Thursday, September 4, 2008

911 at Seven

"911 at Seven

By age seven most children have begun the process of understanding. It’s basic stuff like reading, writing, right and wrong, and a myriad of other things that allow their little brains to make sense of the world. Our brat-child 911 however, seems to be suffering developmental delays, still clinging to the easter bunny and tooth fairy even though he saw mom slip the quarter under his pilliow that night he pretended to be asleep. Perhaps it’s that if he lets go of the childhood myths he’ll have to face the dreaded onset of adulthood and accountability. And 911 remains an ambivalence-magnet with half the population believing he’s an honest and trustworthy little being and the other half knowing that he is the spawn of consummate evil. The dichotomy persists in spite of proof after proof of his misdeeds. In our time, 911 has become the litmus test of honesty vs. denial.

Central to the inside-job debate is the assertion that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Media and goverment scoff at the notion, impugning all who would dare think such a thing as traitors, lunatics and, of course, wacky conspiracy theorists. Yet what is ‘wacky’ about observing clear evidence and raising questions?

With a few photographs and the application of a little bit of science and logic we have established with virtual certainty that the three WTC towers were disintegrated as a result of controlled demolition. In its absence the towers would have no opportunity to collapse, at least not at free-fall speed in perfectly vertical descent. The NIST ‘pancake theory’ is an affront to science and virtually all of Newton’s laws of motion, ignoring factors such as air compression between floors, as one small example. And their latest ‘thermal expansion’ theory to explain the collapse of WTC 7 due to isolated fires on lower floors slaps the collective intelligence in its face. Are they honestly suggesting that the entire complex was so poorly designed as to be unable to withstand small cool fires of any sort? We have been and continue to be HAD friends. And it is time to wake up lest we face another even more drastic fraud.

Given that no steel-cored building has ever collapsed due to fire before, I conservatively estimate that the odds of three such buildings collapsing and disintegrating identically within hours on the same day to be one in a billion. Now, do you still believe in one in a billion possibilities? Do you still think that three drastically over-engineered structures collapsed due to spot fires and pancakes? Do you still think that the impact force of comparatively lightweight jets into the towers jarred them so tremendously that 47 internal core-columns in each tower were shaken into uniform neatly sliced up sticks? Do you still think that burning annual reports and office furniture melted the steel? Do you still think that corporate, military, and government minds are simply incapable of such a dastardly deed?