidence on air to him his comments were to laugh at the "no planes struck the Twin Towers" theory. An obvious disinfo attempt by the proponents of that idea. Then he equated 9/11 Truthers with Holocaust Denial.

As you know, the United States has drastically fallen behind so many other countries when it comes to producing mathematicians and scientists. The further dumbing down of America. So many people will hear the scientific (physics) evidence and their eyes glaze over. That's why the controlled demolition/physics aspect of 9/11 is so difficult for many to grasp. That and the fact that we have all been so propagandized by our government and mainstream media to believe that "our government loves us" and conspiracies don't exist.

The science IS the exacting hard evidence of an inside job. No matter if most people understand it or not. The government and complicit media will continue to parrot the incompetence/negligence theory on all else as they have done for the past eight years.

Like you, I want this to be exposed some day (ASAP), The crimes that have been committed nationally and internationally in the name of 9/11 must be revealed for the profit making motives that the global war on terrorism has exhibited. But until we can get a new investigation or some significant insiders come forward with documented first hand knowledge of the government complicity, science is the only pure hard evidence that we have.

Will the 9/11 Truth Movement ever reach the critical mass stage or will this end up like the JFK assassination?

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

In my opinion...

Not if we don't successfully reach out to the masses in a way they are susceptible to. In a way that shows them how they are being affected by 9/11, and WHY they need to address the issue. You know that I have successfully argued against the idea that they were "incompetent" 1000x over right? Here's one example of that.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

Something I'm Not Qualified To Tell You About

Jon.

My 13 year old daughter knows enough physics to know WTC were CD . You dont need to be qualified, you just have to have some intelligence and a very basic understanding of science. Are you claiming not to have this? In which case why should anyone listen to what you have to say anyway.

Why cant you either accept CD as proven , or openly deny that it is and debate it. By trying to avoid it , you imply it is not true, alienating all those who do,and giving the impression to the world that we are divided. Why not have a poll here so bloggers can vote on whether cd or any other evidence is the best way to go. No one suggests that other evidence is not worth persuing, do it, but why keep denying the value of CD at the same time?

"Something that is VERY HARD for MOST people to believe."
That is your opinion . I and I dare to suggest the majority of 911 truth do not agree ,David Ray Griffin Ae911truth included.

Why not put it to a vote here, and then stop using your editorial influence to promote your minority view (if it proves to be so)

I'm not...

Going to be bullied into believing anything by anyone on this site. My work over these last 7 years should speak for itself. I have no "editorial influence" at this site. If it is my opinion, then why is it STILL the #1 pushback I get from people? I don't even have to mention it, and I get attacked as "one of those people who thinks there were explosives in the buildings."

Again, we need to change the way people perceive us if we are going to be successful.

I also realize that as infiltrated as this movement is, the chances of that happening are next to nothing. However, I would rather try and fail than not try at all.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

So what is it Jon? 1. I

So what is it Jon?

1. I accept that the evidence WTC was CD is conclusive but I dont think it is the best way to persuade others.
2. I dont believe CD therefore I wont support it.
3. I dont know enough to be able to decide if CD is conclusive?

Rather than your suggestion that everyone else is trying to force a CD or nothing face on the movement, It is you yourself who perpetuates this controversy by constantly self publicizing your disagreement with a lot of the movement and their efforts , whilst at the same time implying there is something wrong with CD.No one dismisses the value of other directions. It is actually you that is dismissing the value of CD .

No one can ever bully someone into believing anything.

You have done much work within the movement , but seem to be trying to lead it in an (unpopular- your words) direction , But unless you actually declare what it is that you believe, it is hard to support you when the whole issue caused by your stance is so divisive.

It is a very small effort on your part to actually put all this to rest and embrace Diversity without YOU countering the efforts of others who are as sincere in this cause as you are.

Show "I don't think..." by Jon Gold

Philosophy

"CD is as valuable or conclusive as you think it is."
I assume you mean the evidence of CD here, and that everyone agrees CD conclusively disproves the government story.

However I believe that evidence can be conclusive, even though you don't think it is.

