9/11: Science and Conspiracy - National Geographic

National Geographic put a field trip of kids and chaperons aboard Flight 77.

Next Monday (August 31, 2009), they are airing the latest documentary on 9/11 conspiracy theories. They feature an interview with Richard Gage when discussing controlled demolition theories, and also one with Brent Blanchard.

They did tests with thermite to see if it could be used to cut structural steel.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067#tab-Photos/6



You can already view parts of the documentary at the website:

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067#tab-conspiracy-vs-science

dude.

I predict even this won't shut them up and we'll have to put up with their yammering for a while.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

They like to be official.

Be my guest.

Oh jumper of sharks?

I'm merely responding to one question, what should OCTers be called. Not derogatory enough... for sure... but it will do until something more suitable comes along.

You really should try to hold yourself back.

Rupert Murdoch's ownership of Fox means it's perfectly plausible that NatGeo helped covered up the deaths of their coworkers and kids in their care? If you'd simply repudiate such a despicable argument, I'd be happy to retract the statement. However, your egging him on seemed to imply that you did accept his argument.

Waiting on you.

Show me where in my comment I was agreeing with any of that! You know, there are really excellent medications for hallucinations available these days. You don't have to suffer like this.

If you don't, I'm happy to retract.

But if you do, then you're just playing bullshit games, aren't you?

Do you or don't you?

do you?

The National Geographic Channel is a joint venture with Fox. NG controls the content and Fox is responsible for distribution. Do you think that's nefarious or something?

The name Van Romero strike a memory? He was the vice president of New Mexico tech a demolition expert who on September 11 declared the towers came down with the help of carefully planted explosives.
Oddly just ten days later he recanted saying after further review of the tapes he felt the fires caused the PANCAKE collapse (a since discredited story). It turns out the shows explosives test was done by EMRTC an affiliate with New Mexico tech, that is into the Government for millions in government funding. An Oct 3 2008 appropriations budget Signed by George Bush gave New Mexico Tech and its affiliate divisions who are into border protection,
urban warfare, military operations in urban areas, and anti terrorism professionals 34 million dollars for research projects.
Considering what they are into the funding the government holds over their heads and its past embarrassment to the government and its 911 story this is not the group I would choose for an impartial study on this subject!

So who would you choose?

make up for a past incident that made the governments official story look bad.

name one.

Turner owns Fox, Fox owns NG.

Das war einfach...

I suspect that Rupert Murdoch would be very surprised to hear that Fox is owned by Turner Broadcasting, since it's actually owned by News Corporation, which you'd know if you had the slightest idea what the fuck you're talking about.


And further, for the record, Fox does not own National Geographic Channel outright; they own 50% of it in a joint venture with the National Geographic Channel itself. Why should we listen to anything you have to say when you cannot even get basic facts right, dude?

http://www.nowfoundation.org/issues/communications/tv/mediacontrol.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_geographic_channel

that would eliminate every professor at every university that takes federal funding. It also eliminates every government agency.

Not much left that would have the resources and academic credibility to carry out an investigation.

I suppose you would be fine with letting the drug companies do their own science right?
Oh wait the FDA kind of does and its estimated as many as 250,000 people die each year from perscription drugs.
And new drugs get pulled off the market all the time because they are killing people. Yeah science is never corrupted by money and agenda.
Perhaps there is a lab somewhere in the world that is neutral?????

and just how many countries are neutral towards us? How do they investigate without access to state and military secrets? Are you saying that 911 can be investigated without digging into the FBI, CIA and DoD?

Can you actually name a country you would feel comfortable impartially investigating 911?

I just revisited the old 9/11 tapes online. ARD, ZDF, etc.

All the "experts" said that it could not be done without the help of "other" services.

Need a link, ask me.

Good luck with that.

Boy am I ever in the wrong profession. Demolition U here I come!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVQaVgJne6c

Seems these CD experts know how a top-down demolition works...

explains why you're not taken seriously here, dude.

Can you at least change your handbook to a newer edition that has some new by rote comments we can all enjoy?

dude?

...Dude.

His remark makes sense, according to the new 9/11 physics.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

weren't you about ready to make some important announcement about 9/11? Can we expect it soon?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

understand, dude. I wasn't expecting much from it to begin with.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

did you get the part where it is shear wall construction? It has no steel supports, so fire is far less likley to effect it structurally.

notice how the debris flies out BEFORE the building begins to move...not after. AND with a big BANG!

Thats totally WEIRD, not like the WTC at all! :silly:

Nice attempt, though?

Just an explosion top-down. No jet fuel, no thermal expansion.

Impressive.

cause the Chinese have proven you can do it without jet fuel and thermal expansion!
As you know flying planes into things can get expensive!

Man, I´ll make up my own CD business. Diesel is cheap over here.

with that sharp wit you must be very sucessfull in life.

Ignorance = clever wit. Keep em coming.

But rather simultaneous on multiple levels.

3000+ people died...should they answer for their incompetence?

except when all of those government contracts are in jeopardy.

dude.

then genetic fallacy is one of the things wrong with that statement. There's also begging the question, though.

debater, dude.

for a high school level debate.

You're saying that National Geographic is so beholden to government money that they would be willing to cover up the murder of their colleagues and children placed in their care?

Really?

ETA: On what planet do you spend most of your time?

Apparently, there are scads of people who are quite happy to take money to shut up about killing their family members.

it's one of the most offensive and despicable things I've ever encountered here, bar none

You said:
"Apparently, there are scads of people who are quite happy to take money to shut up about killing their family members."


* What's wrong with families receiving compensation for the loss of their loved ones? It happens everyday. For deaths that are the
result of negligence, intentional killing, accidental, war-related, and sometimes even if it was an Act of God.

* Confidentiality agreements are very common as part of legal settlements.


Do you have evidence to support your claim about people "quite happy to take money to shut up about killing their family members"?

Are you saying that people killed their family members, then took money to shut up about it? Who paid them?

that family members of people killed on 9/11 are aware the government was responsible, but the government paid them to be quiet?

If you have ever seen shark week you would not doubt National geographics willingness to risk the lives of people for our entertainment !
But seriously good people believe the official story but that does not mean they are correct.

