Member Since: 5/4/2005
Band Members: I and I
Influences:
LOOK AT THEIR FACES Dead because of a lie. Dead because selfish people in government wanted a war and lied to get one, aided by selfish people in the media WHO TOOK MONEY FROM GEORGE BUSH TO LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. The government and the media traded the blood of these young Americans for their personal gain.Look at their faces. How can you not be angry?
Tom Hurndall, 22, died in a London hospital due to complications with pneumonia. He had spent nine months in a vegetative state after being shot in the head by an Israeli sniper on April 11, 2003, while trying to escort children to safety in Rafah, Gaza Strip, Occupied Palestine.
On March 16th, an Israeli soldier driving a bulldozer two-stories high crushed to death 23-year-old Rachel Corrie, an American nonviolent human rights protestor. According to numerous witnesses and photographic documentation, she was killed intentionally.
Israeli and Palestinian Children Killed Since September 29, 2000
118 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 683 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000. (Last Update: March 21, 2005)
Israelis and Palestinians Killed Since September 29, 2000
1, 047 Israelis and 3, 599 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000.
Israelis and Palestinians Injured Since September 29, 2000
7, 147 Israelis and 28, 602 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000.
Daily U.S. Assistance to Israel and the Palestinians
The U.S. gives $15, 139, 178 per day to the Israeli government and military and $232, 290 per day to Palestinian NGOs.
Demolitions of Israeli and Palestinian Homes
0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 4, 170 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since September 29, 2000
UN Resolutions Targeting Israel and the Palestinians
Israel has been targeted by at least 65 UN resolutions and the Palestinians have been targeted by none.
Political Prisoners and Detainees
No Israelis are being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 7705 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel
Israeli and Palestinian Unemployment Rates
The Israeli unemployment rate is 10.4%, while the Palestinian unemployment is estimated at 37-67%.
New Settlements Built (March 2001 - July 2003)
60+ new Jewish-only settlements have been built on confiscated Palestinian land between March 2001 and July 11, 2003. There have been 0 cases of Palestinians confiscating Israeli land and building settlements.
These guys know what's up...
R.I.P.-Gary Webb(the reporter who worked with Freeway Ricky, exposing the fact that the CIA has been smuggling cocaine and facilitating the advent of Crack Cocaine-he recently and suspiciously committed "suicide")
R.I.P.- Senator Paul Wellstone(plane was brought down by an EMP weapon, he opposed Bush, his war on terror, and proposed a thorough investigation of 9/11-his death shifted power to the republicans in Congress...hmmm)
Sounds Like: HIP HOP
VIDEO: Aerosol Crimes aka Chemtrails
Chemtrails over Hollywood:
Problem...Reaction...Solution
CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME WHAT HIT THE PENTAGON...CUZ IT WASN'T FLIGHT 77 a 757...AND DON'T ASK ME "WELL THEN WHERE'S THE PLANE, WHERE'S THE PASSENGERS, SO WHAT HIT IT?" BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW, NONE OF US KNOW, NONE OF US PRETEND TO KNOW, NOR SHOULD WE HAVE TO KNOW OR EXPLAIN IT...YOU KNOW WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT!!!
*This* is what was caught on only five frames, on one camera at the Pentagon
...especially without leaving a shitload of recognizeable wreckage on the outside of the lawn, which by the way doesn't have a scratch on it VVVVV
Look at the trajectory of the "craft" at the pentagon...
Here's the trajectory from the "craft's" view point, roughly:
Here is a great overhead shot. Notice the exit for the "757" is non existant.:
Fence untouched where wing or wing debris should have touched. Part of fence blown away from building onto fence onto the Nissan 300Z
It is only obvious, that the engine or the engine and wing debris would have damaged the car.
Other side of Cherokee. Note the Fire Engine
Here is what seems to be the same type of fire engine, next to a 757
Apparently whatever hit the pentagon, didn't enter all the way and disintegrated upon impact, because here it is-back portion of fuselage still outside the building with its tail flying through the air. I believe it was bombs planted in the wall, in the shape of this supposed plane. Except doesn't appear the right half didn't go so well.
To give some more perspective:
Here is the Interior, look at all those seats...where did they go?
Here is all the "recognizable" wreckage we were "shown".
Look at these men in black types rushing out to pick up plane parts. Why???
