Abraham Lincoln talked about how America could only be overthrown from within. Sinclair Lewis wrote: "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Jesus said, "A man's foes shall be they of his own household." (Matt 10:36)
A member of the Bush Administration once talked of their reality-based policy: specifically, "we create our own reality." Harsh reality is the shock & awe imposed on the nations of Afghanistan and Iraq by us. American reality -- and Christian reality -- has been perverted into the acceptance of torture, rendition, confinement without charges, no appeals, and countless other transgressions against our Constitution. The government's reality about 9/11 contradicts the simple physics of falling objects and conservation of energy among many other unexplained discrepancies. Moreover, this "Pearl Harbor"-type event was foreshadowed in 1999 as being necessary to galvanize support from the American populace by the very persons who later became instrumental in carrying out these radical policy changes.
when you say that the government's reality about 9/11 "contradicts the simple physics of falling objects and conservation of energy among many other unexplained discrepancies," are you referring to the trouble many have with the manner of falling done by the buildings on that day?
I do not know what is meant by conservation of energy.
If you use my email address, you should answer questions about what you have sent.
Your wish is my command.
"Conversation of energy" is one of Newton's laws of physics. It says that objects in motion (or at rest) tend to stay in motion (or at rest) unless an outside force acts on them. Moreover, energy is neither created nor destroyed, but it can change forms.
Here is an example of energy changing forms. A car going 60 mph has kinetic energy associated with its speed and mass. Let's say it hits another object, what happens to that kinetic energy? It depends on the mass of both objects as well as their rigidity. Typically, a portion of the kinetic energy gets transformed into the energy needed to mangle the car (and the object it hit), which reduces the car's speed if not halting it altogether, let alone the trajectory if any of the hit object.
Another example is potential energy from the force of gravity acting on an object held up to some height. When it is dropped, the potential energy gets converted to kinetic energy. If it hits something on the way down, that kinetic energy can be transferred or transformed. The falling object could break something and/or be broken itself, which slows or arrests its decent; or whatever it hits is rigid enough to "bounce" the falling object into another or even opposite direction. The point is: the total energy is conserved even if transformed.
D = 1/2 * g * t^2 t = square root (2 * D / g)
The first equation tells you the distance an object will travel in a vacuum in a given time if dropped. The second equation is derived from the first and tells you how long it takes an object to fall a distance of D. D is distance, g is Newton's gravitational constant of 32 ft/sec^2 [feet per second squared], and t is time.
As I recall, the towers were 1340 and 1350 feet tall. A billiard ball dropped from the taller tower (in a vacuum, no air resistance) would fall and hit the ground in about 9.18 seconds. The 9/11 Commission Report and video evidence state that the collapses happened with times like 10.8 seconds and 11.3 seconds. I could be off by 0.5 or more seconds, but that'll prove to be inconsequential. The point here, these are near free-fall speeds, like a billiard ball falling with air resistance (as opposed to in a vacuum).
For the sake of discussion, let's assume that a light aluminum planes could have sliced the steel re-enforced concrete core supports of the floors and, together with the jet fires, initiated a collapse (even though both are questionable assertions in and of themselves.)
Each floor below the starting point required a significant amount of energy to break its ties to the core and outer mesh frame in order to propagate the collapse. Breaking those ties consumed kinetic energy from the 20 or so falling stories and should have slowed the collapse, if not at some point arrested it. But because both towers (as well as WTC-7) fell so fast, it implies that floors underneath the collapse zone conveniently got out of the way and offered no resistance to the falling mass of floors.
Moreover, the buildings did not collapse like a stack of pancakes or old albums dropping from a stereo spindle. You see, in such cases like what happens with earthquakes, you can actually lift up each pancake, each record album, or each floor and discern what was at each level: butter & syrup, record label, or squashed office furniture. A rescuer on the scene testified that the biggest piece of discernible debris he saw was a few of the numbers off of a telephone keypad.
