See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Former senator, engineers offer ‘proof’ of 9/11 controlled demolitions
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/ ... rs-911-controlled-demolitions/
Published: Sep 10, 2010
Author: Raw Story
Post Date: 2010-09-10 10:43:08 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 14586
Comments: 259
The nine-year-old body of 9/11 conspiracy theories includes many improbable (and sometimes contradictory) claims, everything from remote-controlled planes flying into the World Trade Center, to a missile hitting the Pentagon, to mass kidnappings of air passengers. But a group of more than 1,200 architects and engineers is building what it hopes is a scientifically sound argument about one 9/11 claim: That the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed not by fires caused by the airplane collisions, but by a controlled demolition. At a press conference in Washington DC, Thursday, the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth offered evidence "that all three WTC skyscrapers on September 11, 2001, in NYC were destroyed by explosive controlled demolition." The third building the group referred to was World Trade Center 7, a skyscraper that collapsed about eight hours after the main WTC towers fell. For many 9/11 "truthers," WTC7's collapse despite not being hit by a plane is the "smoking gun" proving that something other than airplanes brought down the towers. The WTC7 collapse was not addressed in the official 9/11 Commission report. "That building fell completely into its own footprint," blogger Andrew Steele told WKTV in Utica. "You can watch on YouTube yourself and use your own common sense. Even if you don't have a scientific background ... if you have two eyes, you can see that fire alone did not bring down that building." His claims, and those of the 1,270 architects and engineers who have signed on to the effort, were bolstered by the support of former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, who said in a press release that "critically important evidence has come forward after the original government building reports were completed." Gravel has been concerned with the events of September 11, 2001, for some time now. He has called for an independent investigation into 9/11. "Unlike the first investigation, this commission should be granted subpoena power and full access to all governmental files and personnel," Gravel wrote. "George Bush should be forced to testify ALONE." San Francisco architect Richard Gage said the way the towers collapsed was consistent with a controlled demolition, not a chaotic structural collapse. "The official FEMA and NIST reports provide insufficient, contradictory, and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction," Gage said. "We are therefore calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials." But Gage added that "government investigators at the NIST have been forced to acknowledge the free-fall descent, an indicting fact, after being presented with analysis by AE911Truth petition signers." On its Web site, the architects' and engineers' group lists facts that suggest explosives were used to take down the towers. -- Rapid onset of "collapse" -- Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a second before the building's destruction -- Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration -- Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds -- Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional -- FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e. -- Slow onset with large visible deformations -- Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires) -- High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never "collapsed". Debunking9/11, a Web site devoted to disproving the claims of 9/11 "truthers," argues that no aircraft was needed to bring down WTC7, because "while building 7 wasn't hit by an airliner, it was hit by the large perimeter columns of the Tower collapse. It was 400 ft away but the towers were more than 1300 ft tall. As the tower peeled open, it easily tilted over to reach building 7." "Truthers" and debunkers have been arguing for years over whether the scant photographic evidence of WTC7's south side after the main towers' collapse shows enough damage to justify the building's collapse. "All the buildings just as far away from both towers as WTC7 were hit," Debunking9/11 asserts. "The others were either very short buildings which didn't have to support a massive load above or had no fire. Only Building 7 had unfought fires and the massive load of 40 stories above them." "Justice for all." What's wrong with calling for a transparent, internationally-supported investigation? I want to know what happened that day to all of those buildings, and I want the chain of events that happened up to their collapse. Don't care how ugly the truth is, I just want to know. Why is asking for an independent investigation so bad? I'm not an engineering expert, but ALL of the buildings collapsing (WTC 1, 2, 7) look just like every other controlled demolition video I've seen from around the world. The pieces of the day's events (NORAD, Bin Laden's family being sent out, etc) don't fit together right. It just smells fishy. Who got fired for not doing their job? Who went to jail for criminal negligence? People of authority responding "nothing to see here, move along" aren't helping convince me that what we're being told is the truth. I just want to see Justice. Isn't wanting "Justice for all" patriotic?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-60) not displayed.
.
.
.
#61. To: HOUNDDAWG (#60)
I think you'll find Gravel is in no danger. In fact, I think the gooberment would love it if you designated him as the official spokesman for Truth.