Look how the lower columns aren't even damaged, this is almost from the angle where the craft came in:
You notice the *unsinged* book on the stool right there on the second floor...the walls aren't even charred, but remember all that "steel weakening" jet fuel and fire???, here is a close-up:
Here's just a few of the eyewitnesses:
-The aircraft "appeared to hold about 8 to 12 people" and "sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter", explained Steve Patterson to the Washington Post, on September 11.
-Tom Seibert, a network engineer at the Pentagon, told the Washington Post: "We heard what sounded like a missile, then we heard a loud boom."
-"There wasn't anything in the air, except for one airplane, and it looked like it was loitering over Georgetown, in a high, left-hand bank", explained U.S. Army Brigadier General Clyde Vaughn, director of military support, to CNN. "That may have been the plane. I have never seen one on that (flight) pattern."
-Danielle O'Brien, air controller at Washington's Dulles airport, from where American Airways flight 77 took off, explained that the craft that hit the Pentagon had the speed and maneuverability of a "military plane". Her account was published on the ABCnews site and used on the National Air Traffic Controllers Association site. We reproduce an extract of it here:
"I noticed the aircraft. It was an unidentified plane to the southwest of Dulles, moving at a very high rate of speed - I had literally a blip and nothing more."
"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane, " says O'Brien. "You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."
"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane."
-Christine Peterson: My mind could not comprehend what happened. Where did the plane go? ... But there was no plane visible, only huge billows of smoke and torrents of fire.
-DeChiaro: My brain could not resolve the fact that it was a plane because it only seemed like a small hole in the building. No tail. No wings. No nothing.
-Perkal: Even before stepping outside I could smell the cordite.(military explosives) Then I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.
And who could forget CNN reporter Jamie McIntyre:
Watch Here
JAMIE MCINTYRE: From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon.
The only site, is the actual side of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.
Even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn't happenm immediately. It wasn't until almost about 45 minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.
In a Washington Post article the dummies couldn't even tell us where this surveillance video came from, excerpts from the artcle:
"The photos, which depict a fiery explosion on the building's northwest face, are each dated Sept. 12. Officials say the date may reflect when the images were catalogued by investigators since they are not the actual date of the attack."
"A bright orange fireball is visible in the photographs but the hijacked American Airlines plane is not clearly visible."
[...]
Officials from the Pentagon said the photos were not released officially by the Department of Defense. A Pentagon spokeswoman could not verify that they came from surveillance cameras.(Cuz these bitches were scared to put their names on that doctored film)
"The Pentagon has not released any video or any photos from security cameras from the terrorist attack of Sept. 11," said Pentagon spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin. (SAY WHAT?!?!?!)
A spokeswoman at the Department of Justice, which reviews taped and photographed evidence obtained by federal security cameras, said she could not comment on whether the photos are legitimate, adding that the photos "were not disseminated by the FBI or the Department of Justice."....hmmmmm...WHY?
BUT I AM TELLING YOU THIS IS THE OFFICIAL PENTAGON SURVEILLANCE TAPE, THE ONE TAPE THEY LET YOU SEE WHILE THEY CONFICASTE THE CITGO GAS STATION TAPE, THE SHERATON HOTEL TAPE, AND THE VIRGINIA DOT/HIGHWAY TAPE.
"Flight 11" firing two missiles right before bright flash. Some say it's a bomb in the building opening a clean hole for the craft. But regardless it's clear there is a flash before the plane impacts, and you can see two puffs come of the wings:
(These appear to be the pre-detonation of bombs in the upper floors)
Introducing the X-11 Drone :
Flight 11 was described as a "small commuter plane" including terms like "missile", "bomb" in preliminary reports:
AUDIO: http://www.911research.dsl.pipex.com/wtc1witnessreports/wtc1
_critical_witnesses_mp3.mp3
Anthony Bartolomey EMT varied descriptions of the first plane that hit WTC...
Numerous civilians were telling me that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane. Some said it was a large passenger plane. One person actually said that it was like a *military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building.*
"Hey Grandpa, I'll tell you what woke me up. They bombed the World Trade Centre. I'm looking at it and Mi-Kyung's video taping it. Terrible. I heard, Grandpa, I saw it. It could have been a plane, but I think it was a bomb...a missile...er...this could be world war three."
