Nice dood.

To all looking for Zogby to post this- I agree it looks better for Zogby to publish it- everyone who cares please make a contribution to 911truth.org, one of the hardest-working shoestring budget orgs out there, so they can afford Zogby's fee for posting on Zogby's site. The MSM is already expected to try and pan this, just as they did the GAO report on electronic voting- that's the GAO, not some rinky-dink upstart independent pollster, though Zogby's earned their good rep by getting election calls and other things right; this is a completely valid poll. Now we all have to be the media, put this in the face of the alt/MSM media ceaselessly, email it to Congress, and email/tell everyone we know. When they feel pressure coming from the People to deal w/ this, they'll fall into line. The poll is done; Zogby is wasting their own time by not posting the results as a public service, as they'll now have to deal w/ an onslaught of calls/emails for verification- I'm calling them myself tommorrow, for one, to pressure them.

excellent

what's zogby's phone number?

Google News -

Your search - zogby 911 - did not match any documents.

Don't know if you guys saw this today, but I liked this grouping of information...

Oil lust
It was a prize that the first oil presidency -- the president, vice president and national security advisor are all former oil execs -- lusted after long before the attacks of 9/11. The Washington Post reported that even as the Bush transition team prepared to take power in 2001, changing Iraq's regime and seizing its oil were already on the table:

Early discussions among the administration's national security "principals" -- Cheney, Powell, Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice -- and their deputies focused on how to weaken Hussein diplomatically. But Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz proposed sending in the military to seize Iraq's southern oil fields and establish the area as a foothold from which opposition groups could overthrow Hussein.

Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill told author Ron Suskind that Dick Cheney also supported an invasion of Iraq before Sept. 11, and the New Yorker's Jane Mayer reported on a top secret National Security Council document dating back seven months before the terror attacks that gave some insight into the vice president's thinking:

It directed the N.S.C. staff to cooperate fully with [Cheney's secretive] Energy Task Force as it considered the "melding" of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy: "the review of operational policies towards rogue states," such as Iraq, and "actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields."

And "C" could be so many things... the police state, the bankrupting of America, Hegemony, and on and on and on...

C = Peak Oil

Radical Pragmatist, I believe that Paul Craig Roberts' latest piece is about as overt as any he's written regarding 9/11. The article isn't about 9/11 per se, but like you said, he certainly slipped in some great lines. Here are the juiciest from the article:

The Bush regime blames bin Laden for 9/11, although the evidence is sketchy and inconclusive. Take a moment to consider the chances of bin Laden, who was fully occupied in his involvement in civil war in Afghanistan, being able to organize a successful attack on high-tech America from a primitive country half a world away. A man in a cave operating on a shoestring somehow defeats the myriad intelligence agencies of the U.S.

and this:

The Republican Party has been reduced to one principle – its own power. It protects the Bush regime from accountability and covers up its lies and misdeeds. Under the myths and lies that enshroud 9/11, the Democrats have collapsed as an opposition party.

Great to see him pushing the envelope further. I know that he's under pressure from his publisher (or whoever he gets his paycheck from) not to go too far.... but, perhaps this is a good sign because they're letting him pretty much say it outright now.

http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/

Anonymous, I didn't see "baggage" in Sheila Samples' article. I suggest you read it in its entirety. She's pointing out the insanity, the hypocrisy, and the brutality of the religious right. You don't actually take issue with her contention that there are far-righters who would stone gays and lesbians, among others, do you?

Off subject... but...

Remember when Alex Jones said a while back that some "beloved" musician would be coming out soon? I just heard on Showbiz Tonight that her new tour, which kicked off in LA today, has a video montage of pictures of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, Osama Bin Laden, etc, alongside pictures of Adolf Hitler!

Could this be that "beloved musician" Alex was referring to?

I could be completely wrong...

Whoops - totally left out who that musicin is...

haha..

Madonna

Bush is nothing but a cheap gangster, running a protection racket. The polls now show that the public is waking up to this fact. It's about time. I had this thug pegged years ago. What a punk.

I had him pegged the day he was elected. Little did I know that his destructiveness was necessary for the world to be set free.

Last video clip for tonight. What are the "white-hot-looking" spots on the North tower? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7431174701830641882&q=9%2F11+wtc

According to the FBI's ten most wanted fugitive list http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm, Usama Bin Laden isn't even wanted specifically for 911. Strange...

article on zogby poll just posted:
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=11974

Well Madonna said she doesnt think theres conclusive evidence 9/11 was an inside job, last year in rolling Stone magazine. I wonder what Neil Young and Pearl Jam have to say about 9/11?

Oh, and the real puppet master of the US was in my city of Sacramento today, Dick Cheney.

Look what the NoBeliefs.Com has to say about 911 conspiracy theories.. he needs to be word smacked.

http://nobeliefs.com/comments8.htm

NoBeliefs,

I was just watching "9/11 The Fall of the World Trade Center" that the nobeliefs.com writer cited. What I find interesting is the clip of the journalist who was at the base of the towers doing a report right as the 1st building collapsed was edited. They cut the audio of him yelling, "A huge explosion with raining debris on all of us, WE BETTER GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!"