I assume one reason why you don't want people to promote CD is that you don't understand it. Maybe if you were able to explain why you don't understand it, you could convince some people to stop promoting it, even if they themselves were convinced. After all, it's not only Jon Gold who doesn't feel his physics is up to scratch!

For instance, you seem to be implying that in order to understand the physics involved you would have to be 'qualified'. If so, what as?

Show "AHAHAHA..." by Jon Gold

False

I have replied to several posts since I last replied to you.

This is quite egotistical!

And I'm sorry if I don't find this particularly amusing. You seem to have a more 'refined' sense of humor.

Show "According to the tracker..." by Jon Gold

And..

was it a reply to you?

Unlike you, I am not privy to your personal itinerary.

Maybe we should take this outside, instead of polluting this thread.

Everyone...

Has access to the tracker.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

If I actually knew what you

If I actually knew what you believed it would be easier to answer your claim that CD is not as valuable or conclusive as I think it is.

It is conclusive to anyone who understands basic science.

It is also valuable because it is the best way to affect change.
Let me guess, you would rather talk about the $100,000 to Atta ?
Which makes people think Al Qaida were responsible after all? So there is not really much point in an investigation?
Fog of war/ grey areas but we basically went after the right Guys?

The problem is not just 911, it is the system that allowed 911 to happen and be covered up.
CD not only proves an inside job, It also shows the complicity of MSM in the crime, That is a path to real change,
I am not sure what it is that you actually want to change(Except the focus of the movement)

so you are saying there are no objective facts at all?

darkbeforedawn

Science is the foundation of modern thought and life. It consists of certain basic tenants..such as the requirement that procedures that produce definable results must be reproduceable. Following this line of thought, anyone could conceivably get a sample of the WTC dust and using the techniques described in Harrit's and co. paper isolate and identify an extraordinarily large amounts of nanothermitic particles of high energetic potential. We all can calculate and measure rates of acceleration and free fall speeds using still photography and videos. Anyone can examine the photographic evidence of CD including the giant girders embedded in structures as far away as 500 feet and reach their own conclusions.
If however, your preconceived notions about what you want 911 truth "to look like" get in your way of accepting objective FACTS, you need instruction in the scientific method not just in physics 101.

So let me get this straight Jon.

You want the 9/11 truth movement to stop talking about CD with the general public in favor of some other evidence that you consider more compelling and easier to understand, and you want to do this for tactical reasons of reaching more people? Does that sum up your position?

controlled demolition

anyone who does not believe that wtc7 collapsed due to controlled demolition has to be mistrusted at best and working for the other side, a spook or real dumb.

Show "Definitely..." by Jon Gold

witch hunt?

no at all.Your attitude on this issue is not doing you any favors.Maybe your just stubborn.
There are only 3 possibilities.1.wtc 7 collapsed due to fires(small ones)2.C Demolition.3.A fluke of nature.

Only one of those 3 seems reasonable to me.

It's time for us to pull together...

and all of us pitch in for a fund that will pay for Jon Gold to take a semester or two of "physics" classes at his local community college. LOL

Introduction to Physics- Clearly Explained
http://clearlyexplained.com/technology/science/physics/index.html

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

Show "Wow..." by Jon Gold

Yes I did. Thank you!

By judging the vote count I'd say many others liked my idea also.

Let me give you a few clear examples as to why "we" should not shy away from the controlled demolition argument. Using your approach you are expecting people whom you are trying to influence to examine the facts about 9/11 Truth to invest a large quantity of time researching all of the missed warning about Al Qaeda, the FBI whistleblowers who came forward, the U.S. ties to Pakistan and the ISI, the 75% of the questions that were unanswered to the 9/11 victims family members by the 9/11 Commission, the protocols of NORAD and the FAA etc. You and I and many others here have taken the time to research all of those things but do you really expect the average person on the street to take that much time and energy?

I'm speaking from example when i say that when you are out on the street at a 9/11 Truth action or attending a community event or even a Tea Party you have very little time to speak to and influence people. Sometimes it's just a few words as they pass by and you hand them a flyer or a dvd. And different people will react to different subjects. But one thing that is very compelling is to show them a clip of WTC 7 falling down (maybe even side by side with a known controlled demolition) and mention the speed of collapse. That gets people's attention!