Yes, I know. For the coming day of the Great Awakening of the Truth of 9/11. When you, the faithful saints, will pursue all unbelievers and put them in prison or something. I've read these kinds of veiled threats from the Truthers for years. I find them quite humorous.
The few small fires in WTC 7 could probably have been put out with fire extinguishers. Yet, WTC 7 witness, Barry Jennings (who surfaced through Dylan Avery of Loose Change) mentions no such firefighting attempts by him or anyone else. In fact, his testimony sounds more like a vaudville act: In case of fire, break glass. And apparently that's all he deemed it was of use to him for under the circumstances -- breaking out a window. So why is that? Evidently, there were fire extinguishers on the premises and broken water lines don't explain it either because there was also this on the scene: 9/11 Fireboat That Could - the John J. Harvey N E W Y O R K, Sept. 14 — In the panic of Sept. 11, 2001, as tens of thousands of people tried to leave the island of Manhattan, an aging boat once headed for the scrap heap became a hero of sorts. On 9/11, the John J. Harvey raced to Pier 11, evacuating 150 terrified, dust- covered people. Then came a second call. Firemen battling blazes at the World Trade Center had no water because the twin towers had fallen on the water lines. "The water mains were destroyed, so there was no other source of water available, except for the river," said Tim Ivory, a mechanic who is Harvey's engineer. The fireboat works by sucking in the water it floats on. The Harvey's pumps can shoot 20,000 gallons a minute. Retired by the New York City Fire Department in 1994, the Harvey was supposed to be sold for scrap, but eight fireboat lovers bought it in 1999. They were thinking of making it a floating bar when Ivory said, "Wait, I think we can make it work again." And they did, having no idea how useful it would prove be. For three days, the Harvey joined three active-duty fireboats to provide the only water there was to keep the 9/11 fires from getting worse. [end excerpt] -------- Floating bar...Ivory...soap commercial? Ya can't make this stuff up, right? In any case, they have some 'splaining to do about why 3 fireboats, which could pump about 20,000 gallons a minute each, were available there but "Building 7 had unfought fires". At the very least, Guilliani and his whole office of Emergency Management should be arrested for public endangerment through their gross negligence and mismanagement of the situation.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
I'm open to it. I just require evidence, a trait lacking among Truthers who jump to claim wild conspiracies, nano-thermite, antigravity and energy weapons, and Area 51 technology from UFOs was used to bring down WTC. The Truthers have never weeded out the con-men and nutjobs in their ranks. That's probably the major reason why people think they are kooks, because they let kooks speak for them. I expect this pattern will continue because the Truthers still don't grasp how damaging this is and how it plays into the hands of those who want to promulgate the gooberment's ridiculous "investigation" and the 9/11 Commission report.
These conspiracy groups are like cults. yeah, just like those who still continue to talk about the Kennedy assassination, huh? i believe that the 9/11 truth movement is global and that only those working for government in some capacity or another and have their selfish asses to protect are the majority of those who continue to believe the government CONSPIRACY. con•spir•a•cy
Good heavens.
I posted a link showing that there were 3 working fireboats in the area. If you think WTC 7 fell because of unfought fires, what's your explanation for that in light of the firefighting Harvey and other two crews of a nautical sort on duty?
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Exactly like that, yes. Do you want to buy into the Cubans or the Mafia or the CIA or Mossad or...well...one of the dozen or so other major theories about JFK out there? And many of them are totally ridiculous, presenting the kind of "evidence" you'd expect to find about some story in National Enquirer about some woman who got pregnant with Elvis' baby when she was abducted by a UFO in a three-way with Bigfoot. No doubt, it is stronger overseas where expectations of gross government corruption and criminality are visible on a daily basis. Especially in the Third World. This is essentially another false numbers idea that is popular but entirely false. It doesn't matter who believes what or how many. The truth is the truth and you have to have evidence, not a pack of con-men spinning nonsense for gullible people wherever they are located around the world. I, for one, don't give a rat's ass what people as ignorant as the Afghans or the Egyptians or the Nigerians or Kenyans think about anything (since I would first have to care that these medieval barbarians even exist).
I thought you included the retired fireboat too. That is a nice little story about that boat. Anyway, I never said anything about WTC 7 falling because of unfought fires. I challenge you to find any remark I've made to that effect. I have said steadfastly that WTC 7 is the Truthers' strongest case, I have said that they should pursue that relentlessly because that is the weakest point in the supposed government investigation of 9/11. I think you can move public opinion in your direction with it, possibly even get a major new investigation opened and get access to more evidence. So you might want to stop making up stuff that I did not say and actually deal with the things that I do say.