It also stated that it took 30 seconds for the south tower to collapse.

You know when "debunkers" cite the popular mechanics article they have absolutely no credibility what so ever.

Another thing I noticed is the lack of video footage used. Most of their arguements were supported by "theororetical" computer animations of truss failure and fireproofing being blown off. In no way did they back these claims up with proof. Almost got me!

Andy,

Did I read a post by you awhile back that said you sent a letter of something to our Mayor?

World Net Daily's posted an article on the poll, 1st US source?

DAY OF INFAMY 2001
9-11 truth: Is it still out there?
Zogby poll shows 70% want new investigation
Posted: May 23, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50336

These latest polls are a good sign. When I became a 9/11 truther about two years ago I think about 95% would have believed the "Official Story" and about 5% would have believed there was a cover-up. So we have made good progress the last few years but there is still much work to be done. I also believe no matter what happens Bush and his boys won't go down easy. They may have to be taken out, if you know what I mean. I hope not but it's best to be prepared. I listened to Randi Rhodes on the way to work this afternoon. She was talking about detention camps being built around the country and she sounded scared. I guess Bush is building these camps to house "terrorists" when he catches them. Just a word to the wise.

Democratic gatekeeper sites will now most likely be forced to deal with 9/11. However; this is most uncomfortable for them since they will be pointing attention to democratic congresspersons who have been covering up the affair along with their republican colleagues. Frankly I believe most of that lot deserves in due course to be executed for treason. So; it'll be very awkward.

But this poll is monumental. Especially in the light that the mass media has been ignoring 9/11 for the most part but otherwise busy covering it up with congress and the administration.

These are very serious times.

This ugly mess overhangs everything and creates nagging uncertainty. What will cornered rats do? Will they stage another show to divert attention from their 911 flop? Will they need WW3 for that. When self- preservation becomes the main driving force anything can happen.

WTC 7 is the key. 43% were unaware that it had collapsed. A simple strategy is to ask someone, were they aware it had collapsed, that it was never hit by a plane, that it was never investigated by the commission etc etc. If these simple facts alone do not get someone to question the events of that day, then they simply do not want to know. However, I believe most people when faced with these facts would be compelled to find out more, and the more people exposed to the truth then the stronger the movement will be. Ok, back to lurking!

Former Pilot Says 'Jet Blast' Dismissal Doesn't Fly

Contradicts facts of previous story about Flight 77 knocking cars off Pentagon highway

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | May 23 2006

Following the publication of our article questioning claims that wake turbulence or jet blast could have thrown cars around the highway as Flight 77 approached the Pentagon at a reported altitude of 20 feet, a former pilot and aeronautical engineer contacted us to refute the arguments presented in the piece.

It is our intention to explore both sides of the argument and leave the reader to decide for themselves if the Pentagon Flight 77 issue is a genuine smoking gun of 9/11 or an attempt by the government to bait us into a honey pot trap by later releasing crystal clear footage of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. At no turn do we doubt the validity of the overwhelming body of evidence proving 9/11 as an inside job. The 9/11 truth movement is currently enjoying its widest exposure ever, and a new Zogby poll which shows half of Americans nationwide (not just New York) want a new independent investigation into 9/11 is proof that this issue is evergreen and growing in popularity.

The pilot, who wishes to remain anonymous, stated that the photos carried showing planes coming in to land at St. Maarten-Princess Juliana Int'l Airport in the Netherlands, and the apparent lack of wake turbulence or jet blast as a result of their low altitude over people on a beach, were misleading. The photos depict slow moving planes at speeds of no more than 100 knots, not 400 knots as reported with Flight 77.

He said that it was key to point out the difference between jet blast and wake turbulence. Wake turbulence is defined as a ,"turbulent air condition caused by small, tornado-like horizontal whirlwinds training an aircraft's wingtips (wingtip vortices)." In contrast, jet blast is described as, "phenomena resulting from the passage of an aircraft through the atmosphere. The term includes vortices, thrust stream turbulence, jet blast, jet wash, propeller wash, and rotor wash both on the ground and in the air."
While the Boeing website points out that the direction of the entire envelope of wake turbulence can be directed upwards, sideways or downwards depending on wind conditions, no such deviation is possible with jet blast and that the sheer force of power from the jet blast of a plane traveling at 530 miles per hour would not have been altered whatsoever by wind patterns.

Therefore the pilot states unequivocally that jet blast would have tossed people and cars around like rag dolls if they were 20 feet or less below a Boeing 757, as is claimed by eyewitness reports.

Regarding the eyewitness report of Pentagon renovation worker and retired Army officer Frank Probst, who claimed that the plane flew so low past him that the engine was six feet away, our source exclaimed that this was a ridiculous impossibility.

The pilot said that Probst would have been sucked into the engine like a bird in a giant vacuum and that he had personally been in the cockpit and seen birds from 100 feet away that almost immediately get sucked into the engines.

Similar devastation would have been wrought on cars 20 feet below the plane according to the pilot, contradicting eyewitness reports describing only light shaking of vehicles.