So far I've found that the three subjects that work best are to mention WTC 7 or the fact that four planes flew around in U.S. airspace for almost two hours untouched and that so many 9/11 family members are calling for a new investigation.

The time issue is our biggest setback in confronting others with all of this evidence. I try to chose my information selectively with that fact in mind. Your research is solid but not as obvious as some other subjects.

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

never stop learning....

darkbeforedawn
I hope that all of us here keep open minds and hearts to information that is always coming out. I think that Cincy is just hoping, jon, that you will keep on studying and learning and not lock yourself into a very narrow view point.
There is much we don't know and may never know. You seem to have set a lot of limits on what we "should" and "should not" be talking about or thinking about. This is puzzling.

Show "Nope..." by Jon Gold

?

It's the 21st Century Jon.
Gravity and resistance aren't considered 'flashy" theories any more.

Show "Hey..." by Jon Gold

Useful information

"There is much we don't know and may never know."

And the chances of getting Jon to explain why he doesn't understand would appear to be diminishing. This is useful information as most who have seen the evidence and are not convinced would presumably say something similar like 'I don't understand' or 'I'm not qualified'.

In other words, you shouldn't be trying to convince Jon of CD, but instead convincing him to explain why he doesn't understand.

Show "My point is..." by Jon Gold

If your best CD presentation

If your best CD presentation is just to hand over the nanothermite paper, then I am not surprised you don’t have much success with it.

Try This:
Here are 2 tennis balls one over a tower of bricks, one over thin air.
Which one hits the ground first when dropped?
The one in thin air.
WTC7 fell down at the same speed as the ball in thin air.(For a period, as acknowledged by nist)
For this to happen ALL 25 steel columns and ALL the interconnections had to be severed at the same time BEFORE the building fell.

What melted steel?
Hydrocarbon fires don’t melt the steel on your gas cooker do they?

Additionally, rather than a pancake of floors in a pile, all the concrete was turned to dust.
Where did that energy come from?

This too brainy for you Jon?
--------------------------------------------------------

The nanothermite paper is the icing on the cake- IF you want detailed chain of custody forensic evidence

If I knew nothing else about you, your ridiculous comment above would lead me to believe you were a disinformation agent, misrepresenting CD evidence in a most blatant straw man attack.

Might I suggest that in the minute that you needed to explain the above people might be less bored than wading through your 50 circumstantial arguments (NOT facts)
Testimony is not necessarily factual, it has to be proved to be.(Unlike the laws of science)

In any case half your 'facts' suggest Al Qaieda were responsible anyway so what is the big deal with 911truth anyway ?

What is more, not all the families seek 911 truth, many accept the OT. (As this article showed)

Your facts #15 & #23 Exactly what percentage of them do you claim to represent in seeking re investigation?. There will always be more witnesses like this who can be presented , if anyone brings them up you look stupid.

The neocons also talked about full spectral dominance including the internet. There is much evidence to suggest that many are covertly working to discredit or divert 911 truth.
God forbid that any of these might be ex government employees dangling titbits of fairly innocuous circumstantial hearsay!

Above all the tactic is always to divide and neutralize. Divide and neutralize? who does that remind you of Jon?

Jon, do your own thing, but David Griffin and Ae911 truth have achieved much more than you ever will in terms of awareness, so why keep downgrading their message ?
If you still don't get it from the above very simple explanation, then keep your minority view to yourself.

Point taken

I agree about the thermitic paper for some people, though I do think it looks impressive, and credible. I think 'physics' sounds good too, but know it makes many people think 'boring, hard, school..'. So it might be a good idea to use that word less. Maybe even 'science', after all Sibel Edmond's testimony (for example) is a scientific theory that contains observations and explanations. We just don't talk about everything that way.

However the main evidence for CD is really freefall. This doesn't depend on physics (as such) or building construction. Maybe when people say 'three year old' they're not saying 'the maths is really easy'.. so much as it's a kind of instinctual knowledge we have that things fall slower with things beneath them.

