World Trade Center
March 21, 2007
Line-of-Duty Death Benefits for Officer’s Work After 9/11
By SEWELL CHAN
The New York City Police Pension Fund has approved line-of-duty death benefits for the family of Cesar A. Borja, the police officer whose death in January became a symbol of the plight of those who worked in Lower Manhattan after 9/11.
The fund’s board unanimously approved the benefits on March 14. The decision, which was expected, did not resolve the question of what caused the chronic lung ailment that killed Officer Borja and what role his work in Lower Manhattan might have had in the development of the disease.
Under a state law signed by Gov. George E. Pataki in June 2005, public employees who took part in the World Trade Center rescue, recovery or cleanup efforts are presumed, if they became permanently disabled because of certain medical conditions, to have gotten sick in connection with the disaster.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Rosie: Was 9/11 inside job to protect Enron?
Blog suggests destruction of federal investigations factor in terror attacks
Posted: March 19, 2007
5:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Was the World Trade Center brought down deliberately on Sept. 11, 2001, for the purpose of – are you ready for this? – eliminating records of government investigations into corporate fraud? That's the implication of a blog posting by Rosie O'Donnell about the worst terror attack in American history.
In her March 15 posting, titled "wtc7," on her Rosie.com blog, the controversial TV personality and co-host of ABC's popular "The View" morning show, starts off by recounting popular conspiracy "factoids" regarding the World Trade Center's Building No. 7, which collapsed after the two larger "twin towers" fell.
* The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.
* Silverstein said to the fire department commander "the smartest thing to do is pull it."
From The Sunday Times
March 18, 2007
Firemen douse Rudy’s image as 9/11 hero
Union bid to halt White House run
Sarah Baxter, New York
FIRE battalion chief Jim Riches brought up his son to be one of New York’s “bravest”, like him. The young Jim followed his father into the New York fire department and died at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
What followed turned his heartbroken father into a relentless opponent of Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of New York. With other families of 9/11 victims, Riches has vowed to torpedo Giuliani’s prospects of winning the White House by attacking his greatest source of strength, his reputation as a hero that day.
“We’re going to follow him around the country,” said Riches. “We want all of America to know he is not the man he says he is.”
What Really Happened has some new images of angle-cut columns from the Twin Towers:
Look on the left side of the photo above.
The two officers portrayed in Oliver Stone's film "World Trade Center" were describing an explosion they heard come from the south tower before the tower fell on them. This aired last night on Extreme Makeover while the rest of the world was watching The Grammy's.
Hope you're all doing well.
The claim has been made that the steel cores of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center "turned to dust" on 9/11, and that indicates that some high-tech weapon (as opposed to explosives or something like nano-thermate) were used.
However, this video and this video show that the "spires" or remains of the core columns did not turn to dust. Instead, they collapsed into dust clouds caused, apparently, by the pulverization or crushing of tons of concrete when the buildings were destroyed. Note: to view the second clip you will need the free 3ivx codec which you can download here.
While there is, indeed, dust in front of the spires which obscures their views and the spires fall into a cloud of dust, the spires themselves do not appear to me to turn to dust. As someone else pointed out, the spire itself may even -- when it collapses -- throw off dust which it had previously accumulated when the towers collapsed around it. But that is a far cry from the spire itself "turning to dust". Use your finger to trace the movement of the spires and you will see what I mean.
Someone here posted a link to this article:
9/11 film focuses on conspiracy theories
By Mike Branom, Tribune
Phil Manning’s heart aches for his brother, killed in the 9/11 attacks. But it hurt more to know Scottsdale Community College screened a documentary stating Terence Manning and hundreds of others weren’t victims of terrorism but of a shadowy conspiracy.
About 60 people came to the college on Monday night to see “911 Mysteries — Part 1: Demolitions.” The movie theorizes the World Trade Center towers were knocked down by controlled explosions, and not by the fires created by the impact of two jetliners.
However, writer/director Sofia Shafquat does not offer an opinion on who, or what, would commit such a heinous act.
The 43-year-old Manning attended, somewhat shocked that this issue could even need discussion, let alone at his hometown community college. “This probably gets under my skin more than anything post-9/11,” said Manning, a member of the Arizona 9-11 Memorial Commission.
Focal Point, the college’s film club, sponsored the film. The decision to host the film came a month ago, when a student learned Shafquat was coming to the Valley. “Regardless whether you believe it or not, it’s still an important film,” club president Andre Trinidad said.
The showing of “911 Mysteries” provoked a small outcry on campus and beyond.