No.

if he did...I'd think he'd torch FOX before you and I can hit the snooze button tomorrow morning. (Sorry, today)
I'd say he has every financial motive in the world to keep the status quo rolling along. "It's working for him!"

Had to copy this from Wikipedia. I don't have all night! LOL
Film
Twentieth Century Fox
Twentieth Century Fox Español
Twentieth Century Fox International
Twentieth Century Fox Television
Fox Searchlight Pictures
Fox Studios Australia
Fox Studios Baja
Fox Studios Los Angeles
Fox Television Studios

Television

Broadcast/Production assets
20th Century Fox Television
20th Television
bTV
Foxtel
Fox Broadcasting Company
Fox International Channels Italy
Fox Kids (1990-2002)
Fox Sports Australia
Fox Telecolombia
Fox Television Stations
Fox Television Studios
Imedi TV
Latvijas Neatkarīgā Televīzija
MyNetworkTV
STAR TV
TV5 Rīga
Cable Assets
Big Ten Network (49%)
Fox Business Network
Fox College Sports
Fox Movie Channel
Fox News Channel
Fox Soccer Channel
Fox Sports Enterprises
Fox Sports en Español
Fox Sports Net
FUEL TV
FX Networks
Fox Reality
National Geographic Channel (50%)
National Geographic Channel UK (50%)
SPEED Channel
SportSouth
LAPTV (Latin America — co-owned with Paramount Pictures/Viacom, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/MGM Holdings and Universal Studios/NBC Universal)
Telecine (Brazil — co-owned with Globosat Canais, Paramount Pictures, MGM, Universal Studios and DreamWorks);

Direct broadcast satellite Assets
BSkyB (39.1%)
Sky Deutschland (39.96%)
SKY Italia
SKY Network Television (43.65%)
Tata Sky (20%)

Internet
Fox Interactive Media
AmericanIdol.com
AskMen.com
Fox.com
Foxsports.com
GameSpy
Hulu.com
kSolo
IGN
Drownedinsound.com
MySpace
MyNetworktv.com
NewRoo.com
Strategicdatacorp.com
Photobucket.com
Rotten Tomatoes
Scout.com
SpringWidgets
WhatIfSports
Beliefnet
News Digital Media
Slingshot Labs

Magazines and Inserts
InsideOut
donna hay
News America Marketing
SmartSource

Newspapers and Information Services


United Kingdom
News International
The Sun
News of the World
The Times
Sunday Times
thelondonpaper (a free newspaper)

Australasia
News Limited
The Daily Telegraph (Sydney)
The Sunday Telegraph (Sydney)
The Australian (national)
The Weekend Australian (national)
The Advertiser (Adelaide)
Sunday Mail (Adelaide)
The Sunday Times (Perth)
Herald Sun (Melbourne)
Sunday Herald Sun (Melbourne)
mX (Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane)
The Courier-Mail (Brisbane)
The Cairns Post (Cairns, Queensland)
Geelong Advertiser
Gold Coast Bulletin
The Mercury and Sunday Tasmanian (Hobart)
Northern Territory News (Darwin)
The Sunday Territorian (Darwin)
Australian Associated Press (45%)
New Zealand
Sunday Star-Times
Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea Post-Courier
Fiji
The Fiji Times

United States
New York Post
Community Newspaper Group
The Brooklyn Paper
Courier-Life Publications
TimesLedger Newspapers
Bronx Times Reporter Inc.

International
Dow Jones & Company

Consumer Media Group
The Wall Street Journal - the leading US financial newspaper.
Wall Street Journal Europe
Wall Street Journal Asia
Barron's - weekly financial markets magazine.
Marketwatch - Financial news and information website.
Far Eastern Economic Review
Financial News
Enterprise Media Group
Dow Jones Newswires - global, real-time news and information provider.
Factiva - provides business news and information together with content delivery tools and services.
Dow Jones Indexes - stock market indexes and indicators, including the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Dow Jones Financial Information Services — produces databases, electronic media, newsletters, conferences, directories, and other information services on specialised markets and industry sectors.
Betten Financial News — leading Dutch language financial and economic news service.
Local Media Group
Dow Jones Local Media Group (formerly Ottaway Community Newspapers) - 8 daily and 15 weekly regional newspapers.
Strategic Alliances
STOXX (33%) - joint venture with Deutsche Boerse and SWG Group for the development and distribution of Dow Jones STOXX indices.
Vedomosti (33%) - Russia's leading financial newspaper (joint venture with Financial Times and Independent Media).
SmartMoney (50%)
FiLife.com (50%)

Books
HarperCollins
HarperCollins India (40%) joint venture with India Today Group
Zondervan Publishing
Youth Specialties — organisation helping youth workers worldwide through training seminars and conventions, resources and the internet.
Inspirio — religious gift production.

Miscellaneous
National Rugby League (NRL) (50%)
Ansett Australia, Until 2000 (50%)
Jamba! - Mobile Entertainment/Mobile Handsets Personalisation/Games.
News Outdoor Group - Largest outdoor advertising company in Eastern Europe with over 70,000 ads including billboards and bus shelters, operating in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, India, Israel, Poland, Romania, Russia (96 cities), Turkey & Ukraine.
Maximedia Israel (67%)
Mosgorreklama (50%) - Russia sign and marketing material manufacturer
Kamera Acikhava Reklamclik (?) - leading outdoor advertising company in Turkey
NDS Group (49%) - DRM and conditional access company.

I'm talking about the people of the National Geographic who put kids and their colleagues onto Flight 77 that day, who watched in horror as those events took place, who sat there looking the parents of those kids in their eyes, who hugged and cried and grieved right along with them...

...and then they dried their eyes and helped cover up who actually did it for money?

What planet is it you live on again?

especially National Geographic. Seriously. I just don't believe it.

it's a joint venture between NatGeo and Fox, with NatGeo controlling the content and Fox being responsible for distribution. While it's certainly reasonable to question it due to Fox's involvement, do you really expect us to believe that NatGeo would help cover anything up in which its staffers and children died on a field trip? Really?

should Bush/Chenet be tried for their gross negligent incompetence? Time for you apologists to tell us what you believe.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Nothing in the OP contradicts that.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the weight of the plane and the fuel but not the passengers, food, luggage, etc. That tells me they know it was a government plane and NOT a commercial airliner.