With 9/11, each floor wasn't just crushed into big chunks. No. From the earliest time points in the collapse, the concrete on each floor was pulverized into a fine dust (that caused health problems) and steel beams were ejected horizontally. Take a sledge hammer to your concrete driveway and in not too many powerful whacks, you can get it to crack and even crumble. But it'll take a whole lot of energy and time with a jack hammer to pulverize it into fine powder.
As this relates to conservation of energy in the towers, pulverizing concrete and ejecting debris hundreds of feet are huge energy sinks that the weight of the towers falling cannot account for, in addition to what I've already mentioned about the "bonding" energy of each floor and falling at near free-fall speeds.
The collapses were uniform, although the destruction from the plane and fires were not. That is to say, it might be understandable if a portion of a floor failed causing the upper portion to lean and possibly topple over (the path of least resistance), creaming neighboring buildings while leaving a significant portion of the tower still standing. But no, entire floors failed at once at all levels, and the collapse propagated into the path of most resistance neatly into its own footprint. (My, my! Weren't the terrorists nice.)
WTC-7 wasn't hit by a plane. WTC-1 & 2 were designed to withstand being hit by planes; in fact, they stood after the impacts with no swaying or signs of distress. All evidence including radio testimony by fire-fighters on the scene and the black sooty fires (meaning oxygen starved) suggest that the fires were weak. Steel can be weakened by fire, but only under ideal situations, like a blast furnace with appropriate fuel and oxygen levels, which jet fuel isn't. Steel is an excellent conductor of heat, and a structure like the towers would wick heat away. All in all, it would be very difficult for a fire composed of jet fuel and office materials and inadequate oxygen to sufficiently heat all of the steel on the floor to cause a failure, let alone a uniform one. Hadn't happened in the past, and hasn't since then (like in Madrid): only these three buildings.
Speaking of conservation of energy and fires, the fires were supposedly at the point of impact some 70-80 stories up. Photos of the rescue effort as well as satellite heat images show red hot fires that burned for weeks at the equivalent of the sub-basement levels. Jet fuel can't do that.
So, did I answer your question about conservation of energy?
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Do some googling. Start with WTC-7, because that is the biggest smoking gun.
Thanks for asking,
Hi Max --
so, do you have a theory of how the towers were rigged to collapse?
Theories are plentiful. I can spout some of mine.
But before I do, I must stress that my theories are unimportant! What is important is to recognize the implausibility of the government's version. That version does not stand up to scrutiny or evidence. That is the critical tipping point. Such provable doubt alone is what will inspire true investigations and criminal charges.
But since you asked...
One of George W. Bush's brothers was on the board of directors of the company that ran security for both the World Trade Center and Dulles Airport, where one of the attacks originated. (He was off the board by June 2001 before 9/11.) It would be a big job of installing the explosives and wiring these buildings to detonate. If you had complete access to the buildings over the course of months or a year, you could accomplish the task with a very small crew at night. Who would know?
To maintain deny-ability, I suspect that Massaud (sp), the Israeli version of the CIA was involved. They're experts at false flag operations. Israel benefited in a big way from 9/11, pushing the USA into terrorism mode, which gave Israel the justification to instill its harsh measures against Palistine.
Be that as it may, the outer shell was probably rigged with thermite, as explained by BYU Physics Professor Stephen Jones. (Being made of steel, the structure itself could be used to transmit messages between bombs and a master controller for timing the destruction.) There is plenty of evidence for thermite in the molten steel that dripped from the openings, squib charges visible in the fall, and pictures of steel posts cut cleanly at an angle and in convenient 30' chunks for easy transport, as demolition teams often do.
My speculation about the inner core was that a shaped-charge mini-nuclear device planted in the basement took it out. The core would have been too massive for conventional charges. [Remember, Bush stepped out of nuclear test ban treaties early on and then later gave the auspice of wanting bunker-busting bombs to get Osama. It really meant they had the bombs already available.]
