Is anyone interested in Apollo missions...

[Len Colby]

Thanks Len.

Nice to get confirmation on what respectable, conformist people should spend their time researching - and the right questions for decent folk to ask. Doubtless Kuchinich has been made aware of that too.

Of course, looking at "a few, specific discrepancies in the public record" (re: 9-11) covers a multitude of possibilities.

Let's hope he chooses the best lines to question wisely, with integrity and courage. Kuchinich could certainly crack the whole case open, on C-SPAN if not on Fox.

Here are a few possible lines of inquiry where plenty of discrepancies may be found.

Anthrax Murders/Scares

Collapse of WTC Towers / Contolled Demolition

WTC-7

Pentagon

Identity of 'hijackers'

'Exercises' on 9-11

Israeli Spies

Insider Trading

There are plenty more, but that should be enough to bring down the official house of cards.

Oh yeah Sid, you are the epitome of a non-conformist, open-minded free thinker. In fact you are so open minded you unquestioningly accept any cockamamie CT you hear about that conforms to your world view, and hey if it has “Zionists” (‘wink wink’) as its culprits so much the better..

Yes perhaps he should “waste” time and money looking into your laundry list of complaints and others even if it’s just to see if there is any merit to them. And then if the investigation shows that they are totally baseless no matter how strong the evidence the folks from your crowd will roundly condemn him and his colleagues for being traitors and sell outs to the “power structure”, neo-cons, Zionists or what ever boogeymen their particular faction points their fingers at.

As for real problems a new investigation could look into are these criticisms of Giuliani from NYC firefighters and their families.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070330/ap_on_el_pr/giuliani911

e) if any flaws in the Twin Towers design and construction hastened their collapses

Mafia sponsored concrete perhaps? I understand that the building trade in 70s NY was run almost exclusively by "The Families"

Yes the Mafia controlled construction among other things back then but I don’t think concrete was a problem since with limited exceptions it wasn’t used anywhere other than the floor pans.

The quality and thickness of the steel could be an issue though:

- Despite “inside jobbers” claims to the contrary there is no evidence (other than the third hand reports of a former manager of a water testing lab bought by UL a few month before 9/11) that the steel was ever tested for its fire-resistence

- According to one structural engineer who looked into the collapses

a) The perimeter columns were made from higher than normal density steel to compensate thinner than permitted wall thicknesses

This trade off was not permitted by NYC fire codes (the WTC as a project of the PANYNJ was exempt) and could have made the towers more vulnerable

There are also all sorts of questions raised about the fireproofing used in the towers. Traditionally critical structural steel elements had been encased in concrete but starting in the 1960's spray-on products and wallboard were used as was the case of the WTC buildings. Different types and thickness of spray-on fire proofing were used. The South Tower which collapsed in less time had thinner fire proofing. The inventor of the product used on the lower floors predicted collapse of the towers if fire broke out above the 64th floor.

NIST raised questions about the fire stairs finding they would have been inadiquate if the buildings had been anywhere near capacity. Many people came to work later than normal on 9/11/01 because it was the first day of school at many schools and the NY state primary election was that day as well.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

Since I asked Sid a week ago to substantiate one of his claims and he has yet to reply I decided to give this thread a little 'bump', I'm sure it just slipped his mind.

[Kathleen Collins]

Guiliani hated by NY Firefighters, Rudy is using 9/11 to run for President

Rudy Guiliani meets with harsh criticism about 9/11.

http://news.aol.com/elections/president/st...990001?cid=2359

His administration's failure to provide the World Trade Center's first responders with adequate radios, a long-standing complaint from relatives of the firefighters killed when the twin towers collapsed. The Sept. 11 Commission noted the firefighters at the World Trade Center were using the same ineffective radios employed by the first responders to the 1993 terrorist attack on the trade center.