The pilot also entertained the notion that eyewitnesses had grossly overestimated the altitude of the plane and that it was higher than the reported 20 feet but he was still adamant that those who claimed to have seen the faces of the passengers in the window were living in a fantasy land because the speed of the plane would have meant it appeared as a blur and akin to a bullet flying over their heads.

Our source, having had direct and extensive personal flying experience at low altitudes, also completely dismissed the feasibility that a Boeing 757 could be flown for any significant distance at just 20 feet above ground. He also cited other pilots of large commercial aircraft who concurred.

A phenomenon called 'ground effect' describes the energized cushion of air between the wings and the ground which increases in energy the faster the plane flies. Flight 77 is reported to have whisked up the highway and into the Pentagon at breakneck acceleration, even increasing in speed before it hit, a maneuver described as impossible by the pilot at 20 feet above the ground, due to the reaction of the energized ground effect layer which would simply not have allowed it, even if the pilot was furiously pulling back the throttle which was not the case.

The pilot and aeronautical expert said that the evidence suggests a Global Hawk was used to attack the Pentagon, citing alleged Flight 77 pilot Hani Hanjour's complete lack of flight skills and the incredulous story that he and four other conspirators overpowered two burly 185lbs aircraft veterans and pulled off military class flight maneuvers to attack what was virtually an invisible target.

Despite this, the pilot, who first approached Flight 77 questions in an effort to disprove them, was adamant that the government would soon release a "fantastic clear shot of Flight 77 coming in and close the book." He points out that modern technology and computer generated graphics can accurately forge any event and make it appear completely seamless and fears the entire Pentagon issue is a trap to distract researchers and eventually will be used to discredit the entire 9/11 truth movement.

Our source pleads with people to focus on the real hardcore smoking guns of 9/11, in particular the unexplained collapse of Building 7 and clear evidence that the twin towers were brought down by a controlled demolition. As an experienced aeronautical engineer, the pilot was stunned that he too bought the official version of events at first glance and believed that a giant modern day steel building could completely collapse from limited fire damage. Our source is now working behind the scenes to aid others in the 9/11 truth movement help educate the world on the reality behind the monumental scam perpetrated on September 11 2001.

I had trouble believing the quotes from fire engineering magazine about 911. I went to the magazine and looked up the article. Here are direct quotes from the article.

Fair Lawn, NJ, January 4, 2002-Bill Manning, Fire Engineering's editor in chief, is summoning members of the fire service to "A Call to Action." In his January 2002 Editor's Opinion, "$elling Out the Investigation" (below), he warns that unless there is a full-blown investigation by an independent panel established solely for that purpose, "the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals." Manning explained: "Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers ..... The lessons about the buildings' design and behavior in this extraordinary event must be learned and applied in the real world." . . .

No. Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything. . . .

However, respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers.

You have to register to see it.

http://fe.pennnet.com/articles/article_display.cfm?Section=ARCHI&C=FYI&A...

Yes, it certainly makes sense to focus on the nonsensical official fable regarding the collpase of the towers and WTC-7. But nothing will really get any traction unless the mass media, diverse gatekeppers and the congress are forced to deal with the issue in an intelligent manner. However; it's a little difficult for these entities since they've ignored it and and covered it up for all these years !

Just to let you know how the MSM response to the new Zogby poll could look alike.

I just reviewed the response from the german 911 truth attackers back in 2003.
You may know that we have a similar poll, done by forsa, which provides that 19 % of overall population believes that the US government orchestrated 911.
And even 31 % of the under 30 ages believe this.

So, this was back in 2003, back when truth spreading books and films are rare but nonetheless bestsellers.

Hans Leyendecker, the main suspect for the Simon-Wiesenthal 911 trial remembrance list, felt forced to take a look on this. In his column from 9/10/03, “Apes of fear”, published in the german “Sueddeutsche Zeitung”, he asks: Are 19 % of our population crazy?
He didnÂ’t answer his question, but surely implies that he did think so.
He and others called it a “sociological phenomenon”, be prepared that this will pop up now in the US, too.

He further provides examples that the brain of the crazies suffer from pictures we already seen on tv or in video games. Who can distuinguish between the truth and fiction?
And to make our world-view much better fitting our brain plays tricks on us by providing “simple” explanations for complex structures, aka conspiracy theories.

Then he attacks the 911 truthers personally with the whole list everybodyÂ’s aware off today, plus he mixed-up some loony conspiracy theories.

Zogby Poll:

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50336

Agree with your comments gangster, but its just my way of getting more people on board here in the UK.

Worldnetdaily poll: Do you support a new, independent probe of 9-11?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/polls/

.

Lurker, just keep up the good work.

As I was saying, these poll results are monumental especially in the light that the mass media has totally ignored the issue and covered for the official fable. Once that mass media is forced to deal with 911 in an intelligent manner it should soon be 80%-20% against the official nonsense since it holds no water whatsoever.

It's amazing really how much the 911 truth movement has achieved and this is major blow for the US mass media. Will they learn from it? We´ll see.

Like Sitting-Bull mention up there, I think spin doctors are already working on the results of that Zogby poll.