--From In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01. Produced by Brad Gray and HBO for Brad Gray Pictures. 2002 Home Box Office. Video image above implies recording was made between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am on Tuesday 11th September 2001
"I saw it come up from the left, and I saw the plane coming through to the building, go inside, a small plane.no, no, it was plane, you know, like they teach the people to pilot plane, small plane, you know, it was that kind of plane.yes, going into the building, and I never saw that plane before. It's like something, I don't know, it's like they work with the motors, I never saw a plane like that before!"
--Karim Arraki, From an ABC News Special Report at 9:08 am on Tuesday 11 September 2001.
"I was waiting a table and I literally saw a, it seemed to be a small plane. I just heard a couple of noises, it looked like it like bounced of the building and then I heard a, I just saw a huge like ball of fire on top and then the smoke seemed to simmer down.it just seemed like a smaller plane, I dont think it was anything commercial"
--"Stuart", From a Bryant Gumble CBS News Special Report at 8:52 am on Tuesday 11th September 2001.
"Were walking the dogs and we saw a plane flying really low, a jet, a small jet, and it flew directly into the World Trade Centre. And then all the pieces fell to the bottomin seconds."
--Woman walking dog interviewed on Fox News.
FIRE MARSHAL STEVEN MOSIELLO
Witness to 1st plane crash: prop jet
"I was told by somebody that we had an eyewitness who happened to be an off-duty firefighter who told me that he saw the first building get hit and it was hit by a prop jet, which I think turned out to be the wrong information, but everybody sees things differently. But he said he was an eyewitness. I gave him to a fire marshal. I never got his name personally.
FIREFIGHTER ROY CHELSEN -firefighters leaving WTC1 find lobby blasted
we proceeded in Tower 1. I think the revolving doors were kind of busted up, so I think we went through a window. At that point we were still not sure that it was a plane that had hit the tower. There was some talk from the civilians coming down that a plane hit. The consensus was that it was a small plane.
"We began to speculate about what had happened. Was it an accident? A bomb?
A delivery truck stopped in the middle of the intersection. The driver leaned out and shouted to us. "It's a plane." He pointed to the tower, then at his radio. One guy exchanged words with the driver in Spanish.
"Did he say a plane?"
"Yeah, a plane, a @..%$ plane hit it."
"A plane?"
"A plane, man, a whole plane." He raised his arms in imitation of wings.
"What kind of plane hits the World Trade Center?"
"JFK Junior and @..%$. Boom! Like that."(JFK jr flew and went down in a small commuter plane)
None of us thought that 'plane' meant 'jetliner.' We imagined propellers; or at worst, a Lear jet. An inexperienced pilot behind the controls. Heart attack maybe.
"I first learned of what happened at approx. 9:00 am. The radio stated that a small commuter plane struck the WTC. My thought was that he would be OK even if it hit his floor because he did not sit by the window. As I continued to drive to work I heard on another radio station that a second plane hit the towers and they were large commercial jets.
--Tara Bane
http://www.september11classaction.com/statement_bane.html
"The Trade Center is on fire, I thought, I hope that it is not serious. As I was heading up the escalator to exit to the street, I saw Rick Klepper walking up the stairs next to me. He told me that a commuter plane had accidentally hit the World Trade Center. He looked unconcerned. As I exited the Mall, I saw office papers and chunks of wallboard everywhere. The papers were blackened by fire around the edges. I felt relief. Now I finally knew and could see what was going on. I was facing the south side of the North Tower (the opposite side of the gaping hole) and could only see fire on two floors. Itâs a good thing that it was only a small commuter plane I thought; the people above it will be able to get out.
http://911digitalarchive.org/stories/details/11116
There are plenty more, just google "small commuter plane" and "WTC" or "North Tower".
9/11 DVD Censored! Image of Strange Flash as Flight 11 Hit North Tower Missing From Footage
By Steve Hunter
I have discovered hard evidence of a top-level cover-up of the September 11 attacks containedon the DVD release of the Naudet brothers firemen documentary that captured the first plane hitting the North tower. I video taped this documentary from the TV early last year and bought the DVD later in the year.
In the televised version of the plane hitting the North tower there is a frame containing a huge bright flash of light that has been digitally removed from the DVD
version. I have attached two images of the three critical frames of the jet colliding with the North Tower.
The first is the TV video version, the second is the DVD version. Please excuse the quality of the images, as I don't have the best hardware to capture the images. I had to photograph the video version off my TV screen with a digital camera. Both versions contain the exact same frames.