A November 2001 decision to step up removal of the massive rubble pile at ground zero. The firefighters were angered when the then-mayor reduced their numbers among the group searching for remains of their lost "brothers," focusing instead on what they derided as a "scoop and dump" approach. Giuliani agreed to increase the number of firefighters at ground zero just days after ordering the cutback.

More than 5 1/2 years later, body parts are still turning up in the trade center site.

"We want America to know what this guy meant to New York City firefighters," said Peter Gorman, head of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. "In our experiences with this man, he disrespected us in the most horrific way."

The two-term mayor, in his appearance before the Sept. 11 Commission, said the blame for the death and destruction of Sept. 11 belonged solely with the terrorists. "There was not a problem of coordination on Sept. 11," he testified.

Giuliani was also criticized for locating the city's emergency center in 7 World Trade Center, a building that contained thousands of gallons of diesel fuel when it collapsed after the terrorist attack.

Kathy

Sorry for the double post. Kathy

Edited March 31, 2007 by Kathleen Collins

[Sid Walker]

Sid said: "the WTC-2 fires appear to have been small, localized and not very hot. Not sufficient to explain the unprecedented collapse of the entire building at virtual free-fall velocity"

I was wondering if he or any other "inside jobbers" could cite any evidence in support of the theory the fires in the Twin Towers were "small, localized and not very hot"?

As pointed out ad infinium video evidence shows the collapses took over 14 seconds far longer than the 9 seconds of "free fall time" - BTW

I give up on this 'debate' Len.

If you want to believe that the WTC-2 fires were major, widespread and very, very, very hot, you have a perfect right to do so.

That's religious freedom. Believe what you like.

[Sid Walker]

A new article about this saga.

I've highlighted a few key sentences...

ADL SPIKED SEPT. 11 BLOCKBUSTER

Foxman & Crew Pressured Media To Suppress Israeli 9-11 Connection

rss202

By Mark Glenn

“What are you doing putting this stuff out there? You’re killing us!”

These were the words of Abraham Foxman, executive director of the infamous Anti-Defamation League, considered by many in the know to be nothing more than a domestic branch of Israel’s intelligence service Mossad.

According to an explosive piece recently appearing in the online edition of Counterpunch, Foxman shouted this during a sit-down he demanded to have with an unnamed Fox News executive shortly after Sept. 11.

The “stuff ” that was causing Foxman so much indigestion that day was a damning, four-part investigative series Fox News had been airing after Sept. 11 dealing with the arrests of several hundred Israeli nationals as well as some of the incriminating circumstances surrounding their activities in the United States.

In particular, it was the story dealing with one group, known to investigators and journalists as the “high fivers,” who, according to an arrest report by the Bergen County Police Department, were “seen by New Jersey residents on Sept. 11 making fun of the World Trade Center ruins and going to extreme lengths to photograph themselves in front of the wreckage.”

The same police report also indicated that “maps of the city with certain places highlighted” were found in their vehicle, giving all of it the appearance that “they’re hooked in with this” and that “they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park.”

Since then, Cameron’s reports have been removed by the network from its archives on the Internet. However, the series can still be viewed on web sites around the world.

These men—along with many others arrested around the country after 9-11—were held by U.S. authorities for several months for questioning before being quietly sent back to Israel. What these investigations revealed was that the young Israeli nationals were all intelligence officers working for Mossad, a fact later admitted by Israel and proved by the comments of one of these men in a radio interview he gave after his return home. “We were

sent to document the event,” said one of the Israelis.

What is of particular importance in this development, however, was the role that pro-Israel pressure groups—in this case the ADL, AIPAC and the misnamed Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA)—played in the cover-up of the role Israel played in the mass murder of not just the 3,000 Americans on Sept. 11, but the 3,000+ American servicemen and 700,000 Iraqis subsequently killed in Iraq as well.

