The media propaganda seems to be relentless as well as corrected and re-spun on-the-fly as inconsistencies in the mainstream reports are about September 11, 2001 is exposed by "watchdogs". Before the advent of several video documentaries by Alex Jones of Genesis Communications Network (www.InfoWars.com)
in particular, the 2006 film titled "Terrorstorm"
all of the previous TV documentaries cited 1,500 to 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit as the temperature of the WTC fires. This temperature is much too low to significantly affect the strength of structural steel as they have alleged, and flies in the face of assertions that the steel supporting the floors melted, or was weakened from the fires.
Almost immediately after the documentaries by Alex Jones were released, all of the documentaries airing on or after the anniversary of 9/11 in 2006, had revised their estimates of the fire's temperature upwards
to "over 2,700 degrees"
most notably in one program which aired on the Fox news channel in the New York area on 9/14/2006.
A casual, un-admitted revision of the data in such a manner, should be a red flag, klaxon horn indication of a lie and / or a media-complicit cover-up to anyone who is paying close enough analytical attention to these mainstream media telecasts.
Quite frankly, the collapse of the WTC buildings could have happened just as the
IF steel melts or becomes significantly weaker at a temperature of a fire that is fueled by jet fuel
which is essentially a purified form of kerosene. However, steel does NOT melt or become significantly weaker at such low temperatures, and what everybody
including Alex Jones
fails to mention, is that IF that structural steel could melt, or be weakened at even 1,500 degrees, the ambient temperature around that steel would have had to have been much, much higher. This temperature would have certainly super-heated the air inside the building, and instantly seared the lungs of everyone in the impact zone. We know that this did NOT happen, since NONE of the people who were in the impact zone who escaped the collapse when interviewed, even MENTION anything about the heat of the fire. Also, dark, black smoke from the fires is indicia of a slow and oxygen-starved, incomplete combustion, and it is my contention that the fires were not anywhere NEAR even 1,500 degrees
even though the sprinkler systems failed due to water supply lines that were severed by the impact. Hence, the theory that the steel supports collapsed due to the heat of the fires, has to be called into question.
Additionally, both Trade towers and building # 7 which was not impacted at all, collapsed essentially into their own shadows. This is a feat that ONLY a professional demolition team could do
and only with careful planning and WEEKS of preparation. If we assume that heat from the Trade Center fires weakened the steel supports, then we must hold true that all of the steel supports were weakened and gave way simultaneously, else the buildings would have leaned, wobbled, and fell over sideways
but that is obviously NOT what happened.
There is also the possibility that the rated load of the tower floors was significantly exceeded by the weight of a jumbo jet, and its cargo of fuel. Along with the damage done to the outside support structure at point of impact, it would stand to reason that if the building was going to collapse, it would fall in the direction where the steel was damaged
much like a lumberjack fells a tree by the direction of the cut. Again, this is NOT what happened.
The media reports are either misinformed, or they are lies. Either way, there is no science that can support any of these theories
even Alex Jones' allegations
unless certain critical data is known with absolute, impartial certainty. The temperature of the fires was not measured, and therefore cannot be known, but we DO know that the result of the fires
dark, black smoke
is a 100% reliable indicator of the combustion conditions; anyone alleging that those fires were hot enough to melt or weaken structural steel, either does not know anything about metallurgy and hi-rise fires, or is lying. You choose what you want to believe.
Also, in a program airing on the Fox network, seen in New York on 9/14/2006, the collapse of WTC building 7
which was clearly a controlled demolition, and admitted to be such by Larry Silverstein, the building's owner
was also alleged by the narrator to have been caused by fires ignited by the debris of the falling towers over eight hours earlier. In the documentary "Terrorstorm", video evidence clearly shows explosions
known in the demolition industry as "squibs"
going off at the base of the building prior to the collapse. The collapse shown frame-by-frame is unmistakably a professional demolition job, and Larry Silverstein admitted that it was. So why the media hype that fires also caused building 7 to collapse? Is this ignorance, stupidity, incompetent journalism, or something else entirely? I, for one, do not believe that news reporters are THAT stupid; stupidity and ignorance cannot be made to blame for what is almost certainly a crime carried out with, if not complicity, then at least the tacit consent of our own government. This wouldn't be the first time that a dictator in the making carried out attacks on his own country to have an excuse to go to war, or to put a country under martial law.
ONE tower falling into its own shadow I suppose is statistically possible. TWO towers falling straight down is certainly NOT a coincidence, and when you consider building 7's collapse
an admitted demolition job, one in his or her right mind HAS to question the entire "official" story... and if they're lying, then the logical question that must follow is, "What TRUTH is being obfuscated here?"
Who are we to believe, when all of the "official" stories contradict each other? Let the empirical video evidence speak for itself to a rational, analytical mind. We must question every statement, and hold accountable to the law, every willingly false statement made about this horrendous crime.