As an affirmation of my own Cynicism... A few days ago I reread the eyewitness accounts of the people present at the Pentagon crash. They ranged from Americans to foreign tourists, from ranking military employees to out of work janitors, all with ONE thing in common, THEY HAPPENED TO BE NEAR OR PASSING THE PENTAGON WHEN THEY SAW AN ....AMERICAN AIRLINES...AIRCRAFT PASS BY AND HIT THE PENTAGON. Without stating the obvious, it is difficult to abide endless discussion about the matter, it only muddies the waters that hide the real people we need to know.
The fact is, all of the actual evidence indicates there WAS a major conspiracy involved in the execution and coverup of JFK's assassination. YOUR point of view hangs on a "magic bullet" which can defy the laws of physics and do the impossible, hence the name, "magic bullet". You ALSO rely on the Warren Commission's report as your "factual investigation", where it was run by those who had enourmous conflicts of interests, such as Allen Dulles, and others who could well have been in on the conspiracy itself. The evidence indicates Oswald was buying a can of soda from a vending machine seconds before the shots were fired, where it would have been impossible for him to have ran to the window, positioned himself, and had any chance at all of hitting his target. He wouldn't have even been able to reach the window in time to take the shot. Yet you are SO eager to believe what you are TOLD to believe, you more than likely would never in a million years accept that fact. Never mind the fact Oswald "defected" to the USSR at the height of the Cold War while stationed at a Marine Corps Air Station in Japan, married a Soviet wife, then was allowed to return to the US with his wife, while being PAID by the State Department to do so. Never mind the fact that Oswald was intricately connected to the CIA, and that there were MANY such individuals involved in the events which led up to that fateful day in Dallas. Oh no, any deviation from the Warren Commission report is akin to Bigfoot marrying Elvis on a UFO. Yeah right.
What evidence is there that 9/11 was perpetrated by the 19 named individuals? Hint: Some of them are still alive and well, and have been reported as such in the world press. The manuevers performed by the aircraft that day could NOT have been performed by somebody who never flew a jet in their lives, yet NONE of them had ever flown a jet, and not one of them was even a mediocre pilot.
The infamous 16' hole that some Truthers have made so much of is a goofball theory (peddled by con-men who know better IMO) and is one of these various MIHOP "theories" that is completely incredible outside the circles of the most gullible and conspiracy-minded Truthers. They create the impression that the 16' hole is in the outside wall of the Pentagon when it is actually a hole left several sections inside the Pentagon and the entire outer facade was demolished. Only a con-man could peddle this crap. But libmedia uses this to discredit all those who are dissatisfied with the 9/11 investigations, whether they call themselves Truthers or not. And that is many, perhaps a majority, of Americans who are dissatisfied with the completeness of the 9/11 Commission. One rapidly tires of "debating" people this stupid or gullible. Then they call you names, an "unbeliever" found like a snake in their midst. It actually becomes so comical you can't actually stay mad at them. This is why I normally don't even enter 9/11 threads but I recently made the mistake of making some comment when one of the Truthers had to drag a goofy pet theory onto a completely unrelated thread and now they keep dragging me to these threads. All that said, I don't believe for one second that we ever got anything like a full investigation of 9/11 and a proper explanation. And the fact that we didn't when the gooberment will spend millions on studies to find out how many college men wank off or investigating the sex life of Brazilian beetles or billions on Israel, fake "AIDS" in Africa, global hotting "science", etc. makes it clear that there was something that they definitely do not want us to know. It smells, big time. A stench even bigger than the laughable Warren Commission report.
I read a lot of the truth posts, comment on few or none, nothing to be gained by doing so. Absurdity is a lost cause on many.