:eyes:

what ever 'that" is. 'Cuz "that" is kinda looopy.

The National Geographic set out to disprove in this program what they called "Conspiracy Theories" about 9/11. They have provided proof with a multi-year simulation from Purdue University that the World Trade Center Tower came down because of damage done by the collision with the large airliners that were flown into these building on 9/11, in order to disprove the "Conspiracy theorists", that jet fuel fires couldn't have brought down the towers. But these conspiracy theories on why the World Trade Center Towers collapsed have never been taken seriously by anyone in main stream media or by any other credible media or government source.

They go on to say on their own web site that:

More than 1/3 of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a 2006 Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.

And that;

Conspiracy theorists say jet fuel fires couldn't have brought down the towers -- but a simulation of the impact proves otherwise.

NGC conducts a forensic investigation to test the tenets of some of the most common conspiracy theories of 9/11 and mysteries surrounding the attacks.

But they have shown absolutely no evidence of any kind that shows that this is an accepted theory by any significant number of Americans.

And in spite of the poll they have actually listed on their web site that shows that "more than 1/3 of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them", they have completely over looked doing any investigation al all into why our intelligence agencies did not stop the attacks on 9/11.

It would appear that they have tried to conflate the fact that "more that 1/3 of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them" with "some of the most common conspiracy theories of 9/11", and the theory that "jet fuel fires couldn't have brought down the towers" and make it appear that in fact 1/3 of the American people believe that jet fuel fires couldn't have brought down the towers, when they have not not shown this at all.

In fact they haven't even listed the number or the percentage of the people in America that even believe that "jet fuel fires couldn't have brought down the towers".

But we know that why our intelligence agencies did not stop the attacks on 9/11 was a major focus of the 9/11 Commission and the Joint Inquiry investigations. So it is not that National Geographic was not aware of this issue. We also now know long after the 9/11 Commission report and public hearings that:

The CIA knew al Qaeda terrorists Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi had been at the al Qaeda planning meeting in Kula Lumpur on January 5-8, 2000 with Walid Bin Attash planning the Cole bombing.

They were clearly aware of this when FBI Agent Ali Soufan sent them the passport photo of Bin Attash, Khallad, on November 2000, which allowed them to compare this passport photo with the photo they had of Khallad taken at Kuala Lumpur. They clearly knew without a doubt that Khallad had been at this meeting with Mihdhar and Hazmi when Khallad was identified by their own FBI/CIA joint source on December 16, 2000 as a high level al Qaeda terrorist and was again indentified by the FBI/CIA joint source on January 4, 2001, from the photo taken of him at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting, actually planning the Cole bombing with Mihdhar and Hazmi.

We know from the DOJ IG report that these identifications of Khallad were made in response to FBI Agent Ali Soufan’s request to the Yemen station in November 2000, for any information the CIA had on any meeting in Kuala Lumpur in January 2000 or on Walid Bin Attash who by this time had been identified as the master mind of the Cole bombing.

When Soufan received no information from the Yemen station to his request, he asked FBI Director Louis Freeh, in November 2000 if Freeh would make a formal request to the CIA and George Tenet directly for any information the CIA had on any meeting in Kuala Lumpur or on Walid Bin Attash, Khallad. But Soufan again was told the CIA had none of this information. See account of Ali Soufan, in the July 17,2006 article of the New Yorker.

The DOJ IG report says:

“In the midst of the Millennium period concerns in late 1999, the NSA analyzed communications associated with a suspected terrorist facility in the Middle East linked to Al Qaeda activities directed against U.S. interests. The communications indicated that several members of an "operational cadre" were planning to travel to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in early January 2000. Analysis of the communications revealed that persons named Nawaf, Khalid and Salem were involved. At the FBI, this information appeared in the daily threat update to the Director on January 4, 2000.”

The 9/11 Commission report page 181 says;

“The Counter terrorism center had briefed the CIA leadership on the gathering in Kuala Lumpur and the information had been passed on ... to the Director Freeh and others at the FBI...”

So it is clear that FBI Director Louis Freeh knew about the meeting in Kuala Lumpur at the very time of Soufan's request in November 2000 and then had criminally obstructed his own FBI investigation of the Cole bombing, an investigation that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11 from the very information Freeh was withholding from them.

In April 2001 Soufan sent another request directly to the CIA headquarters. We now know from the DOJ IG report that both CIA officer Tom Wilshire and Clark Shannon had copies of Soufan’s request, see p 183-184 DOJ IG report. But instead of giving Soufan the information he had requested, Wilshire according to his own admission at the September 20, 2002 public hearings for the Joint Inquiry Committee, asked FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi to set up a meeting with FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team, a meeting that was set for June 11, 2001, it is now clear to find out what the FBI Cole bombing investigators had found out about the meeting in Kuala Lumpur and the people who had attended this meeting.

At this June 11, 2001 New York meeting Corsi presented three photos of Mihdhar, and Hazmi taken at the Kuala Lumpur meeting that Wilshire had obtained from the CIA, to show to Steve Bongardt and some of his Cole bombings investigators.

When CIA officer Clark Shannon asked Bongardt and his team if they recognized anyone in these photos, no one on the Cole bombing investigation knew who any of these people were. See DOJ IG Report and Account of Ali Soufan.

Because of this strange request from Shannon, FBI Agent Steve Bongardt asked Corsi and Shannon who these people were, and since they were asking this question of the Cole bombing investigators, what did these people have to do with the Cole bombing?

At this meeting Wilshire, who actually set up this meeting but was not present, Clark Shannon and even Dina Corsi knew that Bin Attash, according to the DOJ IG report, had been at the Kuala Lumpur meeting with the very people in the photos being shown to Bongardt, actually planning the Cole bombing. Instead of answering Bongardt’s question, Corsi and Shannon said they could not give him any information on the people in the photos due to the wall, the artificial barrier that prevented intelligence information from going to FBI criminal agents until evidence that a crime had been committed.

But according to the DOJ IG report, Corsi, Wilshire, Shannon all knew that Walid Bin Attash had been at the Kuala Lumpur meeting with Mihdhar and Hazmi planning the Cole bombing. The CIA, and Wilshire and Shannon also knew from the NSA cable in December 1999 that these people were long time al Qaeda terrorists who had taken part in the east Africa bombings in 1998.

