WTC7 seems to be a classic controlled demolition. WTC 1 &2 destruction appears to have been enhanced by thermate (a variation of thermite) in addition.
Pentagon was not struck by a passenger aircraft. It was a drone or missle.
Newt Gingrich had a gargantuanly stupid quote in the article, which we'll get to in a second. But first let me start with my favorite quote by a "senior United States official," otherwise known as a neoclown inside the Vice President's office. He is referring to the intelligence agencies who have found no evidence of an Iranian nuclear program:
"We're not in a court of law," he said. "When they say there is 'no evidence,' you have to ask them what they mean, what is the meaning of the term 'evidence'?"
Aren't these the same guys that were all over Clinton for asking what "is" is? Read the above sentence again. First, he admits that there is no evidence. Then, his best defense is to question what the word "evidence" means. That's embarrassing. This is a person in a position of power inside our government.
Gee, I wonder how the intelligence got manipulated in the lead up to the Iraq War. If you'd like a refresher course, just watch how they're doing it right now with Iran.
Here's my second favorite quote from the article:
"The consensus of the intelligence agencies is that Iran is still years away from building a nuclear weapon. Such an assessment angers some in Washington."
Isn't it a good thing that they are years away from a nuclear weapon? Wouldn't it give us more time to figure out how to stop them? Not if you're a neoclown. This means war might be delayed. They must have war and they must have it right now. War, war, war.
Now, we come to our old friend Newt Gingrich, who has stopped cheating on his wives long enough to make this absolutely asinine statement:
"When the intelligence community says Iran is 5 to 10 years away from a nuclear weapon, I ask: 'If North Korea were to ship them a nuke tomorrow, how close would they be then?"
Not as close as North Korea.
Let me ask a very simple question: If North Korea already has the weapons and they are also in the axis of evil, why aren't we attacking them? Why are the neoclowns trying to attack a country that might buy it from the North Koreans when they could just attack North Korea, who they haven't paid a lick of attention to in six years?
The answer is 100% undeniable - because it isn't about the weapons. That's just a convenient excuse used to scare the American people. Iraq didn't have any weapons and we're still in there three and half years later. It was never about the weapons. One of the main neoclown architects, Paul Wolfowitz, pretty much admitted it after the Iraq War started. Now, they're shamelessly bringing that old dead horse out again.
Other quick points about Gingrich's buffoonish point: 1. Isn't he admitting that Iran doesn't have any weapons and would have to buy them from North Korea? 2. What would prevent them from buying those weapons the day after our air strikes? 3. In fact, wouldn't they have a far greater incentive to buy nuclear weapons if we attacked them? Especially because they would have learned that their current weapons were not enough of a deterrent and North Korea's nuclear weapons were.
Look, I don't have a problem with neoclowns making these arguments. It's a free country. If you want to put on a shiny red nose and big floppy shoes and make clowning your calling in life, more power to you. What I don't get is why we're still going to the circus. Haven't we had enough of this freak show?
These guys should be the laughing stock of the country right now. And here is all of Washington taking them very seriously to this day and having a legitimate discussion about whether we should attack another Middle Eastern country that did not attack us and has no weapons. How many times do we have to point out how absolutely insane that is before the people in power (politicians and the press) get it? It shouldn't that difficult.
Anyone who backs this war drive will look back and regret it forever. Anyone who still wants to get in the car these neoclowns are driving is going to be eternally embarrassed. You're going to think - what was I thinking? Consider this a preemptive intervention. Get out of the clown car and slowly back away. There is still time for you to pretend you were on to them the whole time.
Humint Events Online The 9/11 hijacking attacks were very likely facilitated by a rogue group within the US government that created an Islamic terrorist "Pearl Harbor" event as a catalyst for the military invasion of Middle Eastern countries. This weblog will explore the incredibly strange events of 9/11/01, and other issues of US government responsibility.
The last couple of days I have been looking (yet again) at the "wing" scars left on the north and south towers of the WTC by whatever it was that attacked the buildings.
Whatever DID attack the buildings made damn good impressions of 767s. First rate impressions-- literally!
But perhaps they were too good!
What is clear is that the wingtips, particularly for the south tower, did not penetrate the columns.
A priori, I would imagine that the wingtips, especially where the wings were slanted back about 35 degrees, would have snapped off in a collision of a 767 with a building having heavy steel columns on its exterior.
As you can see from the frame above, of the CNN "best view" (aka Ghostplane) video, the wings do not snap off.
The same goes for the huge tail of the 767. One would think it would snap off, but the videos show no such thing. And just like the wingtips, the tails of the two planes clearly do not slice through the columns they hit. But there are indeed little indentations made in the facade where the tail hit. Remarkable really, how that happened. But more remarkable is how the wingtips and tails apparently disappear into the building rather than breaking off.
So there are really only two things that can explain the building scars from where the wings and tails hit:
1) the wingtips and tails shredded on the columns into fragments that passed through and then left no debris behind on the facade
2) the scars were made by something other than plane (767) wings and tails
But logically, the shredding mechanism makes no sense. If the wingtips and tails were going to break, they should have broken off en masse, as a chunk.
