Featured What's The Difference?

I don't know how you managed to miss all the video evidence of "first hand accounts" I've posted so far. But then I don't know how the "co - lead investigator" for NIST managed to miss all the evidence of molten steel at ground zero either.

Dr. Graeme MacQueen, "Eyewitness Evidence of Explosions in the Twin Towers : Testimony for the Toronto Hearings, Day 3, Sept. 10, 2011" (without appendix). See embedded video.

I will give three main examples of richly detailed accounts.

(a) I begin with two firefighters, Dennis Tardio and Pat Zoda, whose conversation about the destruction of the North Tower was captured on film by the Naudet brothers on the day of 9/11. [13]

Tardio and Zoda repeatedly affirm each other’s accounts, both with words and with hand gestures. The hand gestures are like a series of karate chops starting high and going quickly downward. The witnesses evidently want to suggest that there were many discrete, energetic events that they observed, and that these started high up and then moved rapidly down the building at regular intervals.

Zoda says, as he moves his hand: “Floor by floor, it started poppin’ out.” Tardio concurs and uses the same hand gesture: “It was as if they had detonated, detonated (Zoda: “Yeah, detonated, yeah”), you know, as if they were planted to take down a building: boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.” Zoda adds: “All the way down. I was watching and running.”

Remember: these are firefighters and they are used to encountering the standard sorts of explosions that occur in building fires. But they do not talk about smoke explosions, or “boiling-liquid-expanding-vapour” (BLEVE) explosions, or any of the other expected forms of explosion. They are talking about, and acting out with dramatic gestures, a different thing altogether. They say that what they saw resembled a controlled demolition.]/QUOTE]

Continue . . . http://themindrenewed.com/in-the-media/713-news156

Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories

The above quotations come from a collection of 9/11 oral histories that, although recorded by the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) at the end of 2001, were publicly released only on August 12, 2005. Prior to that date, very few Americans knew the content of these accounts or even the fact that they existed.

< snip >

Why, we may wonder, have the firefighters and medical workers not been speaking out? At least part of the reason may be suggested by a statement made by Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman Paul Isaac. Having said that “there were definitely bombs in those buildings,” Isaac added that “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact.”57

Would we not expect, however, that a few courageous members of the fire department would have contacted the 9/11 Commission to tell their story? Indeed. But telling their story to the Commission was no guarantee that it would find its way into the final report—as indicated by the account of one fireman who made the effort.

Firefighter Louie Cacchioli, who was quoted earlier, testified in 2004 to members of the Commission’s staff. But, he reported, they were so unreceptive that he ended up walking out in anger. “I felt like I was being put on trial in a court room,” said Cacchioli. “They were trying to twist my words and make the story fit only what they wanted to hear. All I wanted to do was tell the truth and when they wouldn’t let me do that, I walked out.”58

That Cacchioli’s experience was not atypical is suggested by janitor William Rodriguez, whose testimony was also quoted earlier

Continue . . . http://www.911truth.org/explosive-testimony-revelations-twin-towers-in-911-oral-histories/

How to Debunk WTC Thermite

The evidence for the presence of thermite at the World Trade Center (WTC) on 9/11 is extensive and compelling. This evidence has accumulated to the point at which we can say that WTC thermite is no longer a hypothesis, it is a tested and proven theory. Therefore it is not easy to debunk it. But the way to do so is very straightforward and is in no way mysterious.

To debunk the thermite theory, one must first understand the evidence for it and then show how all of that evidence is either mistaken or explained by other phenomena. Here are the top ten categories of evidence for thermite at the WTC.

Continue . . . http://911blogger.com/news/2013-12-08/how-debunk-wtc-thermite

Walguy said . . .

Walguy evidently expects us to believe that the controlled demolition hypothesis has been "debunked" point by point completely without him having to provide any evidence to support his statement.

If he believes so strongly that his statement is true it shouldn't be any problem for him to show us where the "thermite theory" has been debunked completely point by point. And I mean by scientific standards as outlined in the above article.

Like Walguy says, "just do a quick Google search on anything he (me) has posted and you can find responses using genuine facts that debunk every point completely."

Okay if it's so easy, do it.

 

Fast forward to 25 minutes.

For Alcott, fast forward to 47:47.

Are my eyes playing tricks on me or is that smoke coming from the bottom of the building?