Shannon and Wilshire in fact actually knew that Hazmi had already entered the US and that Mihdhar and had a multi-entry visa for the US. Corsi was also aware that Mihdhar had a multi-entry visa for the US. See DOJ report.

Since there was already well established evidence that Mihdhar and Hazmi were criminals and part of the criminal al Qaeda terrorist organization, there was no reason the information on them could not have been turned over to the FBI criminal investigators.

In spite of the CIA, Corsi, Wilshire and Shannon knowing that Bin Attash had been actually photographed at the Kuala Lumpur meeting planning the Cole bombing, the CIA and all three of them kept this information secret from Bongardt and even the fact that the CIA had been hiding this photograph of Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur from the Cole bombing investigation.

Wilshire sent email to his CTC managers at the CIA indicating, on July 5, 2001, that he thought the people at the Kuala Lumpur meeting were connected to the warnings of a huge al Qaeda attack inside of the US, and on July 23, 2001 that Khalid al Mihdhar in particular will be found at the location of the next big al Qaeda terrorist attack.

On August 22, 2001, FBI IOS Agent Margaret Gillespie at the CIA Bin Laden unit finds out from the INS that both Mihdhar and Hazmi are inside of the US and takes this information to FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi and CIA officer Tom Wilshire. Note on July 24, 2001 Gillespie had already found the CIR on Mihdhar’s travels to Kuala Lumpur and his US multi-entry visa that specified New York City as his destination, written up by FBI IOS Agent Doug Miller at the CIA Bin Laden unit. This CIR that had written on the bottom; “Blocked by order of the Deputy Chief” (of the bin Laden unit, Tom Wilshire). August 22, 2001, was less than one month after Wilshire’s July 23, email to his CTC mangers on Mihdhar. See “Substitution for the testimony of John”

When FBI Agent Steve Bongardt got Corsi’s EC to start an intelligence investigation of Mihdhar accidentally on August 28, 2001 he called Corsi to demand that the criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi go to his FBI Cole investigating team. Corsi tells him that he cannot investigate Mihdhar and Hazmi due to the restrictions on NSA information going to FBI criminal investigators.

But it is clear from DE #448, on the Moussaoui trial web site, the release from the NSA, that the NSA had already given FBI Agent Dina Corsi written permission to pass the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi and the fact they attended the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting to the FBI criminal investigators in New York, on August 27, 2001 a release that was sent to Corsi on August 28, 2001. The release even listed the recipients as “The FBI criminal Cole bombing investigators in New York”, Steve Bongardt and his team.

When Bongardt did not see any connection between the NSA information to any FISA warrant, he asked Corsi on August 28, 2001 to get a legal ruling from the NSLU, the legal unit at FBI HQ on this issue, to see if he and his team could take part in the investigation and search for Mihdhar and Hazmi.

She tells him on August 29, 2001 that the NSLU attorney has ruled he cannot have any part of any investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi.

But from Sherry Sabol’s testimony to DOJ IG investigators, on November 7, 2002, it is clear that Sabol, the NSLU attorney Corsi had contacted, had ruled in fact just the opposite from what Corsi had told FBI Agent Bongardt. Sabol had ruled that Bongardt and his team could be part of any investigation and search for of Mihdhar since the NSA information had no connection to any FISA warrant and said if Corsi was still confused she, (Corsi) could go and get a ruling from the NSA herself, unaware Corsi had already received permission to transfer the NSA information over to the FBI two days earlier on August 27, 2001. See testimony of Sherry Sabol, 9/11 Commission report p 538, footnote 81.

By hiding the fact that the CIA had a photograph of Walid Bin Attash at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting planning the Cole bombing with Mihdhar and Hazmi, and then using criminal and nefarious means to shut down Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar, actions that are consistent with all of the other times this same information was withheld by the CIA and FBI HQ from the Cole bombings investigators, it is clear that Wilshire, Corsi and even the CIA and FBI HQ did not want Bongardt to have any part in any investigation of Mihdhar or Hazmi.

It is clear they were all fully aware that if Bongardt would have seen the photo of Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur, he would have known that Corsi, Wilshire and even CIA officer Clark Shannon who had been at that June 11, 2001 meeting, and perhaps many people at the CIA and even FBI HQ had criminally obstructed his investigation of the Cole bombing by hiding the fact that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting on January 2000 with Khallad actually planning the Cole bombing.

While the National Geographic program focuses on the what brought down the WTC Towers, they have done nothing with the information that now points to a wide ranging criminally conspiracy at the CIA and FBI HQ to block the FBI Cole bombing criminal investigation, actions that directly lead to shutting down Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, one of only two investigation that we now know could have prevented the al Qaeda terrorists from carrying out the attacks on 9/11.

Leaving out any thought to explain this, when 1/3 of the American people suspected that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them renders the entire National Geographic on the attacks on 9/11 effort (IMHO) almost a total and complete fraud on the American people.

Leaving out any thought to explain this even renders this (IMHO) as a total and complete fraud on the rest of the National Geographic organization, that has done in the past excellent if not the very best work found today with nature programs.

All of the information currently available now not only confirms that the CIA working with FBI HQ agents they had subjugated had intentionally allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place, but links to PDFs of the official US government documents from official US government webs sites and sources that prove all of this can be down loaded for free right directly from several web sites including http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/ the oifficial US government web site for the evidence in the Moussaoui trial and www.eventson911.com.

You realize that the National Geographic program hasn't even aired yet, right?

To be blunt, I believe this is just one more installment in your ongoing program to drive traffic to YOUR website (funny how you never disclose that) and sell your book.

You'd better be glad of two things:

1. No one has alerted the Moderators that you are in violation of the rules.

2. No one has (publicly) questioned/pointed out their theory of YOUR motives for being here.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

in this post, dude?

DU member's motivations. Just because they don't report it whenever they see it doesn't mean they aren't aware of the violation.

since you spend mnst of your time questioning the motivation of nearly anyone who dares disagree with you. I'm sure the irony of this will utterly escape you.