Click here for larger image
Click here for larger image
As you can see, frame 2 of the TV version contains the bright flash while the DVD version does not.
If you have any copies of this impact on video you can check for yourself. You can't deny that this flash of light has been removed in the DVD. This bright flash is also
present in the doco "How the Towers Fell 2" but has been removed in the Rudolph Giuliani 9-11 doco (surprise, surprise).
Why would this have been done if the government has nothing to hide about the attacks?
There's obviously something the government doesn't want us to see.
What do you think?
High-Ranking Military Officers And Airline Pilots Agree Flt 175 Did Not Hit WTC South Tower
By Dave vonKleist
The Power Hour
12-15-5
Startling new revelations about the 9/11 attacks were recently released on The Power Hour radio program. Col. George Nelson USAF (ret.), who has 30 years of experience identifying aircraft and aircraft parts stated, "The plane that hit the south tower on 9/11 was not United Airlines (UA) flight 175". After reviewing numerous video clips and photographs of the 9/11 attacks, he concluded, "That was not a commercial airliner. The planes were substituted."
( www.thepowerhour.com/news2/replay_aug8_2005.htm )
This shocking conclusion is also being echoed by other military officers and commercial airline pilots.
Glen Stanish, an airline pilot for over 20 years stated, "The plane seen in various video clips of the attack could not have been UA flight 175, due to the extra equipment that appears to be attached to the bottom of the fuselage". A mysterious "flash" is also seen in the clips that indicate possible incendiary events took place before the planes entered the towers.
www.thepowerhour.com(I am also in contact with Commercial Pilot Glen Stanish and a Licensed A & P mechanic who concurs with most of the information shown there)
Device on bottom of "Flight 175" firing something:
Boeing had no comment on the device for reasons of "National Security".
Also...
The case began with the suspicions of a reader
http://www.amics21.com/911/imgs/plane&tower-sm.jpg
One morning last February a young reader came into the head offices of LaVanguardia.es(Mainstream Spanish Newspaper) with an idea in his head that had occurred to him as he was looking attentively at the videos and photos on 9/11.
There are reader/discoverers. They're readers who get a chance to bring news outâprovide their newspapers with an exclusive story. It is initiative which is gratefully received. These readers are efficient spontaneous reporters. That's what's happened in the case of the mystery of the plane which crashed into the WTC in new York on 11 September 2001.
The reader who walked into the editing room of LaVanguardia.es that winter's morning with photos under his arm was attended to by Josep Maria Calvet. The reader, who has asked to remain anonymously as R.R., asked the journalist to look hard at some of the details in the photos: two strange shapes which appeared below the aircraft.
This is how the reporters' work started off the results of which were published in articles in "La Vanguardia" on 22 June and 13 July 2003, and as I commented at the request of a reader, in the last article before the summer holiday season, published on 27 July 2003.
One function of the readers' ombudsman explained in La Vanguardia statutes is to describe the procedure the journalist follows in preparing, elaborating and publishing the story he takes up. The circumstances of this case beg telling the inside story of these reports.
Did "La Vanguardia" come up with this? How did the reporters find out about the mystery of the plane?
Two days after R.R.'s visit, the editorial office contacted Eduardo MartÃn de Pozuelo to ask him have a look and give his opinion on the shapes or bumps to be seen in the images of the plane seconds before it crashed into the skyscaper.
The office checked that the photos had not been manipulated in any way and that they coincided with the ones held in the newspaper's archives. It was true. There were strange "shapes" or "bumps".
MartÃn de Pozuelo set to work. He had a meeting with R.R. and Calvet at La Vanguardia.es head office. They spent two long afternoons poring over the photos, videos and all the visual material they could get together on the attack on the twin towers in New York. What conclusion did they come to?
They noticed evidence of shapes present on the fuselage of the plane. They couldn't tell what on earth it was.
MartÃn de Pozeulo has told the ombudsman that he did not think it was opportune to publish anything as yet on the subject. Data and reliable sources were missing. He says about these "shapes":
"It looked like an optical effect but as that was a totally subjective opinion I showed the photos to fellow photographers and asked them to give their opinion as image experts. They swung between the hypothesis of an optical effect or an added object, as I did. The reporters persevered.