In a personal interview with American Free Press, the writer of the report in Counterpunch, Christopher Ketchum, indicated that Foxman just didn’t call upon Fox News. Every major media outlet in America received a visit from the head of the ADL. In addition to Foxman inserting his largesse personally, executives at the highest levels of the various networks were also inundated with phone calls, letters and emails so numerous that they caused the computer networks to crash.

Of equal importance is the fact that according to the several intelligence and federal law enforcement agencies who were contacted, various members of the most powerful Jewish groups in the country visited the White House and petitioned officials at the highest levels to close down all investigations of the Israeli spies.

It is important to remember that the official position of these various Jewish groups has been that the stories circulating on the internet alleging Israeli foreknowledge of 9-11 have been nothing more than an “old canard” dreamt up by anti-Semites and Israel-haters and that there was never any evidence to suggest that such foreknowledge existed.

Had Americans been made aware of the arrests of hundreds of Israeli intelligence officers in the aftermath of Sept. 11 and the highly suspicious circumstances surrounding them, it is unlikely—even as propagandized as they are concerning the Middle East—that they would have signed on to sending their sons and daughters off to fight and die for Israel in Iraq.

Cover-ups are part of the dirty business of the Israeli lobby. Whether it involves the murderous attack on the USS Liberty by Israeli forces in 1967, Israeli foreknowledge of Sept. 11, the attempt to secure the release of major spy Jonathan Pollard or the efforts to gain an acquittal for the two AIPAC executives now standing trial for espionage, the conclusion to which all Americans must arrive is that Israel and her various tentacles collectively make up the most dangerous enemy the United States has ever faced.

A former schoolteacher fluent in several languages, Mark Glenn spoke at the AFP-TBR conference on the Middle East panel. He is a prolific writer whose provocative essays have been published worldwide. He and his wife Vicki and their eight children maintain a ranch in northern Idaho. His book, No Beauty in the Beast, can be ordered from TBR BOOK CLUB (1-877-773-9077) for $28 ppd.

(Issue #14, April 2, 2007)

Edited April 1, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Sid Walker]

9/11 CONTROVERSY FOR BEGINNERS on the What Really Happened website has superb photos of the WTC under construction, showing the mighty steel frame at the center of the towers.

A brief extract from the accompanying text:

I reviewed the many dubious scientific arguments of the "official story" and noticed a glaring omission. Let us assume –FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT – that 9-11 fires caused WELDED AND BOLTED steel trusses to “weaken” and the floors to “pancake”. Pray tell, what on earth happened to the solid steel cores of the two towers? ???

[Peter McKenna]

9/11 CONTROVERSY FOR BEGINNERS on the What Really Happened website has superb photos of the WTC under construction, showing the mighty steel frame at the center of the towers.

A brief extract from the accompanying text:

I reviewed the many dubious scientific arguments of the "official story" and noticed a glaring omission. Let us assume –FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT – that 9-11 fires caused WELDED AND BOLTED steel trusses to “weaken” and the floors to “pancake”. Pray tell, what on earth happened to the solid steel cores of the two towers? ???

Uh, the steel frames in the middle of the building are the column supports for the pedastel cranes. There are some steel columns, they ae the framing columns for the central shaft, but the lattice shaped structures are pedastel crane supports, which typically are moved up as each floor is completed.

[Sid Walker]

9/11 CONTROVERSY FOR BEGINNERS on the What Really Happened website has superb photos of the WTC under construction, showing the mighty steel frame at the center of the towers.

A brief extract from the accompanying text:

I reviewed the many dubious scientific arguments of the "official story" and noticed a glaring omission. Let us assume –FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT – that 9-11 fires caused WELDED AND BOLTED steel trusses to “weaken” and the floors to “pancake”. Pray tell, what on earth happened to the solid steel cores of the two towers? ???

Uh, the steel frames in the middle of the building are the column supports for the pedastel cranes. There are some steel columns, they ae the framing columns for the central shaft, but the lattice shaped structures are pedastel crane supports, which typically are moved up as each floor is completed.

