Remembering 9/11
To the profound consternation of the political establishment, 9/11 skeptics have not only not gone away but are flourishing. A site that keeps track, worth noting, is Patriots Question 9/11, run by the persistent Alan Miller. To date, he's amassed the names of about 800 prominent individuals who to varying degrees question the official story — recent additions include Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, a former senior staff member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, Dr. Lynn Margulis, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, J. Marx Ayers, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council, and Commander Ralph Kolstad (USN, Ret.), former 'Top Gun' trainer. Needless to say, the mainstream media hasn't covered any of these defections. If you're curious and open-minded, or perhaps even already a 9/11 skeptic, it's definitely worth browsing through Patriots Question 9/11 to see the mix. There may be a few raving nutballs but it would be grossly unfair to impugn such a distinguished group with a broad brush. In short, it's reasonable to suppose that unless and until better answers are forthcoming 9/11 skepticism will continue to grow louder.
Posted by George Kenney on September 9, 2007 6:18 AM 
« Dealing With Mass Murderers | Main | Now We Know Who's Nuts »
Comments
This is a very good site, George. I've been sending it to others... sadly, most people just don't want to think about the implications.
Posted by: Judy Truett | September 9, 2007 12:05 PM
The clincher for me that all is not as the official story would have it, is the clip of video showing the collapse of WT7.
Conventional steel beam sky scrapers, where walls and floor pans are NOT essential to the structural integrity of the building, but merely hung on the structural steel lattice, are immensely strong and do not 'just' collapse straight down. Ever. They never have and never will. This only ever happens when a significant number of the main supports are taken out more or less simultaneously at ground level with explosives.
Asymmetric damage can produce a localised and partial collapse, and in the worst case scenario of a major earthquake, the whole building tends to topple sideways as a single block.
I can't add anything useful to the discussion of WTC 1&2, which due to their unique and peculiar method of construction do seem to be an open invitation to a 'pancaking' collapse disaster. Maybe the architects had this in mind when designing the buildings? Better for 1 & 2 to fall straight down in the event of a major disaster than topple sideways and lay waste to half of lower Manhattan.
Posted by: David Wilson | September 9, 2007 12:50 PM
Remember when that photo of the south tower you've posted didn't look like an explosion?
How could I have been so naive? The William Rodriguez presentation on c-span last night was incredible.
Posted by: RJ Williams | September 9, 2007 11:15 PM
The call for a new "Pearl Harbor" in both the 1997 book The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski and the PNAC document "Rebuilding America's Defenses" are clues which point the way. Michael Ruppert's very well documented book, Crossing the Rubicon is in my opinion not quite complete, but close enough and nails the case that the Cheney/Bush Junta was complicit in this attack.
Posted by: Pandabonium | September 11, 2007 4:25 AM
Glad to see you are still persisting with 9/11 Truth George.
The movement is gaining serious momentum with or without MSM support. If it goes supernova, it could become the seed of a new revolution and a reassessment of our core values.
Posted by: Kevin M. | September 20, 2007 6:11 AM