|
Mike,
To me the case has been there all along, just
needs a "tower of strength" to take it on with international news coverage
and Jtf. The case was there for Ike, but all slept on and paid the $36M to Sloan
and Co. in Berlin. Why do we let history repeat, our heritage has not been
Peace, Harmony, Empathy and stability but wars and aggression from the
beginning of eternity even in the much worshipped sports areanas.
See also the "secret war" under its modern name
Staring Mel Gibson as a pilot and trafficker, was war ever declared? Thousands
of US and other civilians died, and still are being killed/maimed today by the
remnants, in the most heavily bombed country of the world, where war
was not declared. Is this not criminal enough? If found guilty would this mean
the seizure of all assets of the families? This is so in Aus with drug
dealers.
Doug
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 11:13
AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's
group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
"All this is circumstantial and we need hard evidence."
The prosecution of a suspected criminal involves (among other things)
finding motive, means, opportunity and a pattern of behavior or modus
operandi.
The video made a compelling case for quantifying what the US government
is capable of. They did this with events from the past which can be
found in US State department documents (i.e. Operation North Woods).
see also:
Mike
Paul S Cantrell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
D.
I'm
not being a naysayer, the conspiracy theory may have legs, but all
this
creates many more questions for me...Reasonable doubt is exactly
what
they would want to create
All this is circumstantial and we need hard
evidence. Witnesses.
Receipts. Black boxes. Presidential briefings. VICE
Presidential
briefings. Lewis Libby really, really drunk.
For the
WTC Towers and #7 to be wired for explosives would be a HUGE
project
requiring a LOT of time and workers in those buildings for
weeks. Where
are those workers? Where is the company that carried it
out? There are
only a few skyscraper demo companies. No one saw
them? From whom did they
order the wire? Who drove the truck?
I saw a show on the Discovery
Channel about why the towers fell and
they had a lot of footage of
engineers studying the steel in the
special yard it was taken to in New
Jersey. There was a HUGE
operation 24/7 sifting through the rubble
finding personal effects and
bone/tissue fragments. The engineers and
architects investigating why
they fell had cut out huge pieces of steel
and had them in their
offices. The conclusion of the TV show was that the
insulation
covering the steel was blown off by the impact and explosion
of the
airplanes, and caused the buckling of the steel.
I can't
find a summary of the TV show, but here is the featured MIT
guy with good
explanation:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
And
a transcript of his NOVA
interview:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse2.html
No,
mention of WTC7...FEMA surely bumbled the investigation and it did
fall
precisely. My guess is that the 'earthquake' following the WTC
towers
collapse weakened the building and the fire fueled by diesel
caused
buckling in the middle of the building, but there is not enough
reliable
evidence to make a determination.
I can't remember the exact quote,
but there is no need to attribute to
evil what can adequately be
explained by stupidity.
One day we will know the truth...Hopefully
one day it will all add up.
On 4/10/06, D. Mindock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> Check out:
>
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/jones/StevenJones.html
> Basically
the planes were not enough to do the collapse alone. They
> needed
help. WRT having to have the planes hit at the exact level
> where
there would be charges, not necessary. The upper few stories
>
wouldn't need any but maybe they were there, just in case. Just put
the
> charges
> at all the floors below. Demolition
>
wiring is sophisticated enough to initiate the charges at the level
where
> each plane hit to make it look like the plane's impact/fire
started the
> pancaking.
> WRT to the steel beams being quickly
hauled off for scrap, normally there is
> an investigation by the fire
marshall. He would've wanted to see those
> beams.
> A lot can
be learned. At a minimum, how the beams failed. Were they twisted
> or
warped. Any signs of melting. Etc. Hauling the beams off so that no
>
post mortem of the building could be accomplished is, in effect,
destroying
> evidence. Also what caused the concrete to turn into
powder? There was
> huge amounts of concrete dust. Concrete doesn't
normally powderize.
> Peace, D. Mindock
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >> Another unanswered question:
why were the massive steel beams quickly
> >> gathered up
and
> >> ship off for scrap? Is it because the beams might've
shown that they were
> >> torn apart by
> >
>
> If you have been down to ground Zero you will notice there is no room
to
> > store the debris from a fraction of one tower let alone keep
all the steel
> > for "investigation". Does the steel get stored at
whose cost while they
> > are
> > trying to locate people?