Peter,

Whether the lattice shaped corner structures were temporary, as you suggest, or permanent, the point remains: what on earth happened to the solid steel cores of the two towers?

[Peter McKenna]

9/11 CONTROVERSY FOR BEGINNERS on the What Really Happened website has superb photos of the WTC under construction, showing the mighty steel frame at the center of the towers.

A brief extract from the accompanying text:

I reviewed the many dubious scientific arguments of the "official story" and noticed a glaring omission. Let us assume –FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT – that 9-11 fires caused WELDED AND BOLTED steel trusses to “weaken” and the floors to “pancake”. Pray tell, what on earth happened to the solid steel cores of the two towers? ???

Uh, the steel frames in the middle of the building are the column supports for the pedastel cranes. There are some steel columns, they ae the framing columns for the central shaft, but the lattice shaped structures are pedastel crane supports, which typically are moved up as each floor is completed.

Peter,

Whether the lattice shaped corner structures were temporary, as you suggest, or permanent, the point remains: what on earth happened to the solid steel cores of the two towers?

Well as I have not personally seen the wreckage up close, I would have to rely on the NIST report and the architect's evaluation (also popular mechanics did a very good evaluation, but as the loose change crew were directly confronted by the popular mechanics engineers, the PM people have been discounted out of hand):

Anyway, the information I have read concerning the twin towers, the central core strucutre was designed to support the dead weight of the floors and shaft only. The Curtain Wall (exterior wall) was designed to take the live loading, which is much greater than the dead load. As the steel could not have melted, but would have been significantly weakened due to high temperatures (which will reduce the strength dramatically when> 700 degrees F), and overloaded as the catastrophic floor failures resulted in a "domino effect" of many times the dead load would have significantly overstressed the remaining steel, I would guess that the steel center would have been pulled down with the rest of the building internals. Photographs of the wreckage did show large lengths of steel columns laying out at ground zero, and may have been the internal columns. I linked these photos to an earlier post a couple of weeks ago, if you want to see them. Let me know if you can't find them and I will look them up again.

Again, I do not know what happened to WTC 7, and I do not have an explanation which corresponds to the events of WTC 7 captured on video, so I cannot offer any credible reason why it collapsed the way it did.

In my opinion, FWIW, the collapse of the twin towers however, seem to be explained with credible explanations and engineering to support the explanation.

Edited April 2, 2007 by Peter McKenna

[Sid Walker]

In my opinion, FWIW, the collapse of the twin towers however, seem to be explained with credible explanations and engineering to support the explanation.

I don't mean to be rude, Peter, but you have a talent for tortuous and circular arguments, the main import of which seems to be "nothing to see here folks!"

[Peter McKenna]

In my opinion, FWIW, the collapse of the twin towers however, seem to be explained with credible explanations and engineering to support the explanation.

I don't mean to be rude, Peter, but you have a talent for tortuous and circular arguments, the main import of which seems to be "nothing to see here folks!"

Ok Sid I'll, say it simply for you,

It apears the NOT "SOLID" (as was stated earlier) central steel columns were pulled down with the internals of the buiding when it collapsed. This is suggested by photographs of the wreckage.

[Peter McKenna]

In my opinion, FWIW, the collapse of the twin towers however, seem to be explained with credible explanations and engineering to support the explanation.

I don't mean to be rude, Peter, but you have a talent for tortuous and circular arguments, the main import of which seems to be "nothing to see here folks!"

Anway Sid, here are some photos of the steel after the collapse:

http://wtc.nist.gov/media/gallery.htm#recover

As far as "Circular Logic" is concerned, I do not subscribe to it. You might re-read some of your arguments however, as they provide a much better example.

[Len Colby]

Since it seems only ONE structural engineer from any where in the world with building design experience* has publicly challenged the fire induced collapse theory, the inability of Sid and other people with absolutely no expertise in the field to understand why the core collapsed proves nothing.