And I don't want to be pessimist, but since the Internet is that what help the mouvement to be where it is now, I wouldn't be surprise that Internet become soon a "National Security Threat" and that "Terrorist are likely to use Internet to attack important..." you see. Neocon have HUGE power and they certainly want us to shut up. Control over the web has already started. Just my 2c.

"5/22/2006

Dear Congressman Weldon,

I understand that Mr. Jon Gold is to meet with your office today. Mr. Gold was recently featured in a news article here: http://www.timesherald.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=16670601&BRD=1672&PAG=4...

While I think it is useful for you to meet with Mr. Gold, it is not for what he believes. Rather, it is to learn the extent to which some people are willing to overturn facts and evidence, to look away from the horrible events of 9/11, and to construct vast and unfounded conspiracy theories. For whatever reason they pursue these lines of irrational thinking, whether through ignorance or for political motives, it is important to remember that Mr. Gold represents a small minority of people unwilling to deal with factual evidence. Mr. Gold will impress you with his sincerity and conviction and may even claim, as he has publicly, that he knows the "truth", all of the truth about 9/11. I am sure it will be quite clear to you during your meeting that his version of the "truth" is somewhat confused, contradictory, and misguided.

Sincerely,

S. King"

Try hard not to laugh. This is a real letter that S. King wrote to Representative Weldon, as a way to counter Jon Gold. S. King has lost it, and apparently doesn't realize how foolish he sounds. In the process, he gives credence to what Mr. Gold has to say.

It's funny that he feels that smearing others is what makes you "American." He must have loved all the "American" mud slinging going on during the 2004 elections. Look, he really said it:

"As a true American, I have every right to express my views about those who do not have a clue what they are talking about." (Emphasis added for comic relief).

Or maybe he just thinks it's "American"

This is priceless. Kudos to all that made this possible.

_________________________---
http://flight77.info/

UPDATE 5/21/6

today i received the CD from the DOJ. you can see the letter that came with the CD to the right.

the CD contains two .mpg files ~33 megs each. if you're someone who is doing analysis on these videos, please email me (bronco-at-flight77.info) and i will send you the URL where you can download them to your desktop.

_________________________---

Guess what folks. According to S. King, there are only one of two possibilities for why we object to the Official account:

1) You are ignorant; or

2) You are politically motivated.

Which is it? He fails to mention the 3rd alternative:

3) The "facts" don't add up and you don't feel that they present a closed case.

Note: the last option does not imply ignorance, although I'm sure there are many ignorant people on both sides of the fence, just as there are many intelligent people on both sides of the fence.

S. King demeans the whole point of his letter by not presenting the third option. He rather comes off as narrow-minded, and obsessively obstinate.

"Once that mass media is forced to deal with 911 in an intelligent manner it should soon be 80%-20% against the official nonsense since it holds no water whatsoever."

I bet it already is, since the poll was given prior to the release of the all-so-conclusive Pentagon video.

Crisis shortage poses crisis for White House!

http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/05/22/news-bethcolmay22-05-22.html

John Bolton Described As, "Secret Member Of Israel's Own Team At The United Nations"

By the Israeli U.N. Ambassador no less...

cool thanks FrankV

Instead of focusing upon a picture that speaks a thousand questions, we need to ask the questions of authorities. We need to demand a real investigation of the whole 9/11 event that would answer these questions. Then we can start building a government that tells the truth to its people and would never dream of killing them.

http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=586

There it is...

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Less_than_half_of_Americans_satisfied_...

911 for Dummies

http://911-for-dummies.blogspot.com/

Wow... GOOD article from Rawstory...

If you haven't called, wrote, or e-mailed somebody in the media. Please do so now. What are you waiting for??

Delmart Edward Joseph Michael Vreeland II is a Lieutenant who worked for the United States Office of Naval Intelligence.

In June and July of 2001 Vreeland wrote a 37 page document addressed and intended to be sent to Admiral Vernon Clark, Chief of Naval Operations. It recounted the information on the intercepted documents and was to serve as a warning of the coming attacks. In August of 2001 Vreeland wrote a note with specifics of the attacks and asked that it be sent to the CSIS. The existence of this note was not revealed publicly until September 14, 2001.

http://www.sierratimes.com/02/04/19/araw041902.htm

pao@nmic.navy.mil

This covers what you need to know:

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths

"""Delmart Edward Joseph Michael Vreeland II is a Lieutenant who worked for the United States Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)."""

Ruppert was writing about this guy way back then. ONI was wiped out in the Pentagon attack as far as I know.

These are interesting angles and never covered.

Caveman Osama & his 19 lackeys w/boxcutters defeat NORAD, FBI, CIA, FAA, etc., and everyone in the U.S. govÂ’t gets to keep his/her job & many get promoted!

After several years, CIA head George Tenet is finally admonished eased out of his job.