How DO you get away with it? Some of us are stumped. Well, okay - very, very curious.

escaped you, dude. That's not questioning RSchop's motivation. It's questioning the method he's using. I'm sure the subtle difference will elude you for some time. If you'd like more of your posts to survive, you might consider asking someone to tutor you on the rules. If you're implying thast the mods are not enforcing the rules fairly, why don't you complain to them properly and I'm certain they'd be glad to set you straight, dude.

Yes it is questioning my motives and besides, the moderators had cleared my post before I had even posted it, and said it was just fine.

it's against DU rules for a member to use DU for commercial purposes.


Secondly, the irony of you accusing someone else of questioning anyone's motivation is even goofier than the claims you make.

Why don't you alert a moderator and see how far you get with your "complaint"?

While the National Geographic program focuses on the what brought down the WTC Towers, they have done nothing with the information that now points to a wide ranging criminally conspiracy at the CIA and FBI HQ to block the FBI Cole bombing criminal investigation, actions that directly lead to shutting down Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, one of only two investigation that we now know could have prevented the al Qaeda terrorists from carrying out the attacks on 9/11.

Leaving out any thought to explain this, when 1/3 of the American people suspected that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them renders the entire National Geographic on the attacks on 9/11 effort (IMHO) almost a total and complete fraud on the American people.

Leaving out any thought to explain this even renders this (IMHO) as a total and complete fraud on the rest of the National Geographic organization, that has done in the past excellent if not the very best work found today with nature programs.

All of the information currently available now not only confirms that the CIA working with FBI HQ agents they had subjugated had intentionally allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place, but links to PDFs of the official US government documents from official US government webs sites and sources that prove all of this can be down loaded for free right directly from several web sites including.......

despite what you write, I don't for a moment believe that anyone conspired to "let the attacks happen". Again, you're taking 1 + 2 and somehow getting 4. Color me unimpressed.

Another article about this special:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08282009/tv/the_story_behind_9_11__hit_or_myth__186793.htm

Some selected parts:

But at least one local Truther -- Sander Hicks, producer of WeDemandTransparency.com and author of the controverisial conspiracy book, "The Big Wedding" -- has seen a critic's DVD of the special and has his own reaction:

"This documentary is clearly part of the cover-up," he says."

oh... of course, if your not part of the tinfoil, your part of the coverup. heh.

I think my favorite part:

"Nelson, who says he "didn't have a dog in this hunt," insists that the goal of "9/11: Science and Conspiracy" wasn't to debunk Truthers, sway any minds or hide contrary test results.

The producer concedes he would've loved it if the Truther theories were proven correct.

"Our ratings would've gone through the roof!" he says."

Yes, yes, yes, no one wants to find the "truth"... ehhh, bullshit. If any of this non-sense could be proven, any... yes ANY network/channel would be all over it because it would make a fortune for them.

Or set your DVRs!

I've got the DVR going...

I've been insanely busy lately.

wow....i'm convinced ......i was a truther but MAN!! did u see those freakin AWESOME explosions!!

and even cartoons, i love cartoons! or CGI or whatever, lets just not explore what really happened.

Why was Rummy on the field of the Pentagon, helping with stretchers!?

fairy stories?? u r a fairy story.....omg!! this is hil-freakin -larious

I loved the desert scene....i miss New Mexico.........but otherwise....even a more amatuer sopohmoric inane hatchet job then i expected.

Wow....who needs the Daily Show

Did i mention they had lots of really neato-kazeeto bombs and stuff like totally dude i was all

"righteous bro" now i know those "twoofers" are just like totally whack cause, oh man the shit they had blowing up and stuff was better than all those movies and junk i love i mean National Geographjic rocks!!

Maybe if David Ray Griffin blew the crap outta some stuff ...........

how to conduct any of those tests. He can only sit back and bitch that the tests are irrelevant because they don't correspond to his preclusions.

 
http://ngccommunity.nationalgeographic.com/ngcforums/shows/2009/08/911-science-and-conspiracy.html#comment-137269

For example:



Almost like a home away from home...

911: Science and Conspiracy.
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067


:hi:

its his famous one

Let's see,

FOX
"The National Geographic Channel (50%)"
http://www.nowfoundation.org/issues/communications/tv/mediacontrol.html

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/index.html

And that 9/11 stuff is fake science.

Thumbs up so far.

Launching coke cans filled with liquid at a model of the WTC? That's hardly scientific.

Just that they're presenting both.

There are no intelligent people, there are no other choices like LIHOP or MIHOP or anything reasonable in between. Nope. None.

It's either follow the Bush view, or the nutty view.

Thanks M$M. I feel better now that I asked my doctor about my mind controlling drugs. :sarcasm:

They're really not so much interested in science as they are affirmation of their holy faith.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

than a few scattered whack-jobs with a huge agenda and nearly to a one, no answers.

Oh, the irony!

The show openly mocks people who don't believe the Official story by calling them "Truthers". Please, it has the same format as the States Departments website, "Identifying Misinformation". Clearly National Geographic has an agenda.

WTG NG! :applause:

It's why they openly support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's some science there. :eyes:

Glowing articles about our wars in Asia. You don't think Nat. Geo. isn't a political rag? Come on, check out their WWII stuff. What do you think that National Geographic an American publication is going to be against America's wars. Come on. Grow up.

http://www.buch.ch/shop/bch_buc_startseite/typhoonartikel/ID6705601.html;jsessionid=fdc-x7sox3p9j2c.tc3


And that's the most unacusatory link I have.

Edit: Don't know what that says about NG TV or that particular program, though.

How about growing up and providing Objective Quality Evidence.

I haven't been in this forum for a year or more. And the first I'd heard of "truthers" as a dismissive label meaning we are as crazy as the "birthers" was just yesterday during the Van Jones controversy.


Nice way to label people that have questions! And unanswered questions are VERBOTEN in America. You cannot question your government.

I don't have a stake in any theory. But I have lots of unanswered questions. And of course this show only goes after things at least quasi scientific not all the hundreds of others, And I don't even have to watch it to know-guess what ALL the questions by "truthers" are proven wrong. Maybe they ARE wrong.But if it was science there would have to be some conclusions that were inconclusive. But that wouldn't be good propaganda.

The only reason these shows exist is to reassure those that trust their movement and mock anyone who questions it.