BULLSHIT. Few if any actually saw anything hit the Pentagon, although many saw SOMETHING in the way of an aircraft pass over them or nearby, and many saw the aftermath. Fact is, there are TWO sets of witnesses. One group places the aircraft's approach from south of the nearby Citgo station, this is the official story's approach path. Thing is, the SECOND group of witnesses place the approach NORTH of the Citgo station. This group includes two Pentagon police officers, both of which were at two separate locations near the Citgo station that morning. This means there had to have been TWO aircraft which witnesses identified as Flight 77. At least one of them didn't hit the building, that much is obvious. As far as the accuracy of the "eye witness" testimony, one so-called witness stated that the plane's wing hit the ground and it tumbled into the Pentagon. No such thing happened, since there were no marks on the lawn and the damage to the Pentagon would be consistent with the flight path of an object traveling nose first. If it had tumbled, it would have exploded and broken up on the lawn and not penetrated the building. In fact, early reports indicate "no plane hit" the Pentagon...
You and TC live by that motto apparently, thing is, it's self fullfulling in both your cases.
on the morning of September 11'th, 2001 I heard a radio report right after the pentagon was hit. They let an alleged eye-witness talk for I think 30 seconds or so and that was very unusual so it caught my attention. This guy described how the commercial passenger jet was flying along and it was like the pilot saw the pentagon late and started diving for it. and to hit the pentagon he turned so that one wing-tip went down to the ground and the other up in the air, he actually said it was almost perpendicular to the ground. and he said it hit the pentagon like that. This was an elaborate description and it does not match the other 'eye-witness' versions. and this is what they fed us right after it happened. why would they do this? Because they expected that the hole in the pentagon would be narrow and they needed an explanation as to why the hole was not the full width of the jet's wings. But this plan went bad because for at least a few minutes the hole in the pentagon was only on the first & second floors. All the people on the first & second floors at point of impact were killed. the people above all lived. But within a few minutes the 3'rd, 4'th & 5'th floors collapsed. They expected all 5 floors to collapse right after impact and it did not happen. So their explanation didn't work and that is why we never heard it again. I don't put much stock in eye-witness reports in this case. because this is an intelligence operation. They can put up lots of eye-witness reports with people who work for the intelligence people. It means nothing. But the hole in the building means everything. That can't be faked. The hole was not wide enough for a commercial passenger jet. Therefore, it was not a commercial passenger jet. We should also remember that just 1-2 days prior Secretary Rumsfeld had given a press conference about the missing trillions of dollars. The accountants on the 2'nd floor were agitating and basically forced him into it. Then they were killed.
Psalms 137:1 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
One other thing. The impact area of the Pentagon is not wide enough to fit the wings. Where the wings would have hit the building there are unbroken windows, and no evidence of fire. If an actual 757 had hit the building, the wings would have exploded upon impact since that is where the fuel is stored, and there would have been a massive jet fuel fire on both sides of the entry hole. Nothing like that happened. Note that the windows in the left side of the image are still intact... that last photo you put up and your explanation more or less nails it. proof that the government/media's conspiracy theory on this is false. a photo won't lie. but an eye-witness will. a photo can be faked. but ordinary people and journalists took these photos. The photos don't match the official story. who you going to trust? The government/mass media - or your lying eyes?
Psalms 137:1 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
In any major black op there are multiple important goals. The missing trillions is certainly one of those things that needed to go away, along with the SEC documents and evidence related to the Enron and Global Crossing investigations that were stored in WTC7. Silverstein was looking for a way out of the WTC as the towers were loaded with asbestos and were loosing money, and to strip them of the asbestos would have cost more money than they were worth. How tidy of a solution could he ask for, being that he walked away with billions of dollars in insurance money after the attacks. The "War on Terror", the invasion of Afghanistan in order to secure it for the Tran-Afghan pipeline, and the take over of Iraq were also major bennies for those on the receiving end of the gravy train. The "Patriot Act" was sitting and waiting for this very sort of thing. This was yet another important goal for the perps, in that they can now violate the safeguards incorporated in the US Constitution with impunity, all in the name of "keeping us safe".. Yep, I really have to wonder about those who believe 19 angry arabs did all this because they "hated our freedoms".
you're 100% right.