Speaking of Tenat, how did he have this amazing foresight on the morning of 9/11, after the 1st plane had hit the WTC:

“They steered the plane directly into the building?” he [Tenet] asks incredulously. He orders his closest employees to the conference room and wants to be there himself within 15 minutes. “That looks like Bin Laden” Tenet said to Boren. Without waiting for a reaction Tenet thinks aloud: “I wonder if this has something to do with the guy [Zacarias Moussaoui] who trainned for a pilot’s license.”

So, were supposed to believe that when Tenet heard of the 1st plane impact:
1. He knew America was under attack.
2. He associated bin Laden with the attack.
3. He even associated the "20th hijacker", Moussaoui, with the attack.
And now we know that Tenet was part of this diabolical inside job!
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bush_tenet_9-11.html

What happened to this Vreeland guy?

Is he still among us?

What was ONI into 5-6 years ago?

Who at the Pentagon was investigating
those missing zillions Rumsfeld talked about on Sept. TENTH 2001 ? Were they perchance wiped out the next day ?

The coincidence theory would make this extremely likely. :)

I want to ask a question of all of those people who "lurk" at 911blogger.com.

Is this poll "newsworthy"?

Why then are news outlets like MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, ABCNews, NBCNews, not covering it?

im going to email all of the local Philadelphia Major media outlets NBC10, ABC6, and CBS3 and FOX29 as well...

Note: There should be an offical post by Zogby on this poll in the coming day(s).
_________________________---
When this happens, the MSM better pay attention.

" im going to email all of the local Philadelphia Major media outlets NBC10, ABC6, and CBS3 and FOX29 as well..."

Make sure you say hi to Larry Mendte... he loves me. NOT

"When this happens, the MSM better pay attention."

And if it doesn't, then not only do you need to promote the poll, but you also need to use the non-coverage of the poll to prove to people that the media is controlled.

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths

Goodness Gracious! Why do people feel the need to try use Pseudo-Science to prove a tragedy! Damn, I was just starting to debunk 911myths debunking and now we have another one, and another one...they're like roaches

Does anyone know how the trusses on the trade towers were connected to the outer beams and inner core? If so, do we have any photos of this available?

Yizzo, yeah I am just waiting for these people to provide the other buildings that fell because of fire or damage. Since this is an everyday occurance, they should be able to provide this information.

I have yet found ONE steel framed building fall due to fire or damage onto it's own footprint at near free fall speeds. I just want to see ONE building as evidence that this can happen, besides the WTC's of course.

They can't because it is not normal and not possible.

I'm still waiting for those people to provide me with the picture of the top part of the buildings laying on the ground in a relative noticable pile. After all, they were suppose to be the "pile driver" for the lower floors. So what was the "pile driver" for the top part????

How come when i use cooperativeresearch.org now..most of the links are dead? is there a way to revive them? or maybe get the actual article from the company?

3 Credits!

The 9/11 traumatic events end the course discussions specifically around the Islam vs. West controversy and the future of political Islam.

http://www.telavivuniv.org/programs/summer.htm

please send this article into bradblog, if they get a few more emails im sure they will cover it!

Gold, the mass media is complicit in the 911 cover up. We´ve covered that. This is just another confirmation.

"Goodness Gracious! Why do people feel the need to try use Pseudo-Science to prove a tragedy."

This site will help you with real science:

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths

"Is this poll "newsworthy"?

"Why then are news outlets like MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, ABCNews, NBCNews, not covering it?"

I think it is because it was a privately contracted poll.

"I think it is because it was a privately contracted poll."

What polls aren't?

"I think it is because it was a privately contracted poll."

Which polls aren't?

"This site will help you with real science:

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths
anonymous | 05.23.06 - 1:10 pm |"

Here is some of that real science:

" The suggestion that someone would need to fly airplanes into two buildings and blow them up is in itself absurd. Could you imagine the meeting?...

Government: We want to cause a tragedy so great the American people will blindly follow us into war... What do you think gentlemen...

Accomplice #1: Well, the Towers are a perfect choice.. It's been bombed before. We can just blame Osama again. We've been priming the American people by having him blow up our warships and our buildings in other countries.

Government: Yeah, good idea! How will we do that?

Accomplice #1: We can hire Osama to get some of his friends to fly planes into it!

Accomplice #2: Wait... I have a better idea, We can BOMB the buildings!

Accomplice #1: Well, that means placing enough bombs into the 110 story building. That's going to take a lot of man power and risk us being uncovered...

Accomplice #2: Yeah but that way your sure to knock it down. Besides, Maybe the hijackers wont make it to the target. Maybe they'll be uncovered!

Accomplice #1 But you don't need to knock it down, all you need is the horrific sight of the planes hitting the buildings. People will get the message. It's an attack on American soil. We'll also have people like the blind sheik to cover for us. We'll even put a guy on a train with evidence.

Your plan isn't perfect either you know. Do I have to remind you of Operation Towel Pop? We already tried to embarrass Clinton by knocking it down and failed.

Accomplice #2: Yeah, our bay of pigs, but I say the only way they can get the message is if we knock it down.

Accomplice #1 Do not

Accomplice #2 Do too

Accomplice #1 Do not

Accomplice #2 Do too

Accomplice #1 Do not

Accomplice #2 Do too

Government: Gentlemen, gentlemen... Please... What the hell, we'll just do both! :blink: How do we do that? I mean how do you keep explosions from showing up on TV? We're going to have to investigate this at some point. How do we cover up the seen?"