The mini-nuke could be timed by computer with the other explosives for optimal effect. The mini-nuke would provide enough energy to literally turn the building to fine dust, which it did. A shaped-charge could focus its energy in a narrow angle straight up so that its destruction would not necessarily be visible from outside the mesh shell. There are different types of nuclear fuels that leave varying traces of radiation, some lower than others and with different dissipation constants. A shaped-charge aimed straight up could help confine the radiation fallout and sent it up into the air for dissipation by air streams; it wouldn't necessarily hover around the ground. It would explain some of the trace radiation elements measured right after at ground level before they dissipated. A mini-nuke would explain why FEMA and other demolition teams were so Johnny-on-the-spot, why they did the excavation in secret and with tons of security, why they didn't submit the debris to testing, and why they had it shipped overseas and recycled immediately. It would explain some of the health issues of rescue workers. [Remember Rudy and Bush making a big deal about how it was safe for workers, and then later we find that the EPA report was bogus?]
A mini-nuke would explain the HUGE pools of molten steel in the sub-basements that burned red hot for weeks after the collapse.
We have video evidence of the top 20 floors or so of one of the towers starting to lean over as the collapse started. Conversation of energy and momentum would suggest it continue to lean and then topple over... Unless an outside force acted on it. Curiously, the video evidence shows that the leaning of the upper floors stopped and that they practically turned to dust before our eyes.
A mini-nuke would also explain the curious damage to rescue vehicles and other cars parked in the area. They weren't damaged by falling debris; they were parked too far away; they didn't have burning debris on them or external burn patters from that. They had noteworthy burn patterns inside and in places like mirrors, steering wheels, front headlights, and things with metalic rings. Most were torched from the inside but not completely and not the outside as would be the case with falling burning debris. Sometimes the destruction skipped over vehicles indicating a line-of-sight destruction path like radio waves.
Think of a power transformer. The mini-nuke was like the primary side of a transformer generating huge electromagnetic (EM) waves. The steering wheels, for example, being a closed loop, were like the secondary windings of a transformer. The EM waves from the mini-nuke generated such high currents in essentially a single coil secondary winding, it burst into flames. Rear view mirrors acted like this. Other things with rings of metal. But not the back seats. Not the trunks. Not the tops of cars or hoods.
I learned recently that the tenant in one tower where the plane hit was an insurance company, and in the other they were a Japanese bank. Both occupied multiple floors. Both had large computer rooms spanning one or more floors. In fact, the floor structures in one or both had been re-enforced to support the weight of the computers and the battery backup power systems. Refurbishing of those floors with bombs as well as homing devices for the planes is not beyond the realm of speculation.
Speaking of planes, we have had the ability for quite some time to fly planes without pilots. (Think of the Predator military planes.) I believe it is an Israeli company that gives us the technology to land large commercial aircraft without pilots.
When planes fly around, one of three incidents can cause FAA standard operating procedures (SOP) on the ground to kick in and result in a fighter interception: pilot unresponsive to radio signals, deviation from flight plan, or the transponder being turned off. In the case of all 9/11 flights involved in the attacks, all three types of automatic alarms occured, yet ground personnel fumbled around. (In 2000, some 197 planes I believe were intercepted.) How did the hijackers in the air circumvent FAA SOP on the ground? Plus, the pilot has the ability with his voice or clicking a pattern with the microphone talk button to signal that a hijacking is happening. None did.
More speculation. We have reason to believe that some of the planes might have been switched, which turning off the transponder (manually or by remote control) would have facilitated. What happened to the passangers? Not important. Maybe they were gassed and the planes landed by remote control and the bodies disposed of as required. Maybe they weren't real passangers to begin with, as was evident that it was unusual for these flights to be so empty; they were government employees going into hiding. There is evidence of a plane landing in Cincinnati sending its passangers through security while another plane waited >45 minutes on the tarmac; those passengers complained. There is evidence of planes from UA (or AA) being listed as "in service" well after 9/11. The cellphone calls were not possible from those airplanes at that point in time. (In one case, a passanger called his mom and said, "Hi Mom! It's me, your son Mark
The pentagon plane pierced six steel re-enforced concrete walls. The last wall had a neat 8' diameter or so hole. A commercial plane is a flying aluminum can; it can't do that. It also can not do the manuevers or fly as low as it did to the point of clipping light poles at the speed it is said to have flown.