Proponents of the allegations that WTC was intentionally demolished have had, up until this point, failed to explain their allegations, or produce empirical evidence about how explosives and a steel-cutting material called "Thermate" (Thermite mixed with sulfur) could have been planted prior to 9/11. Since the plotters allegedly knew that planes striking the towers would be unlikely to bring them down, explosives and cutting charges (Thermate) had to be in place prior to 9/11. Well, in the very same Fox news documentary cited earlier, the narrator, in an attempt to explain that the fireproof sheathing on the steel was defective, and blown off by the impact of the airliners, admitted that workers were in the process of replacing the fireproofing just a few weeks prior to the attacks. Is it just ANOTHER "coincidence" that workers
possibly a demolition crew
were doing what amounted to structural repairs just prior to the collapse of the buildings? These crews had to have access to the building's structural skeleton to do these "repairs"; were they replacing defective or outdated fireproofing (asbestos), or wrapping the support columns with Thermate and C-4 explosives? I think somebody should confront Mr. Silverstein with the question as to WHAT COMPANY was doing this work, so that they can be reached for verification and questioning. Silverstein cannot deny knowledge of structural work being done on HIS buildings without exposing the Fox Network as a propaganda machine, and if he affirms that the work was done, he exposes himself to further scrutiny, as well as investigation for criminal conspiracy to commit
treason and acts of war
not to mention insurance fraud.
To put the controversy to rest once and forever, I propose that a full-scale replica of six floors of WTC be constructed according to the original specifications. The full-scale mock-up can then be subjected to the same conditions as would be encountered by a plane crashing into it at 600 MPH, as the South tower was. Heat and stress sensors, cameras, and other monitoring devices can provide valuable data to architects, and we will, at the end of the experiment, be able to "bust" the myths
if they are myths
or confirm that buildings such as WTC are vulnerable to collapse due to plane crashes. We will, at the end of such an experiment, have the means to call ONE side of the story "plausible", and the other so much theoretical speculation, a myth, or a lie.
Another interesting study that could be done, is to actually measure the flame of an atomized stream of JP-4 jet fuel... perhaps mix it with pure oxygen in order to show that even under IDEAL conditions, burning jet fuel cannot melt or weaken structural steel as alleged. Once that lie is put to rest, the logical remaining question is WHAT melted the steel
if indeed, the steel MELTED as alleged. If it wasn't melted, perhaps it was cut by highly-localized and shaped Thermate charges as alleged by the so-called "conspiracy theorists".
I do not think it unreasonable to form a "theory" around facts if circumstances that indicate that the "theory" is more plausible than the official accounts of an event. The law has an axiom:
"The danger with the use of circumstantial evidence is that of logical gaps; subjective inferential links of low probability, or insufficient degree".
People vs. Cleague, 22 NY2d 363, 367, 292
The scenario put forth in Alex Jones' "Terrorstorm" has no "logical gaps"; his documentary flows seamlessly from allegation to conclusion. We cannot say as much for the "official" account of events that day. Without empirical verification of every allegation and every affirmation, all we are left with is based on the question "Who do you trust to tell you the truth?"
Again, I must call into question the allegation of nineteen hijackers going on suicide missions, if the ones weaving the scenarios are caught in so many inconsistencies, lies, and obfuscations. There is NO REASON for the government to classify ANY of this information, since the "terrorists" already know that planes can take down buildings
if indeed they DID. I, for one, if flying anywhere, would make a wannabe hijacker EAT his box-cutter. If he's going to blow up the plane anyway, his last meal will be a razor blade.
Among all the so-called "coincidences" that are said to have happened, the FACT that NORAD was conducting exercises that day, is the most disturbing. The odds of this happening, according to insurance company actuarial tables, are one in 1040... Those are long odds, indeed! And so the public has, in MY humble opinion, been brainwashed into believing a LIE, and even when the LIES
let's give them the benefit of the doubt and call it "misconceptions"
are exposed, there follow spins on the original spin, and spins on the spun spins. While I am on the subject of coincidences, I suppose that it is also a "coincidence" that the only buildings that collapsed on 9/11/01 were owned by Larry Silverstein. I suppose that it is ALSO coincidental that Mr. Silverstein made a significant profit on his investment by collecting the insurance money for those buildings, which were insured just a few months prior to the attacks for many times the price he paid for them. Oh, yes, we saw the feigned insurance company challenges to his claims in all the major newspapers, but he won the case, and the money was paid. To NOT include Mr. Silverstein in the growing list of suspected co-conspirators would be stupidity of the highest magnitude.
I personally would LIKE to believe that I can trust the government of my country
the country I fought in Vietnam to protect
is capable of protecting my freedom... but I cannot turn a blind eye to their B.S.
stories, when what they allege happened on 9/11 violates the immutable laws of science. I CERTAINLY cannot have blind faith in a government that has been PROVEN to lie to its citizens. Given the methodology of despots throughout history, 9/11 runs too much of a parallel to the burning of the Reichstag for my comfort; it stinks of cover-up even more so than the Warren Commission report on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Perhaps the TRUTH of the last 40+ years lies in the echoes of Dealey Plaza. Perhaps our government since that fateful day in November of 1963 has been an apparency; that is, it appears to be but it is NOT what it appears to be. Perhaps those who use the Bully pulpit of high government office to speak of the possibility of terrorism by "mushroom clouds" and "Islamic Fascism" are themselves the terrorist propaganda conspirators. Perhaps the citizens who are addicted to the mainstream Media and the mindless fluff of endless ball games and TV sit-coms are beginning to get wise to the schemes of the "power elite". Perhaps they will do what it takes to return America to the American people; perhaps theyll sit idly by and do nothing as the Germans did just before Kristallnacht. Only time and the grace of Almighty God will tell.
ARCHITECTS and Engineers FOR 9-11 TRUTH
The WTC and
building 7 (which fell at 5:45PM on 9-11-01) were brought down by controlled
demolitions. View the empirical evidence and read the opinion of architectural