Atta via Pakistan's secret service with the aid of Saudi credit institutes.

How forgetful of them to omit that. :sarcasm:

what a pile of crap show.
you have to be a moron to believe those demo EMTC guys or the glaring way the editing makes Griffin and others look hesitant and unsure weren't done on purpose to discredit.

the stupid, the guillible and the paid will believe in the official story.

Happy music playing when OCT'ers speak and scary music playing when the truthers speak. A conspiracy theory "expert" author diagnosing the truthers as paranoids. Really really bad.

to be completely laughable.

I also think the idea that thermite brought down the WTC is ridiculous.

The only conspiracy theories that I think are remotely valid are theories questioning the backing of the hijackers.

Other video's of the Pentagon being hit. They must have hundreds of camera's there. Those tapes belong to us, we have the right to see them. What's laughable is to think the Pentagon didn't arm itself when it had more than 30 minutes. If not to protect itself, DC. But you keep on laughing.

The country that spends Billions on defense, doesn't even defend it's own Pentagon. Yup that's believable.

Pre-911 there was no credible military threat to defend against. Russia was the only country that could attack the Pentagon with conventional weapons but they also knew we would respond with a nuclear strike.

Fighters were scrambled from Otis and Langley - those are DC's defenses. There are no secret hidden missile systems like some believe. Not only are they too big to hide, there would be no point in hiding them.

in WTC 1&2, collapsed WTC7 with a mini-nuke, remotely-piloted the drone planes to crash into the towers, and then flew the plane that launched the missile at the Pentagon, truthers will reject the program as just another white-wash, just another example of the complacent media protecting the supremely evil Bush cabal.

Oh, and then you'll get called a Bush supporter for posting it.

Sid

You know that what Sid says is exactly right. It happens all the time here.

for those who accept the "official" 9/11 story, there is only that and the extreme scenario you describe, with no other possible circumstance or situation that could involve them.

what we're saying (at least me) is develop some believable hypothesis and develop conrete proof of that hypothesis. Until then, the "truth movement" will continue to marginalize itself.

Mocking those that can see outside the box. Instead of going with controlled demolition, why not question why the Pentagon wasn't armed? They had over 30 minutes to do so. Or why did Bush say he saw the first plane hit live that morning? Why not ask him what he meant? Nobody saw the first plane live that morning on TV. In order for that, camera's would have had to been watching the towers before the plane hit to get it live. The tape we all saw of the first plane was viewed on 09/12/01 or much later on 09/11/01.

I only made it as far as the absurdly irrelevent steel beam experiment. They took a small isolated beam and suspended it over a kerosene fire burning at 2000 degrees F, and of course - duh - it bends. Then they show this supposedly meaningful footage to Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin and Dylan Avery as the narrator says "let's observe how truthers process information that does not conform to their beliefs". Holy mother of Todd, what a stunning lack of bias. :sarcasm: It would almost be funny if it weren't such a gravely serious matter.

Did they ever get around to WTC 7? All you have to do is show the footage of 7 coming down and you create new truthers. I think their little con job may have undesired results.

Is Positive and Supportive toward the Official Story?

Nah, that couldn't be it.

How will you process this information that is contrary to your beliefs?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The major questions were never addressed:

Why did the steel framed WTC building #7 (not hit by a jet) fall into its footprint?

Why did temperatures rage underground at ground zero, from 9/11 into December?

Why did the buildings fall at roughly the rate of gravity?

Why weren't the many witnesses of primary & secondary explosions interviewed?

What accounts for all the concrete being turned to dust?

What accounts for the molten steel found at the bases of the towers?


This was a propaganda flick (complete with ominous music & a female narration).

This is clearly an attempt to whitewash the Cheney/Addington/Rummy/Rove/Bush legacy.

apparently the powers can't tell who really owned those stocks in question, the ones that made a boodle from airline stocks. sure!

I've watched these sorts of things before. Mostly, they're version is the correct version, no ifs ands or buts about it. Not only that, they only go into the most outlandish and speculative theories espoused to denigrate and make laughable the "truth" movement, completely ignoring the rational SIDE of the MIHOP section, which DOES ask hard questions about things that DID happen.



This book is a timeline, also found online, of all events happening before, during and after 9/11. Can't really place Paul Thompson in the "Alex Jones" bunch, as his book and website is all mainstream media articles from respected sources. No rense, no anti-semetic sites, no prisonplanet, nothing dubious or ambiguous at ALL about any of the information presented. If one doesn't come away from a full read of this book at least in the LIHOP court, then I have no hope for them that they'll EVER stop trusting a government that stopped caring for it's lesser citizenry long ago.

Many groups benefitted from the events on 9/11, there IS no doubt about that.

A great deal of critics focus on the wrong questions. For instance, instead of asking "WHAT hit the Pentagon", people should be asking "Why was anything allowed to hit the Pentagon AT ALL, especially 45 minutes after they knew two planes were headed off course, both towards the direction of the Nation's Capital, and almost an hour after the Twin Towers were attacked?" They should be asking why and how the NSA, NORAD, the military, the CIA and the FBI all failed on that day and that day only? Where were the terrorist watch lists? Why did the Bewsh administration suppress prior intelligence? Why were there massive amounts of puts on the WTC's biggest tennants and airline stocks prior to Sept 11th? Why was money wired to Mohammed Atta? Why were cabinet members, mayors and authors told not to fly or changed schedules on that day? How was a hijacker passport that should have been vaporized miraculously found in the wreckage (the odds of this happening are almost next to impossible when you think about it)? Why were there reports of people in Muslim communities here and abroad having foreknowledge of the attacks?

Science and physics can't answer these questions, and whenever one of these shows tries to, they come up with the most flimsy, "because I said so", appeal to authority whitewash they can think of and it makes them look like bozos. That is, when they're not avoiding the question completely and want to talk about holograms, drones and missiles instead.

Here's another good article written by DUer Warren Pease on the subject.

The straw men are first and for-most in the flick I saw...

be heated enough so that they lost the tensile strength that allowed them to support the hundreds of tons above them. Then those hundreds of tons would come crashing down and cause a cumulative effect on the support beam portions below them, like an avalanche. Gravity and increasing weight takes care of the rest. The result is the building gradually collapses and implodes all the way from the impact point down to the ground.