Psalms 137:1 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
Anyway, I never said anything about WTC 7 falling because of unfought fires. I challenge you to find any remark I've made to that effect. I have said steadfastly that WTC 7 is the Truthers' strongest case, I have said that they should pursue that relentlessly because that is the weakest point in the supposed government investigation of 9/11. I think you can move public opinion in your direction with it, possibly even get a major new investigation opened and get access to more evidence. So you might want to stop making up stuff that I did not say and actually deal with the things that I do say. I did include the fireboat that was retired until it was brought out of retirement by those who bought it -- the Harvey. Glad you liked the report. You might want to take your own advice and stop making up stuff that I did not say and actually deal with the things that I do say. I said if you think WTC 7 fell from unfought fires, what's your explanation for that -- in light of the 3 fireboats on duty in the area. If you don't think it fell so and likely fell due to a controlled demolition of some sort, say what you think or just skip over the aspect I was focusing on about the fireboats so as to eliminate the broken water lines excuse from the downpour of lies we've been wading through to find the Truth. WTC 7 might be our strongest case but there's way more than that which needs to be investigated -- and regardless of opinions that it's kooky of us to multitask in areas of research that don't meet your standards of approval or whoever's.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Not only is the hole too small and the damage inconsistant with a 757 impacting that area of the building, but the fact is, even a professional pilot couldn't have flown a 757 at 500+ mph inches off the ground while keeping the wings straight and nose level. The idiot who supposedly did this impossible feat couldn't even land a single engine propeller driven airplane at normal landing speed, never mind skim the Pentagon lawn with a multi-engine jumbo jet at it's max speed, all without even scraping the lawn. Ground effect causes the plane to experience increased lift and would have forced the plane to climb. The only way to fight it is to decelerate to landing speed and point the nose down, yet the plane was flying over 500 mph and the nose was level, since if the nose had been down it would have left a crater at the wall, and the plane would have done a flip and broken up outside the Pentagon.
I think your analysis is very excellent. The pilots simply don't have the ability to put a 757 into the 1'st floor after flying parallel to the ground as described. and if you look at the last picture you put up, it shows the uncomfortable truth that originally right after impact in the first 30 seconds, the 2'nd floor hadn't even fallen down yet. and the opening was truly on the first floor only. they sent a missile into the first floor and it blew up. thats what happened. The passenger jet was diverted to Ohio and the people were taken, never to be seen again. Ohio local media reported on this story back when it happened.
Psalms 137:1 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
One other interesting aspect of this image can be seen to the left of the car. Notice how the fence is collapsed OUTWARDS rather than INWARDS. If a wing had taken that fence down, the fence would have been knocked down TOWARDS the Pentagon wall, not AWAY from it.
They create the impression that the 16' hole is in the outside wall of the Pentagon when it is actually a hole left several sections inside the Pentagon and the entire outer facade was demolished. Only a con-man could peddle this crap. But libmedia uses this to discredit all those who are dissatisfied with the 9/11 investigations, whether they call themselves Truthers or not. And that is many, perhaps a majority, of Americans who are dissatisfied with the completeness of the 9/11 Commission. One rapidly tires of "debating" people this stupid or gullible. Then they call you names, an "unbeliever" found like a snake in their midst. It actually becomes so comical you can't actually stay mad at them. This is why I normally don't even enter 9/11 threads but I recently made the mistake of making some comment when one of the Truthers had to drag a goofy pet theory onto a completely unrelated thread and now they keep dragging me to these threads. All that said, I don't believe for one second that we ever got anything like a full investigation of 9/11 and a proper explanation. And the fact that we didn't when the gooberment will spend millions on studies to find out how many college men wank off or investigating the sex life of Brazilian beetles or billions on Israel, fake "AIDS" in Africa, global hotting "science", etc. makes it clear that there was something that they definitely do not want us to know. It smells, big time. A stench even bigger than the laughable Warren Commission report. Oh, the irony...
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
lol hey, good to see you here :-)
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
What what? Geez Eric. Yeah. Here. On the board. lol
I was just saying hello and posting that link in one post. Killing two birds with one stone... Looks like a good site for anyone who wants to read it.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
that is a very excellent link.
Psalms 137:1 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
Glad you like it. This one's interesting too, if you haven't seen it yet: Out.
Evidence? The video of it falling is evidence in itself you dweeb! Not to mention the nano-thermite found on the remains of the steel. What more evidence does your little brain need? An admission from the Mossad that they did it? Get lost you loser.
God is always good!
Comments (102 - 259) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestOne concern of mine is any member of AK's congressional delegation must use airplanes, and it's not unusual for them to use small bush and float planes to reach the interior and extreme coastal areas.
#62. To: HOUNDDAWG (#59)
You can keep whistling past the cemetery but keep your passports current.