Never in the history of the world has scientific evidence (the 911 videos) been so important. They had been pretty careful for a long time, but they took a risk and dropped the ball (let's hope that wasn't deliberate?!). We have it on tape. The oligarchs are upset and the press is complicit. This is a one in a million chance, and so we have a responsibility to use it.

People who discuss CD are always trying to make their explanations easier to understand, so I think what suprises (and worries?) people most is that you are intelligent and interested in it, yet you don't understand, or (worse?) remain unconvinced. But this gives you a different, and very useful, angle.

You think politics, health etc. are easier for most people to understand. But maybe you have more luck persuading people with these points because you find it easy and you aren't convinced by CD. Many people will find that sort of stuff very difficult to take in. To them it is complex, subjective, ambiguous, and overwhelming! The government effectively killed hundreds of responders to open wall street? Well, more soldiers than that have died in Iraq, and over a million Iraqis. Not to mention the other wars instigated by the empire. At least subconciously, many people already know the sociopaths are running the asylum, and so don't expect any really useful change through 'normal' politics.

Conversely, those who think more about CD will probably get more mileage out of that. It's more to do with what you're comfortable with, or most interested in. Poor presentation can confuse people more than subject matter.

Bearing that in mind I'll wrap this up, just don't forget you can educate the proponents of CD on how to reach people who aren't so into it, and then we all win. The case is being built, whether for court or not, and we need many eggs in many baskets.

That pamphlet is great, so are the physical laws of the cosmos

Jon, that is a very deep pamphlet you have created. It is very important that while you argue for why it is important for us as a community dedicated, or as the Rastas I know would say, livicated to "end the murder, mayhem, and fascism taking place" to focus on how we might be perceived, you don't disrespect the idea of the common experience that we call reality. To put things like "science" and "controlled demolition" in quotations is to pretend as if it is impossible to know anything. Of course, on a deeper level, all knowing is provisional as the sun will eventually overtake the earth, the cosmos will probably contract again and the possibilities for the future laws of the physical universe will potentially hang in the balance. However, for the time being, your argument will be much stronger if you will honor the truth of reality as you argue for why we need to present ourselves in a different light.

If you were to say, "of course science and the known laws of the physical universe show that those buildings and our fellow human beings were destroyed in controlled demolitions of some sort, but I think that we would be more effective in reaching our desired goals if we were to approach the issue from the perspective of something like my here deep pamphlet," you would really get where you say you want to get much more ethically and effectively. People want to know that you honor the reality of our commonly inhabited physical universe just as much as you honor the crucial nature of what we are trying to accomplish.

p.s. That really is a great pamphlet. Let's get that out along with the material from the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth ( www.ae911truth.org )

“Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool.” –Plato

"We must speak the truth about terror." --George W. Bush

Science is at the core of 9/11 Truth

The evidence that controlled demolition was the cause of the three WTC towers destruction is overwhelming. Massive quantities of the military grade high explosive (nanothermite) were used to bring down the WTC towers, as shown by multiple rigorous experiments on Ground Zero dust samples.

Here is the perr-reviewed scientific publication: http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000...

Science is the core of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

make that "peer-reviewed"

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Show us the indisputable evidence!

The article says:

"The Hemenways say they have seen and heard indisputable evidence that a group of men now detained at Guantanamo Bay plotted the attacks.."

Really?

Could someone show us this indisputable evidence?

I'm sure that won't happen!

Maybe Jesus told them

I'm assuming that is Jesus, looking deflated in the background.

deleted

deleted

Yeah, sure

' say they have seen and heard indisputable evidence'

I believe that's what's known as 'hearsay' evidence, which isn't supposed to count for much in our legal system.

I'm reminded of how Davin Coburn of 'Popular Mechanics' tried that ploy during a radio interview, talking about pictures which supposedly prove such-and-such that had supposedly been shown to them by the government, but not to any of the rest of us (but the radio host called him on it on that occasion!).