But the videos show no such thing.
So we must conclude the scars were made by something other than plane (767) wings and tails.
Which of course fits better with the evidence that the videos of the plane were fakes and forgeries.
But the building scars were really cleverly done, I must say!
According to William Cohen, former Secretary of Offense and Clinton administration war criminal, few of us have made the sort of “commitment to universal service” demanded by our rulers, or are we “really committed to this war against terrorism,” that is to say the forever war against Islam.
Appearing on Fox, Cohen said “something has to be done to put us on a war footing mentality,” as obviously the spate of fake color-coded terror alerts, revealed to be nothing more than crass political monkeywrenching, and the parade of duped patsies in Miami, Ontario, and London, to name but the most recent, have not frightened the populace to the degree required. In order to get the people in the appropriate mindset, Cohen believes we need “national service,” that is to say he is in favor of mandatory servitude, otherwise known as slavery, and he describes this national serfhood as “helping out at homes, health care, nurses, etc.,” when in fact the state—or, more specifically, the multinational corporations and banksters who run the state—could care less about such things. In essence, this is a foot in the door for a military draft, as millions of soldiers, or pawns, need to be thrown on toxic and depleted uranium battlegrounds for the next generation or two.
In a truly sane and just world, William Cohen would be doing the perp walk in an orange jumpsuit. As the the International War Crimes Tribunal notes, Cohen is guilty of slaughtering innocents in Yugoslavia. On March 24, 1999, corporate gangster don Bill Clinton ordered the Pentagon and NATO to attack the people of Yugoslavia, not only a war crime and a crime against humanity, but also a violation of Article 2 of the United States Constitution (50 USC 1542, mandating initial and regular consultations with Congress; 50 USC 1543, mandating written reports of necessitating circumstances; and 50 USC 1544 mandating the termination of the war use of United States Armed Force after 60 days in the absence of the official enactment by Congress of specific statutory authority).
Specifically, Clinton and his minions stand accused of the following crimes: bombing homes, residential areas, bridges, historical sites, churches, passenger buses, embassies, hospitals, prisons, sanatoriums, and even a zoo. “A group lawyers from several countries has laid a formal complaint with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia against all of the individual leaders of the NATO countries and officials of NATO itself,” Michael Mandel, a member of the Osgoode Hall Law School, wrote in a press release, dated May 7, 1999.
The complaint was initiated by professors from Osgoode Hall Law School of York University in Toronto — where Tribunal prosecutor Louise Arbour was also a professor before becoming a judge. The group has charged Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Javier Solana, Jamie Shea, Jean Chretien, Art Eggleton, Lloyd Axworthy and 60 other heads of state and government, foreign ministers, defense ministers and NATO officials, with war crimes committed in NATOs six-week old bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.
The list of crimes includes “willful killing, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, extensive destruction of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly, employment of poisonous weapons or other weapons to cause unnecessary suffering, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity, attack, or bombardment, by whatever means, of undefended towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings, destruction or willful damage done to institutions dedicated to religion, charity and education, the arts and sciences, historic monuments and works of art and science.”
The complaint also alleges “open violation” of the United Nations Charter, the NATO treaty itself, the Geneva Conventions and the Principles of International Law Recognized by the Nüremberg Tribunal (the latter of which makes “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances” a crime).
Instead of facing formal charges for such egregious crimes, Clinton is allowed to walk free, recently visiting Shea Stadium during a baseball game where he basked in the adoration of the celebrity hungry crowd. Hitler did likewise during the the 1936 Berlin Olympics. Of course, a few short years later, the German people paid a heavy price for their unquestioning devotion and fawning worship. It still remains to be seen if the American people will one day be called to pay for the vulgar crimes of their rulers.
Instead of focusing on William Cohen’s unabashed call for war servitude and sacrifice in the name of our corporate rulers, the media concentrates on his latest novel, a fictional account of state power unbound going up against “terrorist attacks, a possible alliance among Russia, Germany and China, right-wing militias in the U.S., and more,” according to a frothy review posted on the MSNBC website. Of course, there are few “right-wing militias” in the United States, although plenty of folks are worried about the systematic destruction of the Constitution (these folks are considered dangerous “right-wing nuts”), and most terrorism is state-sponsored, but never mind, this is, after all, a work of fiction, and wildly speculative fiction at best.
In fact, reality, under the reign of our corporate fascist rulers, is far more scary than any horror novel, as the future portends, under Cohen’s bleak vision, shared by our decadent and indeed sociopathic rulers and their sycophants, hegemonic and endless war in the name of a corporate, and thus fascist, Oceania. It is entirely natural for Cohen and his ilk to expect—nay, demand—our subservience to a predatory Novus Ordo Mundi, window dressed as selfless volunteer work for the sake of “homes, health care, nurses,” when in fact it is nothing less than the naked, blood-streaked face of the oligarchy engaged in the dance of the vultures.