The Pentagon was not hit by a commercial plane; more likely, a smaller military aircraft with a missile or a cruise missile by itself; the FBI confiscated tapes that would have shown what really hit the building. The Pentagon did not have human body parts, luggage, and aircraft debris fields that are common at all other aircraft crashes. The plane that crashed in shankville was spread out over miles and had no body parts, luggage, aircraft parts, etc. as if it were blown out of the sky.
What I'm about to write is maybe another wild theory, so don't let it overwhelm the big picture; I'm not sure I believe it. Some of the video evidence from multiple angles of an airplane hitting the tower shows a pod under the plane launching something like a missile and a flash reflected off of the building's glass before impact. Such a pod would have been noticed by ground personnel at the airport. Hence, another reason to switch planes. Why did the planes need missiles? Maybe because the culprits knew that a light aluminum and fiberglass plane (a pop can) hitting a tower (solid steel wall) would not do the amount of damage that they wanted. A missile could clear a path for the plane that might otherwise get crushed like a pop can and bounced off the wall. A missle on the plane could help provide some of the extra energy needed to start the collapse, particularly if the target floors had been re-enforced. Also, maybe they wanted to assure that the computer systems on those floors were completely taken out for whatever reason.
Other holes to the official story.
My speculation: A small cabal of very high officials in the Bush Administration including Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz perpetrated this with the help of just a few high ranking military people. They compartmentalized information and operations so that few knew the big picture. The events of 9/11 fall in line with their "Project for a New American Century" and its stated goals from 1999.
As the Bush Administration has already proven, they are very adept at outsourcing. I believe they outsourced the details to Israel through Pakistan. Israel scapegoated the Saudi's with the 19 Saudi names to keep them in line. Pakistan is known to have passed money along to the cell. Between the military exercises and Cheney & Rumsfeld, ground personnel were fooled.
As for the 19 hijackers, they were patsies; they might not have even been told it was a suicide mission. Contrary to the government's story about these "devote" Muslims, they were seen drinking, gambling, and frequenting strip clubs prior to the event: not something devote Muslims are known for. A flight instructor where one of them took lessons said that they were more interested in learning how to take-off and fly than in landing. Maybe because they were told it would switch to automatic pilot which could land them anywhere. We have no way of knowing what these guys were told or what they thought their mission was. And if the plane were equiped with gas to knock everyone out, it wouldn't matter once the operation started.
If you were going to do this and you had deep pockets, you would plan for redundancies. You wouldn't have just one plane or two. (The fourth plane proved unnecessary so was shot down.) You wouldn't rely on the airplane's mass and its jet fuel, you might supe it up with a missile. You'd also have explosives planted in the building that could be timed by computer to bring it down in a spectacular fashion.
You certainly wouldn't make it easily tracable back to yourself. If possible, you'd pin this on someone else. The US was in negotiations with the Taliban in the summer of 2001. We wanted to build a natural gas pipeline across their country. We told them: "Either you accept our carpet of gold, or we'll burying you in a carpet of bombs." They refused. On the weekend before 9/11, several important Afghanistan leaders were assassinated. Within a month or two of 9/11, they got their carpet of bombs. We installed as the Afghani president one of Unicol's negotiators in the pipeline. If you look at a map of the bases we built in Afghanistan, it would overlay perfectly along the route for the pipeline that Unicol wanted.