^

personal attacks

hey everyone- i read the original article that we're all commenting on
i joined nbcactionnews thingy in order to report the rude comments that were posted by people who were being very disrespectful to the elderly couple
in fact there were several violations that i reported
Peace to Jon
and RG is all about peace- I know, I met him
Douglas Hilton

Several 'violations'?

I'm sorry Doug, but I think you are overreacting a bit.

At the time of writing there are ten comments listed.

I can only find three that I could imagine you would find objectionable:

1. PCGr42 - I'll give you this one. But it's probably a kid, they even lol.
2. Pat Curley - A particularly unpleasant stooge. It seems either him or Mark Roberts show up on every MSM piece. He is not being disrespectful of the couple, but rather AE911.
3. Auberon B - A good post, and I learned of the existence of the 'Jesus couch'. I like this one! Maybe the Jesus angle is actually central to the story? Could the couch be a kind of subliminal message? Like the flag below it/on her shirt.

Would it be fair to say the couple are being disrespectful of activists, whom they imply are in it for the money?
And going out on a limb, I've often wondered if newspapers pay for these kinds of story.

hi device!

i concede!
at that time of the morning (here in uk) 3(+) seemed like several!
was waiting for red bull high to fade B4 i could go to bed!
(had to drink it 4 work, 4 road safety reasons!)
obviously i'm with u on your 1 + 2
the comment number (my macbook seems to have no hash sign) 3 that u mentioned - i jus think that in the circumstances, well, imagining if the couple themselves read it- then that for them would reinforce in their mind that the 9/11 tm is a bunch of - whatever
also imagine if someone else read the couch comment who had not yet woken up to 9/11 truth- i think again they would be distracted by the level suitability of humour in the tragic situation
jus my point of view- we know a lot lot more than the man in the street but to convince the man in the street- that would be a great goal
Douglas

These folks need a history lesson

I feel for them as i lost good friends, not a son, but people I loved in NYC. When I saw the towers turn to dust I knew what that was demolition. I worked in the South Tower WTC and have quasi architectural experience as a student of architecture at Rice University with practical experience in building with heavy steel in structures of same. Knowing the real history of the ways and means we've gotten involved in wars over the last nearly 100 years led me to believe the worst. Those fears have been confirmed through hard science thanks to ae911truth.org....For the naysayers if these scientists find the presence of the same nano-thermitic compounds found in samples of WTC dust in bone fragments from the unfortunate murdered in the WTC on 9/11, will you come around ? Our govt are proven liars people, liars and thieves who turn a blind eye to close to 2 million dead civilians in Iraq....not to mention our own dead...For Gods sake we're guarding poppy fields.
I can't feel sorry for people with their heads buried in the sand. Thats the reason we're where we are in the first place. WAKE UP OR BE EATEN ALIVE, THE TIME IS SHORT.

jon

i read your here and here comment
i think your points are fair to bring to the NINE/ELEVEN TRUTH table and i'm mulling them over in the sense that it's the Dave Frascas of this world who people like MCR mention with a tangible trail of evidence leading to them vis a vis actual prosecutions and perhaps CD is in a way like the Zapruder film- not relevant in initial stages of prosecutuions if there were to be a nurnberg prosecution of Frasca , Cheney, at al
but CD grows the movement and wakes the people
CD was good for me as I studied math/incl applied math(basic physics) at senior high (i think u call it- im in uk) and uni so i grasped suddenly and shockingly the fakeness of the official story- having been led to it by family i must confess btw of my paternal cousins we either believe gage or have a sibling who believes gage now- 4 of us and hopefully growing!
however once awake people like me need to be pointed towards the other stuff too- thanks all who do this, jon and others
pls continue to inform/ share views even if at odds with others of us
re CD u have perhaps a bit of a different approach to me but all roads lead to rome
ignore the bear baiting- it's obvious to the intelligent reader that some people are just being pushy and looking to make an argument- i advise u dont rise to it + that u show that ur the better man by saying peace and ignore the personal stuff (- i always look 4 ur comments as i value them)
if u show they get to u they'll do it "e to the power" more (exponentially)
believe me they're not misleading anyone and they know it- poss objective only to make u think they are/ jus to get to you or...
they may or not have objectives- in fact they may even be mental- reminds me about what RG told me- he actually had a face to face with someone who had been dogging his work in 9/11 truth and when he finally met the guy, the guys eyes were like all over sort of left right left right - cuckooo you know
RG will back this. He's super peaceful. he jus felt sorry 4 the guy i think.
if the 9/11 truth movement is diluted with either infiltrators or just mentals it really doesn't matter- they're people ('less they found it costs less to use computers!- no pension!) anyway, they're people so step by them, make ur point and remember peeps like me read sites like this like the ruskies read pravda back in the day. hold it like this then upside down then turn it - the truth's there- u jus gotta know how to read it
PS near 11000 with my farrakhan911+fed on youtube thanx mainly to the guys who distributed it out thru their blogs after i naughtily spammed it around the comments.. sorry - the passion overtook me, anyway i got thanked and nice comments- some from people normally outside the truth movement (deleted the mental ones!)