They consulted another expert, Amparo Sacristán, an image and microelectronics specialist at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. Her first appraisal encouraged them to go on in their investigation. Doctor Sacristán performed a digital analysis of the photos and concluded that they were shapes not reflections brilliance. The results of this new stage were surprising and disconcerting.
Xavier Mas de XaxÃs, who was working as a correspondent for the "La Vanguardia" in the United States on the 11 September 2001, searched for news, published or unpublished, which could throw some light on the matter. He was gathering information on the poor security at Logan airport (Washington).
Meanwhile MartÃn de Pozuelo consulted aviation expertsâamong them an aeronautical engineer who asked not to be identified, due to his rank. He spent all one morning analising the photos in the "La Vanguardia". His pronouncement reinforced the hypothesis of something added to the fuselage.
The two reporters conducting the investigation were not convinced, of course. They were sceptical. They decided to take it one step further to dispel all doubt. They turned to US sources. The Boeing company in Seattle agreed to have a look at the photos and give their conclusions. The photographs were sent electronically from "La Vanguardia".
For ten days, by telephone and electronic mail, the company responded whenever called by the two "La Vanguardia" newsmen, as the photos were studied by various departments at the company. Finally, from Seattle, back came a surprising, enigmatic reply: "We are not able to tell you what it is. Security reasons."
It was then that the newsmen decided there was enough to report to "La Vanguardia" readers. The text and photos were handed in to the newspaper's editorial office to assess whether to publish a first report. It was released in the June 22 issue. It caused an impact, even in the United States, where the translation of the "La Vanguardia" article was hung on a web site dedicated to 9/11.
The two reporters then asked Boeing once more: "Is there any further news?" Answer: "No answer for security reasons". A negative reply which does not clear up the mystery. And so they continue to investigate.
http://www.amics21.com/911/ombudsman2.html
American Airlines Flight 11, from Boston, Massachusetts, to Los Angeles, California, crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center with 92 people on board.
Here is a query run on the BTS for Flight 11 from Logan, Boston on the 10th Sept 2001:
Here is a query run on the same database for Flight 11 from Logan, Boston on the 11th Sept 2001:
Conclusion: American Airlines Flight 11 did not fly on Sept 11 2001
Same with Flight 77 that supposedly hit the Pentagon, it also did not fly on Sept 11th:
(It has also been noted that: Prior to 9/11/04 neither Flight 77 nor Flight 11 were listed as "scheduled" on 9/11. They existed nowhere in the database. However, three years later Flight 77 and Flight 11 appear as scheduled for 9/11 but don't show an actual takeoff time, suggesting they didn't fly that day. However, this data has been tampered with by personnel either inside or outside the BTS to make it seem as if Flight 11 and Flight 77 were scheduled. So we should note that someone has already manipulated the flight data by inserting a scheduled flight for Flight 11 and Flight 77)
Well, both UA tail numbers were still registered as "Active/Valid" with the FAA until 9/28/05...as in Not Destroyed! While the other two AA tail numbers were listed as "destroyed"! On 9/28/05 the two UA's became "cancelled, not destroyed, after several calls to the FAA, asking why they were sitll valid in the first place.
Flight 175 N612UA, now registered as "cancelled" and not "Destroyed" as of 9/28/05
Flight 93 N591UA, now registered as "cancelled" and not "Destroyed" as of 9/28/05
Hmmm. That's weird. They were still registered as valid-IN USE! WTF?
Now let's look at the AA flights.
Flight 11 N334AA
Flight 77 N644AA
Isn't it odd that the two planes that were described as "small commuter planes" show up as A)Not taking off on 9/11 and B)"Destroyed" according to the FAA, while the other two show up as still "Valid/Active"?
Flight 93:
Absolutely NO real wreckage there, as reported by witnesses on news reports:
Some people believe they simply blew up a plane-shape using expolosives in an open field.
So what brought down the Twin Towers???
Leslie E. Robertson - Chief Engineer of the World Trade Center
In 1966, Robertson designed the structural elements of the WTC towers to withstand the impact of the largest airliner then in service, the Boeing 707.
The above image is taken from Chapter 1 of the WTC Report [FEMA PDF of report]. To see how willing to "stretch the truth" the authors of the report are, compare the above image to the original (which can be found here). Notice that they have "accidently" quoted the length, height and wingspan of one of the early 707's (possibly the Boeing 707-120) and the weight, fuel capacity and speed of the more common Boeing 707-320B (the aircraft that most people associate with the name, Boeing 707). The above graphic has been edited to give a more accurate picture.