The WTC buildings contained lots of flammable material inside to continue the internal fires burning and heating the support beams long after the jet fuel had been used up. Papers, magazines, desks, carpeting, office doors, etc.

I'm more willing to abide by the NIST findings.

http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/

???

absent any significant (so far unidentified) horizontal forces, the only force acting on all that weight was gravity. As far as I know, gravity still operates in one direction - straight down.

absent some thermit help.

I once had an argument online with someone who insisted the planes that hit the towers were not really passengers planes and there weren't really people on them. It was at that moment that I realized that for some people, the delusion goes so deep that they can no longer be reasoned with.

forensic testing of the steel to corroborate the claim of loss of tensile strength. IIRC they may have found one piece of steel exposed to temperatures high enough and long enough that it underwent a fifty percent loss of tensile strength. If my recollection is even ballpark correct, that is not convincing evidence that the structures underwent meaningful loss of tensile strength. Sure, NIST's theory of the collapse is within the realm of plausiblity even given the paucity of corroborating physical evidence, but it is far from convincing.

Anything that proves them wrong is just corporate propaganda, probably personally oversought by Bush and Cheney and produced by Fox News.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Up above, you were complaining that the thread was left in GD because it was positive toward the OCT.

Now here you're complaining that the thread got moved to the dungeon because DU doesn't want open discussion.

Think about how this two statements don't fit together.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If 9/11 was an inside job, it was as simple as OBL being a double agent. The rest could have happened more or less as the official story tells it.

That said, it is strange how the towers and building 7 collapsed.

Edit: spelling

I'm pretty sure the jig was up when he BOMBED OUR EMBASSIES IN TANZANIA AND KENYA. If you're honestly suggesting that we "worked with him" after the embassy bombings, you need more help than I can provide. In fact, if you have some sort of conclusive evidence he's ever worked for the US, please provide it.

I believe what I described to be the most plausible scenario.

plausible.

Of course, any argument that I'm capable of making here and now will not meet the definition of "conclusive evidence". But I'm willing to discuss the subject as patiently, honestly, and intelligently as I'm capable of - as long as you lay off the ad hominem. There's nothing crazy or stupid about not trusting all of the information the empire dispenses. And that, I believe, is what accounts for the genuine interest in these "theories".

Now, if I'm not mistaken, a double agent is nothing without a genuine enemy. It may be true that Al-Qaeda is responsible for the embassy bombings in Africa, and other crimes. But not necessarily true that OBL was personally responsible for every operation. Also, it may be true that some operations were allowed to proceed for a variety of reasons.

The perpetrators of a number of these crimes may be "...groups connected by little more than shared aims, ideals and methods". This article from the BBC also mentions OBL's possible ties to the CIA.

By the way, the US government worked with the Khmer Rouge AFTER they killed 2 million of their fellow Cambodians. Working with the worst people on earth is par for the great American course. Is it not?

The reason I favor this approach over the other conspiracy theories is that it involves the smallest number of people: OBL, his contact, and a select few from government and industry.

There are other things that make you go "hmm", such as the alleged ties between the Bush family and OBL.

And the evacuation of Bin Laden's family after 9/11.

And then there's the interesting interview with Benazir Bhutto, a month before she was murdered, where she talks about "the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden" and his ties to a certain member of Pakistan's ISI. Go to 6:00 in the video to skip to the quote. Of course, it may be that she misspoke, and meant to name Daniel Pearl.

Personally, I lean towards the theory of an American empire that earns its enemies. But who knows? There's also the matter of the pipeline, and the timing...

when you actually have one of these, let's talk again.



To be blunt, I don't see the point of trying to reason with people who post things like:



Fucking unbelievable.

So why in hell would they put out anything but propaganda, ESPECIALLY on this subject!

Is that your final answer?

they were more concerned about them, the corporations.
they started a war in a country that posed no threat, who had nothing to do with 9/11, with over 4000 military casualties, and countless civilian casualties.
Fox is their propaganda arm. We all know that.
They couldn't give a gnat's testicle about kids and co-workers. It was all about the money!

Well, there you and I disagree.

One comment

Gage is an embarrassment to Architects and Engineers across the globe.

He's been laid off from his firm (last year, due to the recession) and was just divorced from his wife as well. And AE911Truth sends him out on world tours! He's going to Australia, New Zealand, and I believe Japan at the end of the year. He just did Europe last year.

He actually posts his touristy pictures on the AE911Truth site and asks for more money.

..that being said I am not enough of an expert to refute/deny the dynamics of the the two towers collapsing so I'll leave that bickering to the "experts"...however the collapse of WTC 7 still doesn't sit right with me...How did that fire start? I don't remember a jet full of fuel hitting THAT building???

The upper floors had a backup sprinkler system based on storage tanks that probably controlled and extinguished the upper floors, but the lower floor systems (primary and backup) fed off the city main that was utterly destroyed when the Twin Towers fell down.

The Nat Geo Channel recently aired a 2- hour special on 9/11 Truthers’ objections to the OCT (Official Conspiracy Theory) put out by the U.S. Gov’t, on the WTC destruction. It was clearly a “hit piece” on numerous levels. The show was comprised of a back and forth on the WTC destruction aspects. The “truthers,” and the supporters of the OCT--the 9/11 Commission Report--mostly politely stated their opposing views. However, the only “truthers” shown were all thermite supporters: Architect Richard Gage, young Dylan Avery of the Loose Change film “fame,” the 9/11 thermite hypothesizer himself, Steven Jones, PhD, and the theologian, David Ray Griffin. No mention of what really destroyed the WTC--micro-nukes--nor of the China Syndrome Aftermath was allowed.


The thermite “hypothesis” is nothing but an Intel agency created limited hangout, to desperately try to hide what really destroyed the WTC. There was one very strange “thermite moment” in this show. Now when one of these NGC experiments showed that thermite failed to explode, Steven Jones remarked that nano-thermite has more explosive properties than regular thermite; and he actually said “nano-thermite such as made by Lawrence Livermore Labs--which implicates them …” So Jones and this show actually leave us with the implication that a U.S. Laboratory was involved in making the alleged WTC destruction agent! Except, of course, “nano-thermite” was not. But what has LL Labs’ primary task been, since the 1940’s? Yes, design of NUCLEAR weapons. Was this another hint by Jones, and the NGC controllers, that LL Labs’ designed NUCLEAR weapons destroyed the WTC?