Peter was correct The perimeter columns bore 40% of the gravity load (i.e. static load, dead weight) and 100% of the live load, the core was responsible for supporting 60% of the building’s mass as static (i.e. motionless) load. Once the perimeter columns gave way and the upper floors started to come down the damaged core had to support 100% of the building’s mass as dynamic (moving) load. Adding to the core’s problems NIST found that the sagging trusses pulled in the perimeter and outer core columns. In the case of the former this can be documented by photos showing the columns bowing in. I remember see a video clip from a NYPD helicopter where the pilots noticed the bowing and radio a warning (this is the helicopter mentioned in the NIST and IIRC 9/11 Commission reports) I’ll try to find it.

FWIW I don’t think the “core should have remained standing” argument has been put forward by any of the few “inside jobbers” with vaguely relevant expertise.

* Leaving aside the fact that he a) is a political and religious fanatic, won’t say what buildings he’s designed {so we have to take his word for it he has done so}, c) claimed to be a pilot but isn’t listed in the FAA database {which casts doubt on his reliability see } d) seems not to have read the NIST report and e) is really an architectural engineer {can be the “structural engineer” of record in some states but as the name implies is not as specialized in the structural aspects of building design as a structural engineer). The only other structural engineer I know about spent his entire career designing deep sea oil platforms.

Edited April 2, 2007 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

Sid said: "the WTC-2 fires appear to have been small, localized and not very hot. Not sufficient to explain the unprecedented collapse of the entire building at virtual free-fall velocity"

I was wondering if he or any other "inside jobbers" could cite any evidence in support of the theory the fires in the Twin Towers were "small, localized and not very hot"?

As pointed out ad infinium video evidence shows the collapses took over 14 seconds far longer than the 9 seconds of "free fall time" - BTW

I give up on this 'debate' Len.

If you want to believe that the WTC-2 fires were major, widespread and very, very, very hot, you have a perfect right to do so.

That's religious freedom. Believe what you like.

You’re a funny guy Sid, you make a claim refuse to back it with any evidence and then insinuate that I base by beliefs on faith. The burden of proof is in your court.

The fires don't have to have been that widespread the NIST report you claim to have read only claimed the fire strong enough to weaken the trusses were on the 80th and 81st floors of the eastside of the South tower. Nor was it speculated that they were especially hot, only that they reached tempratures commonly obtained in office/residential fires (office fires tens to burn hotter than residential ones due the greater amount of flammable material per square foot (or meter) and greater use of synthetic material.

[Sid Walker]

The saintly folk at News Hounds, who watch FOX so the rest of us don't have to, have been keeping an eye on campaigns to have Rosie O'Donnell fired from the ABC's The View show.

See John Gibson and Michelle Malkin Whip Up Frenzy Over Rosie O'Donnell and ABC

163 comments have been posted to this article and counting. A hot topic!

I couldn't resist re-posting this comment here. IMO it puts the CD argument clearly, in relatively few words.

One either has to believe in the laws of physics relative to linear motion, namely, conservation of momentum, or trust that the official narrative of the 911 atrocity is true. They are mutually exclusive.

Objects or buildings that fall at a free-fall rate fall with no resistance. Discounting air resistance, this is the case with WTC1, 2 and especially building 7. The widely trumpeted "pancake collapse theory" would introduce significant resistance as upper floors would have to crash through many tens of stories of undamaged structure. The actual rate of the collapse of these three structures as corroborated by unspinnable video evidence, exposes the fallacious nature of the official explanation. A free-fall rate of collapse is only possible if all structural integrity is eliminated just ahead of the collapse wave. This set of parameters can only be accounted for by the controlled demolition of these buildings.

Every American has to decide whether to trust this government and corporate controlled news media or whether to apply some critical thinking skills in the evaluation of widely disseminated information concerning the 911 atrocity. Since my government has a long history of protecting me from the truth “for my own good”, I'll stick with Newton and Galileo.

brisa