To summarize the aircraft:
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336, 000 pounds.
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395, 000 pounds.
The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet.
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.
The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet.
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet.
The Boeing 707 could carry 23, 000 gallons of fuel.
The Boeing 767 could carry 23, 980 gallons of fuel.
The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s,
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s.
The Boeing 707 and 767 are very similar aircraft, with the main differences being that the 767 is slightly heavier and the 707 is faster.
Since the Boeing 707 had a higher thrust to weight ratio, it would be traveling faster on take-off and on landing.
The thrust to weight ratio for a Boeing 707 is 4 x 18, 000/336, 000 = 0.214286.
The thrust to weight ratio for a Boeing 767 is 2 x 31, 500/395, 000 = 0.159494.
In all the likely variations of an accidental impact with the WTC, the Boeing 707 would be traveling faster. In terms of impact damage, this higher speed would more than compensate for the slightly lower weight of the Boeing 707.
In conclusion we can say that if the twin towers were designed to survive the impact of a Boeing 707, then they were necessarily designed to survive the impact of a Boeing 767
VIDEO: WTC Construction Manager, Frank A. DeMartini: Towers Were Designed to Take 707, he believes multiple jet strikes
Boeing 707
Boeing 767
What about Building 7:
Secretive CIA Site in New York Was Destroyed on Sept. 11
by James Risen Published on Sunday, November 4, 2001 in the New York Times
Not to mention U.S. Secret Service, FEMA, SEC, and Rudy Guliani's Mayor's Office of Emergency Mgmt command bunker!!!!
Obviously if 911 was an inside job the complete destruction of building 7 was necessary to destroy evidence.
âIn June 1999, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani built a $13 million emergency crisis centre on the 27th floor of 7 World Trade Center, a building just north of the towers that itself collapsed late Tuesday afternoon.
Giuliani intended the centre to serve as a command central during city emergencies including blackouts, storms and terrorist attacks. Guiliani spent part of the New Year's Eve 2000 celebration in the emergency centre.â
(Sounds like the perfect place to run the whole operation from and then "pull" the building when you're done to destroy the evidence if you ask me!)
Speaking of "pulling" the building this is exactly what the owner Larry Silverstein admitted happened in an interview in the PBS documentary "America Rebuilds".
America Rebuilds: A Year at Ground Zero -PBS (09/10/02):
Larry Silverstein, WTC Leaseholder: "I remember getting a call from the, uh, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'You know we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is, is pull it.' Uh, and they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."
Watch Here
(Unidentified construction worker): "Hello? Oh, we're getting ready to pull building six."
Luis Mendes, NYC Dept of Design and Construction: "We had to be very careful how we demolished building six. We were worried about the building six coming down and then damaging the story walls, so we wanted that particular building to fall within a certain area."
Watch Here
Notice how a lot of other references where the word "pull" is being used to describe the demolishing of buildings...
*"The preparation of the structure for implosion could have been approached a number of ways...it was decided that CDI [Controlled Demolition, Inc.] could effectively minimize the amount of linear shaped charge explosives to be used in the structure. By torch-cutting splice plates on selected upper columns/floors, and utilizing approximately 3, 000 feet of steel-core cable on alternate upper floors to help âpullâ the northern and eastern walls away from the fiber optics cables..." -Controlled Demolition, Inc. (01/23/05)
*"Phase 1 continued to fall, helping to pull Phase 2 in . Phase 2 was detonated several seconds later and collapsed and fell the same as Phase 1." -Controlled Demolition, Inc. (01/23/05)
*Perfect demolition leaves Dome a fallen souffle
"The roof did its job, the gravity engine worked. It provided the energy we needed to pull the columns inward, " said Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition Inc., the Maryland-based company whose handiwork brought down the Dome.