As for Iraqi, yes, the US wanted control of Iraqi oil reserves. Most of us thought it was to get access to additional oil reserves for our gas hogging SUVs. That is certainly a long-term plan. What we failed to see was that control includes both turning on and turning off, and that turning off might indeed have been the short-term plan. Why? Look what it accomplished. It provided a shortage in the supply so that demand would drive oil prices to new heights and obscene profits for oil companies (who helped put Bush/Cheney in office and drafted the US energy policy with Cheney.) Maybe turning off the supply was also considered payback to Saudi Arabia who benefited as much or more than the oil companies for letting us scapegoat 19 Saudis along with the housing US military bases.
By the way, one of Osama's complaints against the US was our military bases in the holy land. Now that we have Iraq to build and play on, we closed those Saudi bases, thereby accomplishing what Osama and the Saudi government wanted. We blew our attempts to capture Osama, and diverted important military resources to Iraq. Pakistan harbors him, and Pakistan was one of our intermediaries for at least one leg of 9/11. Pakistan has gotten lots of military aid from the US despite the fact that they have been proven guilty of selling nuclear secrets to others like South Korea and Iran.
So if you look at 9/11 from the perspective of those involved at the high level (not those imprisoned or killed), it has been win-win all around.
But I'm an optimist.
I'm a Ron Paul supporter.
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 2: Registered 420 Jimmy
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 3: Semaphore for Truth
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 4: 9/11 Christian Science Treatment
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 5: Mind Your P's & Q's
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 6: Q Dots
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 7: Nine-One-One
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 8: Q-BoughtBot
Choice Quotations from the Hee-Haw-ley Himself showing his God-given character & charm:
* 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 * 14 * 15 * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24 * 25 * 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 30 * 31 * 32 * 33 * 34 * 35 * 36 * 37 * 38 * 39 * 40 * 41 * 42 * 43 * 44 * 45 * 46 * 47 * 48 * 49 * 50 * 51 * 52 * 53 * 54 * 55 * 56 * 57 * 58 * 59 * 60 * 61 * 62 * 63 * 64 * 65 * 66 * 67 * 68 * 69 * 70 * 71 * 72 * 73 * 74 * 75 * 76 * 77 * 78 * 79 * 80 * 81 * 82 * 83 * 84 * 85 * 86 * 87 * 88 * 89 * 90 * 91 * 92 * 93 * 94 * 95 * 96 * 97 * 98 * 99 * 100 * 101 * 102 * 103 * 104 * 105 * 106 * 107 * 108 * 109 * 110 * 111 * 112 * 113 * 114 * 115 * 116 * 117 * 118 * 119 * 120 * 121 * 122 * 123 * 124 * 125 * 126 * 127 * 128 * 129 * 130 * 131 * 132 * 133 * 134 * 135 * 136 * 137 * 138 * 139 * 140 * 141 * 142 * 143 * 144 * 145 * 146 * 147 * 148 * 149 * 150 * 151 * 152 * 153 * 154 * 155 * 156 * 157 * 158 * 159 * 160 * 161 * 162 * 163 * 164 * 165 * 166 * 167 * 168 * 169 * 170 * 171 * 172 * 173 * 174 * 175 * 176 * 177 * 178 * 179 * 180 * 181 * 182 * 183 * 184 * 185 * 186 * 187 * 188 * 189 * 190 * 191 * 192 * 193 * 194 * 195 * 196 * 197 * 198
Choice Quotations from Hee-Haw-ley's Echo Chamber, Registered Independent:
* 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 * 14 * 15 * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24 * 25 * 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 30 * 31 * 32 * 33 * 34 * 35 * 36 * 37 * 38 * 39 * 40 * 41 * 42 * 43 * 44 * 45 * 46 * 47 * 48 * 49 * 50 * 51
Choice Quotations from Hee-Haw-ley's Superior Officer, Sgt. Asshat:
* 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13
Quotations from Jesus H. Christ:
* 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 * 14 * 15 * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24
Quotations from others:
* 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 * 14 * 15 * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21