Anonymous, you completely misinterpreted Sheila Samples' article. I simply posted it here because parts of it were relevant to 9/11 truth (because she "came out" about 9/11 in a previous article and insinuated government complicity in those lines I quoted), BUT this article is NOT about 9/11 and she is NOT bringing her "baggage" as you call it to the 9/11 truth movement. Jesus, read the friggin article man. Looks like YOU brought YOUR baggage to this forum, not anybody else. Get a grip.

Reinforced buildings can not - by definition - in a collapse driven by gravity (non-CD) collapse without any delay in the collapse from the reinforcing structure ! Such a building can not fall through itself at free fall speed !

Those towers collapsed at free fall speed - hence extra energy was used to help with this collapse.

If you believe that reinforced structures can collapse at free fall speed in a gravity driven event you can not also believe that parachutes work ! :)

With regard to the counter-arguments about "conspiratorial" thinking and the theoretical "meeting" between accomplices: There is a quote by Edward Luttwak which says that conspirators need not hide the truth forever; they need hide it only long enough for it not to matter anymore.

The Bush/Cheney/Rove/PNAC crowd is acting with great arrogance lately, essentially "flipping off" those who think they can be stopped. They are only one or two more moves, and four to eight weeks, away from being essentially untouchable.

Things will be very touch-and-go during that period of time, but there is investigation (journalistic and legal) underway not only in the 9/11 world, but with regard to Plamegate, the NSA, and the nasty little picture at the top having to do with moles, espionage, infiltration, betrayal and treason.

Keep up the pressure, and re-double effort. We are close to "breakthrough".

RE: Central Columns:

Warning: Red Pill:

PhysOrgForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums - 911 WTC - Evidence of an Nuclear explosion
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=4418

Check out the first video that comes up under popular

http://video.google.com

It's a matter of historical record that those towers had a TOTAL collapse in ten seconds. Even the 911 commission admits on page 305 that the south tower collapsed in ten seconds. This equals free fall speed. There is no way around it folks. :) This is a physical impossibilty in a gravity driven event. There is also no way around that. :)

Gangster,
I posted this late last night.

I was just watching "9/11 The Fall of the World Trade Center" that the nobeliefs.com writer cited. What I find interesting is the clip of the journalist who was at the base of the towers doing a report right as the 1st building collapsed was edited. They cut the audio of him yelling, "A huge explosion with raining debris on all of us, WE BETTER GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!"
It also stated that it took 30 seconds for the south tower to collapse.
Another thing I noticed is the lack of video footage used. Most of their arguements were supported by "theororetical" computer animations of truss failure and fireproofing being blown off. In no way did they back these claims up with proof. Almost got me!

I think this will probably change your mind, anonymous. It was written by a structural engineer 6 days after 9/11. Is there some reason I should think he is wrong and you are right?

With both towers, the forces created by the falling floors above on the floors below would have been orders of magnitude greater than the resistance of these floors, leading to the complete collapses then observed.

I am by no means a structural engineer, but I have several issues with the report to begin with.

First, how can he do an extensive review only 6 days after the collapse when the material was not available then for analysis. Not that much has been available since, but none was available then.

Second, there was very little information available regarding the facts only 6 days after the event.

Finally, anyone who immediately comes out with the answers is surely a plant and really has not done any SERIOUS INVESTIGATION.

It's like NASA picking up a few parts of Columbia and saying they had the answers without reviewing all the video and material that was available.

NOT VERY SCEIENTIFICE. So if this person is in fact what they say, I seriously lay any credibility to their analysis.

A REAL engineer looks at all the evidence and material and then makes a conclusion. Not just some small amount of data that was not even available at the time for a valid analysis.

Try again! NEXT!

In fact, that structural engineer got it pretty much correct since he knew a 767 hit it.

But you haven't explained why we should think you are right and he is wrong.

Here's some more, written in Oct. 2001:

Without exaggeration, more than 99% of all buildings would collapse immediately if hit by a 767

Here is some more from just after the attacks:

More will be learnt as the investigations proceed, but in the meantime a number of internationally
respected specialists have agreed that the towers performed very well during the attacks. To fully
appreciate this it is necessary to consider the extreme nature of each of the three abnormal loading
events that occurred. It should also be noted that it is unreasonable to compare the performance of
these towers with some notional concrete equivalent because an equivalent has never had to withstand
such an attack: the hypothetically better performance is argued from silence.

Firstly the buildings were subject to violent impact as each aircraft hit with a force that would have
collapsed most buildings. Some idea of the magnitude of the impacts is gained from the earth tremors
they caused – measured at 0.7 and 0.9 on the Richter scale for earthquake intensity at a seismic station
34 kilometres from Manhattan. The significance of these values is that, unlike an earthquake
that occurs at considerable depth in the earth’s crust causing wide–spread seismic forces, these impacts
were very localized, occurring several hundred metres above ground, before being transmitted
through the structures to their foundations and into the subgrade. The fact that such large disturbances
were measured at such a distance is testimony to the force of the impact.