"The demolition went perfectly, " said Tom Gerlach of Turner Construction Co., which is building a new football and soccer stadium on the site. "The relief is palpable." -Seattle Post-Intelligencer (03/27/02)
*"Stacey Loizeaux, who calls herself "The Demolition Woman, " grew up in a family whose grandfather, Jack, pioneered the art of implosion, the controlled demolition of structures ranging from bridges to blast furnaces, from radio towers to buildings. In 1957, Jack Loizeaux, now 81 and retired, was the first person in the U.S. To "implode" buildings in dense urban settings. J. Mark and Douglas K. Loizeaux, who co-authored an article, "Demolition by Implosion, " in the October 1995 issue of Scientific American, describe the process of preparing a building for its five-second takedown as a process of carefully removing all non-essential (non load-bearing) materials, scanning blueprints, taking samples of concrete to determine its actual strength (or weakness!) -- and even, in some cases, re-building parts of the structure in order to properly pull it down. " -University of Pittsburgh
*"With few exceptions, explosive demolition in the early 1960s was concentrated in the industrial sector, and blasters worked primarily within a few-hundred mile radius of their respective offices. Many expanded their resumes' with power plants, warehouses, factories, coal tipples and blast furnaces, and with each new project they gained valuable experience. Gradually they began to develop techniques to increase the efficiency of explosive charges, such as pre-cutting steel beams and attaching cables to certain columns to "pull" a structure in a given direction. -ImplosionWorld.com
*"The University of Louisiana at Monroe, Anderson Excavation, and Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI Â Implosion Subcontractor) of Phoenix, Maryland announced today that Olin Hall on the ULM Campus will be imploded on Saturday September 25 at 10 a.m.
Implosion is a process where a small amount of explosives is used to disrupt selected supports in a building. This allows gravity to pull the structure down in a controlled manner . CDI has used this implosion method thousands of times around the world during the past 52 years to remove unwanted structures. CDI's safety record is unparalleled." -University of Louisiana at Monroe (09/20/04)
*"Jack [Loizeaux] brought a basic knowledge of construction, engineering, and physics to his new science of implosion. More important, though, he brought the fascination and conviction of a true believer. Long before anyone else, he had faith in the power of explosives to help gravity do what it wants to do anyway: pull things down. " -University of Georgia
*"On Sunday, June 10, 2001, the City of Des Moines subcontracted the implosion of the Younkers Warehouse Building to Controlled Demolition Incorporated (CDI) from Des Moines and Metro Wrecking and Excavating, Inc. from Phoenix, Maryland. CDI drilled over 500 holes in the supporting columns in the building and placed approximately 250 pounds of explosives. The explosives were detonated with a delay pattern that started in the southeast corner of the building and proceeded toward the northwest corner in a matter of seconds. This delay sequence allowed the explosive charges to detonate fractions of seconds apart; reducing the noise and vibrations to approximately 25 percent of the allowable levels before damage would occur to surrounding buildings. This delay allowed CDI to control the direction that the building would fall and resulted in the illusion that the building melted. CDI planned the implosion to pull the building to the southeast and away from the intersection of SW 9th and Mulberry Streets. The implosion was very successful. -Front Line/Des Moines, IA
*How does an implosion work?
"Not all demolition blast(s) are implosions. The industry often refers to them as implosions because it is a popular expression. A true implosion is a case when a structure has been caused to fall inwards on itself. Smokestacks, towers, bridges and most buildings are not imploded. They are simply knocked over.
Implosion is used when there is limited area on all sides of a structure making it impossible to lay them out.
The principles used on an implosion are basically the same whether it is a true implosion, or if the structure is simply going to be laid out. The principle tool in an implosion is gravity. The explosives are used to weaken and cause the supporting members of the structure to fail, thus allowing gravity to pull the structure down or over. " -Dykon Blasting Corp.
*"Stacey Loizeaux, twenty-six years old, has worked for Controlled Demolition, an international explosives engineering firm, since the age of fifteen. She learned the fine art of demolition from her father, Mark Loizeaux, and her uncle, Doug Loizeauxâpresident and vice-president of the company.
NOVA: A common misconception is that you blow buildings up. That's not really the case, is it?
Stacy Loizeaux: No. The term "implosion" was coined by my grandmother back in, I guess, the '60s. It's a more descriptive way to explain what we do than "explosion." There are a series of small explosions, but the building itself isn't erupting outward. It's actually being pulled intop of itself. What we're really doing is removing specific support columns within the structure and then cajoling the building in one direction or another, or straight down.
NOVA: I understand that you try to use the smallest amount of explosives possible...Can you explain why?
SL: Well, the explosives are really just the catalyst. Largely what we use is gravity. And we're dealing with Class A explosives that are embedded into concreteâand that concrete flies. So, let's say your explosive is 17, 000 feet per secondâyou've got a piece of concrete moving at that speed when you remove it from the structure.