 

Propaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams

No one thinks that jet fuel fires can melt steel beams—not even The Posts’ new science champion, who doesn’t bother to actually use jet fuel or steel beams to teach us about “retarded metallurgical things.” Instead, he uses a thin metal rod and a blacksmith forge to imply that, if the WTC buildings were made of thin metal rods and there were lots of blacksmith forges there, the thin metal rods would have lost strength and this would be the result. If you buy that as an explanation for what happened at the WTC, you might agree that everyone should just stop questioning 9/11.



This absurd demonstration highlights at least two major problems with America’s ongoing struggle to understand 9/11. The first is that there was a great deal of molten metal at the WTC. Those who know that fact sometimes share internet memes that say “Jet Fuel Can’t Melt Steel Beams” when they want to convey that “Thermite Melted Steel at the WTC.” The second major problem is that certain mainstream media sources continue to put a lot of energy into dis-informing the public about 9/11.

Continue . . . http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/12/propaganda-cant-melt-steel-beams.html

 

* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

Irony: a literary technique, originally used in Greek tragedy, by which the full significance of a character's words or actions are clear to the audience or reader although unknown to the character.

In other words the "character" (in this case Carpro) can't see that he's accusing me of doing what he does to me all the time. How ironic.

 

Walguy said . . .

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

Continue . . . http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”

Continue . . . http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/news/20010430/

ATLANTA — Shocking as it may seem, U.S. government doctors once thought it was fine to experiment on disabled people and prison inmates. Such experiments included giving hepatitis to mental patients in Connecticut, squirting a pandemic flu virus up the noses of prisoners in Maryland, and injecting cancer cells into chronically ill people at a New York hospital.

Continue . . . http://www.nbcnews.com/id/41811750/...-us-human-experiments-uncovered/#.Vno0kPkrKM8

From 1955 to 1975, military researchers at Edgewood were using not only animals but human subjects to test a witches' brew of drugs and chemicals. They ranged from potentially lethal nerve gases like VX and sarin to incapacitating agents like BZ.

Read the secret (now unclassified) Army document revealing BZ tests on soldiers (PDF)

The military also tested tear gas, barbiturates, tranquilizers, narcotics and hallucinogens like LSD.

Read the confidential (now unclassified) Army document uncovering LSD tests on volunteers (PDF)

This top secret Cold War research program initially looked for ways to defend against a chemical or biological attack by the Soviet Union, thought to be far ahead of the United States in "psycho-chemical" warfare. But the research expanded into offensive chemical weapons, including one that could, according to one Army film obtained by CNN, deliver a "veritable chemical ambush" against an enemy.

Continue . . . http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/01/health/human-test-subjects/

In New York, military researchers in 1966 spread Bacillus subtilis variant Niger, also believed to be harmless, in the subway system by dropping lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto tracks in stations in midtown Manhattan. The bacteria were carried for miles throughout the subway system, leading Army officials to conclude in a January 1968 report: "Similar covert attacks with a pathogenic [disease-causing] agent during peak traffic periods could be expected to expose large numbers of people to infection and subsequent illness or death."

Continue . . . http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1003703226697496080

13 Instances Of Unethical Human Experimentation Performed In The United States

1. In 1902, American doctors stationed in the Philippines allegedly administered the bubonic plague virus to five unsuspecting victims. Four years later, in 1906, Dr. Richard P. Strong also reportedly infected prisoners with cholera. US Army doctors also reportedly withheld food to induce vitamin B1 deficiencies, calledBeriberi.

2. Dr. Hideyo Noguchi reportedly injected men, women and children, totaling 146 patients, with syphilis, while at the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. He was later sued by some of the patients.

3. According to this article, the US government exposed citizens of San Francisco with a gas they thought was harmless.

Continue . . . http://thoughtcatalog.com/michael-koh/2014/12/read_about_human_experimentation/





This BBC series is about a far-right secret army, operated by the CIA and MI6 through NATO, which killed hundreds of innocent Europeans and attempted to blame the deaths on Baader Meinhof, Red Brigades and other left wing groups. Known as 'stay-behinds' these armies were given access to military equipment which was supposed to be used for sabotage after a Soviet invasion. Instead it was used in massacres across mainland Europe as part of a CIA Strategy of Tension. Gladio killing sprees in Belgium and Italy were carried out for the purpose of frightening the national political classes into adopting U.S. policies.

Could it be Walguy that perhaps there are some "Americans in positions of power" that don't hold human life in the same high regard as you?

 

9/11: Why do Bill Moyers and Robert Parry Accept Miracles?