#63. To: Ada (#0)
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire
Only Building 7 had unfought fires
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=129435&page=1
#64. To: TooConservative (#5)
#65. To: ghostdogtxn (#64)
And your problem is that you can watch a building free fall into its own footprint and cannot open your mind to the likelihood that it was a controlled demo.
#66. To: TooConservative (#12)
The future of the Truther movement is declining numbers, an ongoing stream of literature by clever con-men to peddle to the faithful as the decades unfold until all of you die off around 2070 or so.
1 : the act of conspiring together
2 a : an agreement among conspirators b : a group of conspirators syn see plot
#67. To: christine (#66)
yeah, just like those who still continue to talk about the Kennedy assassination, huh? i believe that the 9/11 truth movement is global and that only those working for government in some capacity or another and have their selfish asses to protect are the majority of those who continue to believe the government CONSPIRACY.
#68. To: TooConservative (#65)
#69. To: christine (#66)
yeah, just like those who still continue to talk about the Kennedy assassination, huh?
i believe that the 9/11 truth movement is global
#70. To: GreyLmist (#68)
I posted a link showing that there were 3 working fireboats in the area. If you think WTC 7 fell because of unfought fires, what's your explanation for that in light of the firefighting Harvey and other two crews of a nautical sort on duty?
#71. To: TooConservative, Christine (#69)
It doesn't matter who believes what or how many
#72. To: TooConservative, christine (#69)
Exactly like that, yes. Do you want to buy into the Cubans or the Mafia or the CIA or Mossad or...well...one of the dozen or so other major theories about JFK out there?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#73. To: TooConservative (#69)
This is essentially another false numbers idea that is popular but entirely false.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#74. To: Cynicom (#71)
A few days ago I reread the eyewitness accounts of the people present at the Pentagon crash. They ranged from Americans to foreign tourists, from ranking military employees to out of work janitors, all with ONE thing in common, THEY HAPPENED TO BE NEAR OR PASSING THE PENTAGON WHEN THEY SAW AN ....AMERICAN AIRLINES...AIRCRAFT PASS BY AND HIT THE PENTAGON.
#75. To: TooConservative (#74)
#76. To: TooConservative, Cynicom (#74)
(Edited)
THEY HAPPENED TO BE NEAR OR PASSING THE PENTAGON WHEN THEY SAW AN ....AMERICAN AIRLINES...AIRCRAFT PASS BY AND HIT THE PENTAGON.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#77. To: Cynicom (#75)
Absurdity is a lost cause on many.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#78. To: Cynicom, TooConservative, FormerLurker, *9-11* (#75)
One rapidly tires of "debating" people this stupid or gullible.
#79. To: FormerLurker (#76)
(Edited)
#80. To: TooConservative (#74)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#81. To: FormerLurker (#80)
#82. To: Red Jones (#79)
We should also remember that just 1-2 days prior Secretary Rumsfeld had given a press conference about the missing trillions of dollars. The accountants on the 2'nd floor were agitating and basically forced him into it. Then they were killed.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#83. To: FormerLurker (#82)
#84. To: TooConservative (#70)
(Edited)
thought you included the retired fireboat too. That is a nice little story about that boat.
#85. To: Red Jones (#81)
(Edited)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#86. To: FormerLurker (#85)
#87. To: Red Jones (#81)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#88. To: TooConservative, Cynicom, FormerLurker, Red Jones, GreyLmist (#74)
The infamous 16' hole that some Truthers have made so much of is a goofball theory (peddled by con-men who know better IMO) and is one of these various MIHOP "theories" that is completely incredible outside the circles of the most gullible and conspiracy-minded Truthers.
#89. To: *9-11*, TooConservative, All (#88)
One rapidly tires of "debating" people this stupid or gullible.
#90. To: wudidiz (#89)
#91. To: Eric Stratton (#90)
#92. To: wudidiz (#91)
#93. To: Eric Stratton (#92)
#94. To: Eric Stratton (#92)
#95. To: TooConservative (#65)
#96. To: wudidiz (#91)
#97. To: wudidiz (#94)
#98. To: wudidiz (#94)
#99. To: Red Jones, *9-11* (#96)
that is a very excellent link.
#100. To: All (#99)
#101. To: TooConservative (#65)
I'm open to it. I just require evidence
.
.
.