Political science professor Nick Damask sent an e-mail to the entire Maricopa County Community College District stating: “I will not be attending the film presentation for the same reasons I would not attend a presentation on alchemy, flat-earth theory, or Holocaust denial — it’s simply too stupid and irrational.” Also voicing displeasure with the screening, yet still attending, was district governing board member Jerry D. Walker.
Later, Shafquat said she was drawn to the issue by a friend who tried to debunk such conspiracy theories only to find merit in their arguments.
“The more you go into the territory of 9/11 and the more you follow this angle or that angle and look for real facts and real science, the more it adds up,” Shafquat said.
“The more you follow the official story of 9/11, the more it falls apart.”
In case anyone thought maybe someday Stone will realize his mistake with "World Trade Center":
"I think that conspiracy-mongering on 9/11 is a waste of time," he said. "The far greater conspiracy occurred after 9/11 when basically a neo-cabal inside our government hijacked policy and went to war. That was as broad a conspiracy as we can get and it was about 20, 30 people. That's all, they took over and all these books are coming out and they are pointing it out," said Stone.
Video highlights the financial and environmental consequences of the controlled demolition that brought down the World Trade Center towers. Also:
What did the president's brother, Marvin Bush, have to do with security for the World Trade Center Complex and Dulles International Airport on 9/11? Why were there so many power-downs and evacuations in the WTC just prior to 9/11?:
Numerous experts have stated that the collapse of the world trade centers was, or looked like, controlled demolition:
- An expert on demolition said that the trade centers were brought down with explosives (and see TV interview here; both in Danish)
- Two structural engineers at a prestigious Swiss university said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)
- A Dutch demolition expert stated that WTC 7 was imploded
- A U.S. professor of physics stated that the world trade centers were brought down by controlled demolition
- A U.S. professor of mechanical engineering argued that the trade centers were brought down with explosives
- Several U.S. structural engineers, such as this one (second interview), have concluded that the collapse of the Trade Centers on 9/11 cannot be explained by the plane crashes and fires in the buildings
- An expert on why buildings collapse said controlled demolitions make buildings fall straight down (as opposed to falling over like a tree, which is what normally happens when buildings collapse) because the vertical columns are destroyed simultaneously by explosives, and "that's exactly what it looked like and that's what happened" on 9/11
- The head of a national demolition association stated that the collapse of the towers looked like a "classic controlled demolition"
- A terrorism security expert used by many news organizations asked, after commenting on the "secondary explosions", "whether in fact there wasn't something else at the base of the towers that in fact were the coup de grace to bring them to the ground" (keep in mind that a controlled demolition involves the use of explosives both at the base of the building and in higher sections of the building)
Many other experts have privately expressed skepticism of the official explanation for why the Trade Centers collapsed. Hopefully, they will also find the courage to come forward publicly.
Anyone want to run with this idea of using a milk carton as a parody on the "official story" of 9/11? How about "Missing: A Real Investigation of 9/11?" Or "Missing: Justice for the Real Perpetrators of 9/11"?
Do people think that the top of the South Tower really did "go missing" due to demolition, or did it fall over and land somewhere, like Church street? This thread contains an interesting debate on this question.
Thanks to Angular Momentum Fan for the heads up.
Note: This probably should have been a blog instead of a story. The views expressed herein are solely those of GeorgeWashington, and not of 911Blogger.
In order to test the no-plane hypothesis that CGI imagery generated fake video images of planes crashing into the Twin Towers on 9/11, it would be useful to analyze the number of eyewitness (earwitness) reports that they HEARD the planes.
My theory is that if enough witnesses heard planes, then CGI would be highly unlikely, since that would not account for the sounds of planes (especially if witnesses heard planes from multiple locations).
The following Google search (i.e. using the search terms 9/11 heard plane "world trade center") yields 55 pages worth of results.
Anyone want to divide this up and find the relevent quotes? Let's figure out whether the acoustical evidence refutes or supports the no-plane theory.
Become a part of history. Do some original research, and help be a part of a team which tests this theory.
Alternative searches could use the words "Twin Towers", "South Tower", "North Tower", "WTC", "1" and "2" instead of "world trade center"
Two animations purport to model flights 11 and 175 crashing into the North and South Towers:
These animations were posted at the website of Engineering News-Record, a subsidiary of McGraw-Hill, back in 2003 (I just saw them yesterday for the first time).
And NIST has made 2 animations of its own:
NIST's animations are linked from this page.
Are these animations accurate, in the sense that they show what Boeings crashing into the Twin Towers would have looked like? If so, does that refute the argument that there should have been more aircraft debris outside of the Twin Towers?
If the animations are not accurate, would discrediting them also help to discredit animations of the purported Pentagon plane crash?