So what else was aired during this NGC/Regime hit piece? Within minutes, Dylan Avery says that the No Planes Theory is ludicrous. This despite the blatantly, obvious proof that all videos are purely nothing but CGI, and that they all contain exhibited behavior of both the South Tower, and the alleged plane, showing Zero Interaction Physics. Then also within minutes, the show flashes two “33’s” one from a poll of New Yorkers, and the other on a flatbed containing WTC evidence--the coveted double 33--often used to denote something nuclear by the elites.


Also near the beginning, Griffin calls the towers’ destructions, “implosions.” This despite his “colleagues” calling them “explosions.” Is this a slip-up? And if not, at what level is Griffin’s disinformation? It may be at a superficial level, as all these hidden intel assets really are put in place to destroy their own hangout, and support the OCT. And the regime’s number one stooge for tower “collapse” mechanism, Z.P. Bazant, claims that 80% of the tower ends up in its footprint. But, the vast majority of the towers went variously up in smoke (vaporized), or was flung beyond its footprint. Analysis of Bazant’s work is here: http://bogus911science.wordpress.com/


But is there a deeper reason for Griffin contradicting himself, and his colleagues, with the “implosion” statement at the beginning? It is possible that the regime’s stooges are ordered to leave little hints all about--like the double 33? Indeed while the towers are exploding outward and upward (vaporized contents rising), what initiated the destruction and caused the vaporization--and dust particle sizes much smaller than the regime’s stooge alleges--could only have been small nuclear bombs. And these fission bombs are initiated by the IMPLOSION of sub-critical, fissioning components into a super-critical mass. So it is possible Griffin, and the NG Channel, were ordered to include this implosion statement, as an “homage” to what really took out the WTC!


Then the several “experiments” depicted, and the “expert” opinions of several pro-OCT people, are hardly even worth noting. The experiments were thoroughly irrelevant to the WTC event! They included shooting a projectile at a set of thin, supposedly concrete slabs (not thick steel as was the outer structure of the towers), and some conventional building demolition. There was also a steel beam softening experiment. Fire in open air was claimed to have reached a temperature of over 2000 degrees F., and led to the beam buckling. Of course, this is irrelevant for many reasons. The open air was not what was happening regarding the towers, where any alleged jet fuel was 1.expended in the outside explosions, and whose smoke color--black--denoted a low temperature fire inside the oxygen deprived area. The claim that the shock of impact took off all asbestos coating on the beams, is also ludicrous; and obviously both necessary for the regime’s position, and an outright lie. Yes, all these “experiments” and the comments made by the OCT supporting stooges were ludicrous and irrelevant to the WTC set of events!


As already noted, there appears to have been much included here at a deep conspiracy level. At one point, a night-time flyover the new WTC area shows the three largest buildings remaining in a row. They all have pyramids on their tops. And they are aligned similarly to both the Giza pyramids, and what those are modeled after--the Orion belt stars.


Numerous other Intel stooges are paraded out as “journalists or “historians.” These assets claim basically that there has never been a conspiracy, beyond what the Regime states happened. The Pearl Harbor set-up, the Kennedy Assassination, and 9/11 are all stated to only have occurred exactly in the impossible manners that the regime has declared for each one. Of course, one glaring omission by these stooges, in claiming that “Oswald alone did it”--in violation of the inviolable Law of Conservation of Momentum, as Kennedy is slammed backward against the momentum of the claimed incoming bullet from behind him--is the fact that the Regime itself said there was at least another shooter when the House Assassinations Committee, in the late 1970’s, released its report.


So basically the Regime jumped on this chance to not only try to shoot down “9/11 Truth,” but also the truth of the Pearl Harbor set-up, and the Kennedy Assassination. Indeed I have noted here before, that even the Pearl Harbor set-up was acknowledged by no less than President Richard Nixon, that President Roosevelt knew ahead of time, and set it up to happen. This was included in a book by Daniel Ellsberg, “Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers.” So these regime “journalists” and “historians,” as well as the “experts” and their “experiments,” did not recite a single word of truth during this 2-hour “special.” Neither alas did the bogus “truthers”: Gage, Jones, Avery, and Griffin. This is standard for the somewhat clever way the Intel agencies work, in putting out several bogus hangouts to appear to be the only possibilities for some dastardly deed perpetrated by the Regime. Then they get them to “war” with each other publicly. But probably they later go out celebrating together at Langley or London.


But my “favorite” stooge, who just recited one stupid, ignorant lie after another about 9/11, the JFK Assassination, Pearl Harbor, etc. was David Aaronovitch, who closed the show for NGC. His bio includes the fact that he was awarded the “George Orwell Prize for his political writing in 2001.” Yes Big Brother is proud of this Intel asset for his “journalism.”


But despite all these lies, the people are more and more realizing that the World Trade Center could only have been destroyed by micro-nukes http://www.wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/ and the China Syndrome http://www.wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com/ resulted. And this realization, and the Regime’s fear, are the reasons the Regime put out this ridiculous hit piece on 9/11 truth. And the need for the ludicrous denial of ALL conspiracies, and especially the global conspiracy against Mankind, also indicate that more people are finding out about the Ultimate Conspiracy.

By the way - you claim that "the vast majority of the towers went variously up in smoke (vaporized), or was flung beyond its footprint" yet when I asked you to provide calculations for the energy required to vaporize the towers you refused, even though I made some preliminary (admittedly crude) calculations showing your claim to be wildly out of whack with the magnitude of energy released by a fission bomb. Have you managed to determine what the required energy was, or are you perhaps basing your analysis on another of your famous "experiments"?

is woo per word. Without question the highest density of woo seen in a long time.

except for a few here who spend all their time trying to deny 9-11 was an inside job. And it's all they do... Ya gotta be naive or really stupid to believe the official story.

claim "9/11 was an inside job". You can believe that fantasy if you want, but until you produce actual evidence it was, I won't.

and National Geographic is shameless propaganda anyway. All US media is owned by a few who have a financial interest in the views they promote.