Show "Are you single?" by influence device

device

no, not single, happily in a relationship
u have a wicked sense of humour (uk spelling) !
re 9/11 humour have u seen the subversive lecture of tinfoil hat lady
http://www.spike.com/video/subversive-lecture/2879351?cid=YSSP
another bit of humour is, thinking about cheney on his way to the bunker, where the official story is he was secret serviced there so quick his feet hardly touched the floor- something MCR says in a lecture thats on youtube reminded me of that - yes cheney's feet may have hardly touched the floor but my take is, imagine a cartoon character when they're about to run really quick- there's that whirl of action where their fet go round and round as they run on the spot for a bit then they run off like a bullet from a gun with the pyowm! sound too! more like that kind of "feet not touching the ground" in eagerness to use his promis software to manipulate the day's events!
peace to u and your friend!

'secret serviced'

Heheh. Thanks for the video, I haven't seen that yet.

I was just thinking about Cheney going to the Pentagon yesterday. But then, I think about Cheney in the Pentagon most days :( I agree he'd been aching to get in the hot seat, so to speak, he'd been planning it for a very long time (COG).

It would be good to see more cartoons regarding 911 etc., I can think of the south park episode and the comic version of the commission report, but little else? There is something ridiculous about the days events.

Thanks for taking my comment in good humour, and peace to you, too.

Douglas , I agree with what

Douglas ,
I agree with what you said, and I hope that you don't mean my comments here when you suggest baiting and argumentative.
If that is how I came across then I apologize.

I am open to discussions about anything, and do not discount what Jon has contributed or has to say on this issue.
But it is very important to understand what the issue is.

Is it that CD is not conclusive ? then we should always be prepared to discuss any reservations openly so that the evidence can be challenged.

Is it that CD is conclusive but too difficult for people to understand? In which case we either try to present the CD argument in a more accessible form or make choices about whether a person is likely to follow collapse logic.

Is it preconceptions that 911truth is CD only , and people will instantly turn off when it is mentioned? Well then firstly canvass everyone's experience to see if this is actually widely true, and then, if it is, then maybe re-brand CD , include variety, or adapt our presentations to avoid that preconception, or again select presentations depending on assessment of the persons preconceptions.

Jon obviously has something to say on this point, but has always been too vague and not prepared to discuss his objections, so you have the worst possible scenario where a valued truther appears to be dissing CD , but wont discuss why.

Furthermore, In my experience reading these sites, it is not as Jon Claimed people bullying him and the movement into a cd only policy.
I have yet to see anyone suggest there should be CD and nothing else. On the contrary it is Jon who usually raises the issue by implying Cd is problematic and inconclusive but then refuses to discuss why. I do not object to Jon or anyone else doing what they think works best, but I object to him using his influence and high profile on 911 sites to try and persuade others against CD, without proper focused discussion on the issue.

What is more worrying for me is that this view often leads to the conclusion that the best way is to concentrate on agreements with the OT and to concentrate on information not widely broadcast that suggests Al Qaieda were in some part responsible, something that has yet to be proven to me.