Because Physics says so.....

Show me anyone who can defy physics, then I MIGHT believe that a building, actually 3, can fall at a near free fall speed.

Just provide one person who claims that they can defy physics, and I will believe you.

If not, then perhaps you or they can explain the following:

1) Why the cores were not standing 30 or so floors above since the inner floors pancaked. It's like a record on a spindal.

2) Fire above could not end up in the basement and under the rubble and cause it to burn for months after the collapse. Prove that the fire 80 stories above could have ended up in the basement.

3) Show me ANY STEEL FRAMED BUILDING in the worlds history that fell onto it's own footprint and at a near free fall speed before. JUST ONE! Since this is SO COMMON this should be easy for you or them.

4) Provide evidence by simulations or sceintific means, usually by a small model, that this can in fact happen. Where's the proof???? There are other scientists that refute the official version. Just as many say the opposite, so who is right???

5) Show me how the steel cores can be sliced into about 30 ft. sections by the pancaking theory. It is a fact that most of the core columns were severed into about these sizes. Show me how their pancaking theory can account for this????

Show me how there can be small concentrated spots in the building, about 30 stories below the collapse, of the building shooting out? How can this be accounted for when the building was designed to be a hermetically sealed building???? This is impossible with the design of the building.

Show me how the top part of the buildings also were destroyed into nothing???? What can do this??? The force for the damage is suppose to be the top floors, to destroy the lower floors, so what destroyed the top floors????? There should have been a large portion of the top part still in large pieces on the ground below. However, the WHOLE building was gone.

NOT POSSIBLE OR PLAUSIBLE WITHOUT EXPLOSSIVES!!!!!

By the way....

If it is so easy to bring down sky scrappers as to blow up the top part and light a fire, then the people who do Controlled Demolition has been wasting a lot of money and time.

That's why they spend so much time and money preparing for a CD, because it is not that easy and buildings do not just come down from damage and fire in that manner.

I don't know where you get the idea that building collapses defy physics.

We know from videos that they did not fall at free fall speed so you can scratch that.

The cores could not stand on their own. The fires underground were burning all the debris from within the towers. There was no free fall speed. There was no "slicing" into 30 ft sections. The top floors were destroyed from the tremendous kinetic energy of the fall to earth. And a building cannot remain hermetically sealed when it is collapsing. This all is well known. I'm not sure where you're getting your information, RemoveBush.

This covers pretty much everything:

SCIENCE DESK

Compressed Air and Gravity: Physics Finished What Terror Began

By WARREN E. LEARY (NYT) 1016 words
Published: September 25, 2001

Little is left but rubble and dust. The degree of destruction at the World Trade Center after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks seems almost beyond comprehension.

But understanding the natural forces that contributed to the disaster can help explain the destruction of the twin towers, why they came crashing down the way they did and why enormous clouds of dust erupted from the site, experts say.

The buildings contained more than 200,000 tons of steel, 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 600,000 square feet of glass in 43,000 windows. Each floor, a reinforced concrete pad on a metal deck supported by steel cross beams, was about one acre and weighed about 4.8 million pounds.

The general outline of the towers' collapse was well known soon after the terrorist attack: engineers believe that the crash of the 767's and the intense heat generated from thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel weakened and buckled the buildings' steel framework, causing the upper floors to collapse and beginning an unstoppable chain reaction borne along by the force of gravity.

Since the crash, engineers have continued to analyze the catastrophe. The buildings came down, engineers said, much as they would have in a controlled demolition -- although a controlled collapse would have started with the strategic placement of small explosives.

The size and weight of the concrete floor pads, and the way they collapsed onto one another, helps explain why so much of the mass of each building was smashed into small pieces, demolition engineers said. As each concrete floor pancaked into the one below, their combined weight grew so large that they and everything in their path broke into smaller and smaller pieces, until mostly dust and small pieces of rubble remained.

Dr. Frank A. Moscatelli, a professor of physics at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania, calculated that the total energy released in the disaster was equivalent to the explosion of 600 tons of TNT. This energy discharge, which takes into account the weight of the airplanes that struck the buildings, their speed at impact, the jet fuel and the mass of the buildings, is about one-twentieth of that released by the 10-kiloton atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima, he said.

''And most of this energy was supplied by gravitational collapse,'' Dr. Moscatelli said. ''People don't think of an item sitting still as having energy, but it does. The energy from gravitational collapse is what the controlled demolition people use to take down structures, and it is very powerful.''

Once the mass of the upper part of a building begins to fall, Dr. Moscatelli said, it gains momentum that adds to the force the structure below has to resist. ''If the rest of the building can't do it, everything begins to fall straight down,'' he said.

Jon D. Magnusson, chairman and chief executive of Skilling Ward Magnusson Barkshire in Seattle, a structural engineering company that worked out the original World Trade Center design, said the enormous energy released in the collapse was enough to pulverize the 110-story towers and their contents.

As the buildings fell, large plumes of dust billowed from the structures in what appeared to be high-speed jets. Engineers said compression of the buildings' air propelled the dust.