 

Published on Nov 30, 2015

INCONTROVERTIBLE is the first and only feature length documentary we have which portrays the frank and candid views of Police Officers, Firefighters and Soldiers as they express their grave concerns about the official explanation for the events of 9/11. The film is intended to act as a practical aid in combating the mainstream media's propaganda and outright lies concerning the attacks on September 11th 2001.

This film is intended to be viewed by Police Officers, Firefighters and all those serving in the Armed Forces as they are the among the best placed members of our society to have the ability to change things for the better. If you have friends or family who are serving then please pass this film onto them.

Once again the video below is the "official story" we are expected to believe without question . . .

 

Walguy said . . . "just do a quick Google search on anything he (me) has posted and you can find responses using genuine facts that debunk every point completely."

And yet he has failed to respond to my challenge to show us where the thermite theory has been debunked on every point completely using genuine facts.

Think maybe he knows he can't back up his statement by using genuine facts?

 

I showed you video and photographic evidence of smoke at the bottom of one of the WTC buildings. I showed you evidence that thermite can indeed melt steel despite what the corporate sponsored "debunkers" claimed. I showed you video and oral testimony of explosions by people on the scene including fire fighters and police that was ignored by NIST. I showed you how NIST ignored evidence of molten steel including video and photographic evidence, eye witness testimony, written reports and NASA imagery. I showed you that NIST was forced to admit that WTC 7 did indeed collapse at free fall speed for the first few seconds and I introduced you to the high school physics teacher, David Chandler that forced NIST to change it's story by using free software available to any high school physics student. I showed you how NIST was able to rule out evidence of explosives by not looking for evidence of explosives.

I introduced or reintroduced you to Newton's laws that the "hijackers" would have had to suspend on the day of 9/11/2001 in order to cause the total collapse of three steel framed buildings with two airliners at or near free fall speed. I showed you the testimony of the engineers that designed the WTC towers to withstand several impacts from comparable fully loaded airliners. I reminded you of how the crime scene was quickly destroyed at ground zero which in itself was a crime. I showed you the 11 characteristics one would expect to see in a controlled demolition. I showed you how the government fought against having any investigation into the biggest crime/mass murder ever committed on American soil. I showed you how the media told us by who and why the crime was committed in a matter of minutes before the first tower collapsed or any investigation had taken place. I showed you how the 9/11 Commission was set up to fail from the beginning and led by a Bush administration insider that had the conclusion already written up before the commission even held it's first meeting. I even showed you how the FEMA report contradicts NIST's report on WTC 7 and how the 9/11 Commission chose to stop investigating the insider trading after it found that it couldn't be traced to Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. I showed you that there has been no investigation into or even discussion about the trillions of dollars Donald Rumsfeld admitted was "missing" from the Pentagon on 9/10/2001.

And I also showed you other things that I haven't mentioned above.

[Alsnott, got a rational explanation why NIST, the 9/11 Commission and the corporate media would overlook (ignore) so much evidence and Newton's laws to make the government's "official story" seem plausible?]

 

I take it this is your way of admitting you're afraid to take up the challenge to "debunk" the "thermite theory" completely point by point.

Walguy says it's easy to do. So let's see one (or both) of you do it.

We've all witnessed what you two can do with your mouths already now show us what you can do with your brains.

 

The "official story" is a theory.

That's where you're wrong, I don't have to prove that's what happened, all I have to prove is the official story couldn't have happened the way we've been told it happened. I already did that. You can say I haven't but that doesn't prove your theory is correct. That only proves you have the ability to deny all the evidence that has been presented is evidence.

You have to prove your theory is correct and to do that . . .

You have to prove how jet fuel and office fires can melt steel.

You have to prove how fire can burn under tons of debris without oxygen and under water for three months to rule out thermitic reaction. And do it using real science instead of magic.

You have to prove how all three collapses happened at or near free fall speed using the laws of physics instead of miracles.

The fact that you have to resort to blanket denials and name calling only proves one thing, you don't have as much faith in the "official" theory as you'd like the rest of us to believe.

 

You're the one defending the official theory so the burden of proof is on you to show this theory to be correct. You've made it abundantly obvious that you can't.

So far you all you've managed to do is deny all the evidence that shows how your theory cannot be correct.

That's not very scientific.

All you've proven is you cannot prove your theory to be correct. Like I said all I have to prove is your theory cannot be correct and I've done that rather handily.