NOVA: Can you describe the prep work that goes into dropping a building.
SL: Well, it depends on the structure, obviously. We've had chimneys prepared in half a day and we've had buildings that take three months. Generally we don't do the preparation work. We are usually an implosion subcontractor, meaning that there is a main demolition contractor on site, who's been contracted by the property owner or the developer, and they then subcontract the implosion to us.
NOVA: Why do the explosive charges go off at intervals rather than all at once?
SL: Well, if I kick both your legs out from under you, you're going to fall right on your butt. If I kick one leg out from under you, you'll fall left or right. So the way we control the failure of the building is by using the delays. And, again, that varies structure to structure and depending on where we want the building to go. A lot of people, when they see a building implosion, expect it to go into its own basement, which is not always what the contractor wants. Sometimes the contractor wants to lay the building out like a tree. And, sometime, we need to bring down buildings that are actually touching other buildings.
NOVA: How do you do that?
SL: Well, you just pull it away , you peel it off. If you have room in the opposite direction, you just let the building sort of melt down in that direction and it will pull itself completely away from the building. It can be done.
NOVA: What do you look for in an explosive?
SL: Velocity. You have two different types of explosives. You have low order and high order. A low order explosive is like what they used when they bombed the Oklahoma City buildingâthat's ANFO, ammonium nitrate and fuel oil. It's a very slow, heaving explosion. It tends to push more than it does shatter. The explosive we look for is a shattering explosive. What we want to do is instantaneously remove the integrity of the columns or whatever we're working on. That's what we look for in nitroglycerin or NG-based dynamite. With a steel building, we use something called a linear shaped charge. It's the same explosive they use to sever the fuel tank off the Space Shuttle, when they launch.
NOVA: I understand that Controlled Demolition was hired to bring down the remains of the Oklahoma City Federal Building. Were you out there for that?
SL: My father and my uncle went out.
NOVA: Do you get a thrill watching a building fall?
SL: Oh sure. I mean you really don't ever lose it. Your perspective changes. When I first started traveling with my Dad at fifteen, sixteen years old, I used to be awestruck. But you sort of go from that awestruck feeling to where you understand how the structure is coming down and you're watching for certain thingsâcounting the delays or waiting for a part of the building to kick out or waiting for it to pull forward. So it does change, but it's always a rush." -NOVA/PBS (1997)
"A private developer little known to the general public, Silverstein signed a 99-year lease for the twin towers just six weeks before the attack .
His lease with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey remains in place, making Silverstein, 72, a key figure in the rebuilding of the site." -CBS Interactive
"In April, the Port Authority granted a 99-year lease of the twin towers and four other buildings to Silverstein for an estimated $3.2 billion.
The deal -- which allowed Silverstein to manage the complex and collect rent -- was said by the Port Authority to be the most expensive real estate transaction in New York history. " -CNN (09/12/01)
The fires in wtc 7 were limited to a few floors and the building was never fully engulfed in flames. it's perfect free-fall collapse into it's own footprint makes no sense whatsover and wasn't even attempted to be explained by the 911 commission. here is FEMA's woefully inadequate report:
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."
Close-up of WTC-7 Collapse Footage ShowsUnmistakable Demolition Charges/Suibs
Keep in mind...
Buildings 4, 5, 6 DID NOT COLLAPSE.
Building 3, The Marriot DID NOT fully collapse either, even after the first tower fell through the middle of it!!
Bankers Trust (not shown above) DID NOT collapse.
The two buildings on BOTH SIDES of WTC7 DID NOT collapse.
Building 4:
WTC5:
WTC6:
WTC6 (above), WTC5 (below):
WTC3 Marriot...South Tower crashing through:
After South Tower collapse:
After North Tower collapse...still standing:
Bankers Trust (near South Tower):
WTC Financial CTR(Winter Garden Dome in between the buildings, near 600 ft away)Look at the steel ejected all this way. Only explosives could explain this:
Winter Garden:
In the foreground, you can see WTC6 (left) and WTC5 (right), and the two buildings that stood on each side of WTC...note they are untouched:
WTC6 (bottom), WTC5 (top)...to the left you can see the WTC7 pile. Look at the building on the sides of the pile. Untouched:
Type of Label: None