I personally would not even look at the steel
> > other than a
hindrance to rescue work and get it out of there as fast as I
> >
could to ease the rescue congestion work.
> >
> >>
massive explosive charges? BTW, it's believed that the charges were
set
> > off
> >> just as the floor
> >>
above was just about to hit the floor below. Then this sequence was
>
> repeated
> >> all the way down
> >> to the last
floor. Doing this would create the nice domino effect and
> >>
make
> >> it appear that each
> >> floor was being
crushed by the weight of the floors above. It would make
> >>
a
> >> free fall effect and
> >> not cause the
building to go beyond its footprint. Remember how quickly
> >
the
> >> towers
> >> collapsed? In 15 seconds the
entire tower was down after the initial
> >> charges were set
off.
> >
> > So the aircraft was not a massive explosive
device?? Had no effect on the
> > structure at all?? did not change
any of the steel characteristics?? It
> > was
> > all done
with carefully placed explosives. I seem to remember the top
> >
floors
> > staying intact for several seconds and the lower floors
where impact
> > occurred
> > collapsing first? This if
charges were laid would mean that the plane
> > would
> >
need to be upon the exact floor of the explosives not one floor above
or
> > below other wise the whole charge progression would be out
of time
> > sequence???
> >
> >> They fell
down at free fall velocity, or close to it.
> >> I believe there
were puffs of smoke that appeared just as the collapse
> >>
began.
> >
> > Powder coatings and plaster would more than
account for the puffs of
> > smoke/dust as each section
went.
> >
> >> And yep, Building 7, never hit, did go
down in the free fall way, right
> > into
> >>
its
> >> footprint. If you have ever seen demolition of tall
buildings, this is
> >> how
> >> the pros
>
>> do it. Those charges were pre-set by people who were not amateurs.
The
> >> sequential timing
> >> of the charges was
perfect. All three buildings fell exactly in the same
> >>
way.
> >
> > Have you looked at sites where other
buildings have fallen through bad
> > design? There are hundreds,
some swaying before they collapsed and some
> > falling in on
themselves to fill their own foot print. ( They, collapsing
> >
buildings, actually fill quite a bit more than their footprint as did
the
> > towers).
> >
> > On the other hand, some
place some where there is the emanation of a bad
> > smell about
the whole affair. Too many things have been covered up, not
> >
all
> > was done that could, and why was the 5 sided being
strengthened? Why hit
> > in
> > the vulnerable places,
insider trading perhaps???
> >
> > Who would come forth as
an architect and say "Well I calculated wrongly
> > and
>
> thus the towers could not put up with the impact of - - - - - - - -
and
> > due
> > to this minor error on my part so many
lives are lost"???? I think as is
> > the
> > norm with
human preservation from Sloan to the ground cover up what you
> >
can,
> > deny the rest or blame some one else.
> >
>
> Keep in mind the bungles architects have made and then ask if the
oxygen
> > tanks were factored in and all the rest? Was a B-52
in-air fueller used to
> > determine the impact, no. So why now use
the scenario of a smaller plane
> > as
> > the basis for
impact?? Why was not the biggest plane used, why was not a
> >
nuclear blast used at a distance for theoretical purposes?
>
>
> > The more I study logic, and theory the more broader it
gets and the more
> > it
> > becomes intangible, a lot of
loose ends out there.
> >
> >> Peace, D.
Mindock
> >>
> >>
> >> > And the
towers were designed for impact by large aircraft.
> >> > I
read an interview with the architect - he said the buildings were
>
>> > designed to withstand a hot from the planes of the time the
towers were
> >> > built; these planes were smaller and
carried
> >> > less fuel. In typical list fashion, I don't
rememebr the source, but I
> >> > think it was The New
Yorker.
> >> >
[snip]
--
This message
has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Lao Telecom MailScanner with NOD32, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing
list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel
at Journey to
Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the
combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Lao Telecom
MailScanner with NOD32, and is
believed to be clean.
|