''People don't think about it, but there is a large amount of air in a structure,'' said James Redyke, president of Dykon Blasting, a demolition company in Tulsa, Okla. ''A building is like an accordion, and when it collapses the air has to exit someplace. It exits at a pretty good volume, carrying all the dust from concrete, sheetrock and other things inside.''

An initial analysis of the World Trade Center disaster released last week by Risk Management Solutions of Newark, Calif., a company that analyzes catastrophes for the insurance industry and others, estimated that the pancake collapse of the tower floors produced a major airborne ''debris surge.'' This cloud, which it said initially spread at more than 50 miles per hour, dumped significant deposits of dust more than a half mile from the site and small amounts up to two miles away.

Larry Gilmore, president of Controlled Blasting, a demolition company in Norcross, Ga., said the large cloud of dust coming from the fall of a tall structure was from more than the displacement of air inside. Watching tapes of the New York disaster, he said he noticed another phenomenon seen during controlled demolitions.

''As a building falls, it pulls the atmosphere down with it, creating a vacuum behind it,'' Mr. Gilmore said. ''Air rushes into the space that has been evacuated above and creates a downdraft that hits the debris below, pushing even more dust out with great force.''

Impact of the collapse coupled with this powerful downdraft provided the force to propel the giant dust cloud down nearby streets and around buildings, he said.

Mr. Magnusson and others said they were initially surprised that the buildings went straight down without sliding to the side or toppling.

Pictures of the collapse indicate that the buildings' outer support structures may have helped guide the falling floors, Mr. Magnusson said.

The buildings had a so-called metal tube structure design, which consisted of hundreds of steel columns spaced around the outer face of each tower to give the structures stiffness and to support much of their weight, including the floor pads. This outer ring was connected by steel trusses to a cluster of metal columns in the center that supported core components such as elevators and stairs, as well as part of each concrete floor.

Mr. Magnusson said the outer tubes of the buildings, consisting of 61 steel columns on each of a tower's four sides, seemed to keep the concrete floors aligned as they fell.

''As you look at the videotape, it seems that as the building frame peels back, it stays long enough for the floors to pass,'' Mr. Magnusson said. ''The reason the buildings stood and the reason they went straight down was that strong exterior tube.''

Since it is so common for 3 buildings to fall in one day, perhaps you can explain why this building did not fall?????

Of course it is not of the same construction, clearly less well constructed as the WTC's, and the plane was not going over 400MPH. However, the building never once showed signs or even collapsed........

I guess it only happens here when our government wants to do something that it knows that it won't be able to do without "a New Pearl Harbor"?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/061205planecrashes.htm

Well, you just keep holding onto your beliefs and what's left of your civil liberties. After all, they both will eventually be gone. Then perhaps you will wake up, along with the remainding 48% of America.

You do realize that it's not just the WTC's, but the entire day that makes this point directly at an inside job???

It's not just one, two, or ten things..... It's hundreds of things that do not hold water by the official version.

You obviously do not have any math experience or engineering experience, so I'm really wasting my time. I can provide just as many quotes to counter what you provide. However, I have a 2 year degree and a 4 year degree that the math says is not possible the way America has been told. NOTHING is as we are told.

I'm glad that I could serve my country to give you the right to give away my civil liberties. I would rather you just said thank you, and help protect everyones civil liberties!!!!!

RE: Collapse speed.

It would be helpful if the followers og the official story finally took the time to check what they believe (clearly blindly) actually consists of. For example on page 305 of the commission report it says that the south tower collapsed in ten seconds. So, even the commission admits this.

Anyway, free fall speed of 1360 feet comes to 9.22 seconds and is of course slower in the atmosphere due to air resistance, wind, updraft etc. As a result free fall speed at sea level from this height is probably at least 12 seconds. In this light the constant hair-splitting by people who are unwilling and unable to identify arguments

is just comical.

Clarification, free fall in vacuum comes to 9.22 seconds and is of course slower in the atmosphere due to the factors I mentioned. As a result the speed of the collapse PROVES that outside energy was used to help the collapse of the towers - unless you want to believe impossible things.

"As a result the speed of the collapse PROVES that outside energy was used to help the collapse of the towers - unless you want to believe impossible things."

My question is why I should believe your claims rather than that of physicists and structural engineers? RemoveBush seems to say he is more qualified to speak on the subject but doesn't give any reasons why he is contradicting professionals. You just say it's impossible.

anonymous, you should believe that outside energy was used to help collapse the towers because you can see it with your own eyes! The physicists & structural engineers you refer to are paid & owned by the same gov't that committed the atrocities. So go play devil's advocate somewhere else, as you seem very disingenuous in continually asking the obvious.

Common sense also tells us that when buildings are damaged, they are not designed for a chain-reaction to occur & bring the entire thing down in one fell swoop. Just the opposite. They are not houses of cards or chains of dominos!

Wow

Brand spanking new poll here
http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

very much in our favour !

Amazingly excellent post, i wonder if we can get another updated zogby poll going?

Further interpretation of Zogby poll results:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/2534