The problem is that this reinforces the OT , and allows people to accept a fog of war/ Grey area issue which is in my opinion detrimental to the potential 911 truth has to effect actual change, and to get enough public motivation to demand answers.

CD or not CD- that is the question

i find it very conclusive but i'm science- educated so perhaps i would
i think there are many different ways that people are drawn to 9/11 truth- i have a cousin who was sceptical of the days events even before the towers fell and lost friends over that different opinion
a suspicious air defence non-action in such a heavily armed country was enough to trip alarm bells in that case
- i woke up 7 years after 9/11 when another cousin who had studied architecture told me about CD
some people are drawn by different ways
a think CD is one of the ways that people can be woken up and that's my opinion but some people are not very science- orientated though so would find other info more compelling
either way i think we can agree to differ in approach and move on - we are a varied, organic school of thought and perhaps don't need a one uniform branded appearence with rules to adhere to
i feel that jon has a good heart and is maybe more the non-science type
in his efforts he draws in more people to 9/11 truth and then they can make up their minds themselves about topics within 9/11 truth
i would expect the majority of peeps he draws in would accept CD so jon is in that way swelling the ranks of people believing CD

to CD proponents:
and the problem is ....? :)

Peace 2 all incl mr/miss/ms/mrs device
and friend!

Good article

I think this is quite a good article. It says AE911 claim "indisputable forensic evidence" vs the Hemenway's having seen and heard "indisputable evidence", so at least that balances out.

And as has been mentioned the web link is there now (below the US flag), the reporter even encourages the reader to go to the site!

I bet Lindsay Shively is alright.

Yes. One more sign that...

... there definitely is no reason for us to change the way we are perceived.

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is one of the best things to have happened to the movement. Let's continue to support them, financially and otherwise.

puzzleing disbelief here at blogger

darkbeforedawn
for me this goes without saying....this is the rock solid foundation of "hard evidence" we have been waiting for for years. There is no possible arguing with it and even NIST does not try.

The question that bothers me --and it seems others....is why are some here asking that it be ignored and relegated to secondary status...
Just askin......

an Unbiased real investigation not done

I find the work of Gage, Hoffman, Jones etc. to be very interesting and compelling. I find it very hard to believe two 110 story buildings would disintergrate in 10 seconds. I find it very hard to believe a 47 story building would look just like a control demolition, but instead come down that way due to office fires. However, I also find it hard to believe that these buildings were blown to kingdom come, although I do lean toward that theory. I understand how JG feels that 9/11 truth movement turning into the 9/11 CD movement is worrisome. There are lots of other issues other than CD. So to doubters of CD, I start with other issues, and then let them decide which is harder for them to believe. But what I do know for sure is this.......

Shortly after 9/11, U.S. embassies around the world were instructed to deliver a top-secret briefing to world leaders on the attacks of September 11.
Embassies were instructed on Oct. 2, 2001, to deliver "oral briefings only and not [repeat] not leave the document" in hard copy form.

Here is the document....
http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-10-02-DOS-Qaeda-Overview.pdf

On page 6/24.......

"THOUSANDS WERE KILLED IMMEDIATELY AND THOUSANDS MORE WERE TRAPPED BY FIRE AND SMOKE ON THE TOWER'S UPPER FLOORS. WITHIN 90 MINUTES BOTH TOWERS--STRUCTURALLY WEAKENED BY THE INTENSE HEAT OF THE FLAMES--COLLAPSED, KILLING THOUSANDS MORE INCLUDING
SEVERAL HUNDRED POLICE AND FIRE FIGHTERS WHO HAD RUSHED INTO THE BURNING BUILDINGS ON A COURAGEOUS RESCUE MISSION."
http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-10-02-DOS-Qaeda-Overview.pdf

This tells me before FEMA or NIST did their investigation the U.S. Government had no intention of entertaining the idea of anything being the cause of the collapses other than fire.

IMO this seems to prove a real investigation into the collapses was not done. This seems to show that the result of any investigation into the cause of the WTC collapse was already known before any investigation was begun.