Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax

[Solve et Coagula]

Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax

Mon Jan 30, 11:37 AM ET

http://news.yahoo.com/

 

Duluth, MN (PRWEB) January 30, 2006 -- A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

 

They have joined with others in common cause as members of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (S9/11T), because they are convinced, based on their own research, that the administration has been deceiving the nation about critical events in New York and Washington, D.C.

 

These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor." (Don't forget that Dubya supposedly wrote in his diary that night "We have just had another Pearl Harbor"- If anyone believes that King george wrote that all by his lonesome or even wrote it that night, I have a bridge for sale in the AZ desert).......

[TheBigDog]

Can this be moved to strange claims? Even if it contained a single fact, it would still be nothing but an insult.

 

Bill

[C1ay]

This might come as a surprise to you Solve but this is a science site, not some conspiracy theory, junk science, skeptics site. Perhpas you'll find more discussion of your topics at another site like scam.com or similiar.

[alexander]

well, lets answer some questions as to why this post is being ignored, yes ignored, because it is so unorthodox and hard to follow without wondering as to whether this post is a joke of some sort, well, let me explain...

 

first of all this entire post is a statement, which happens to be the title, followed by an article from yahoo news that makes a crap load of statements with less then a little factual evidence to support the crazified claims, lets digest this a bit:

 

A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

duh, thats what the 9/11 commitee and 9/11 movie said, as well as the first episode of The Boondocks, and many articles and news reporters who worked on the project did, as well as any logically inclined person, problem is that gov-t wont release the information no matter what it is that you do, gov-t, that's the way they do things....

 

but cool, cool, lets not even discuss that part and move down to the factual piece:

Here are some of the kinds of considerations that these experts and scholar find profoundly troubling:

 

* In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?

plane hitting a building at some 200 odd miles in hour is a pretty darn good reason, and its not just a fire, its a jet fuel fire, intense and with heat up to and over 1800 degrees (there must have been some pressure build up, and therefore the flame could have become hotter) anyways, i'll discuss this point later, but it is a pretty darn good reason for a steel fram building to come down...

 

* The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?

people who crash an airplane into a building that then catches on fire and burns for even a few minutes, sort of makes the chance of finding remains of people quite hard, therefore the FBI has to assume that they were on the airplane from the descriptions of the people seen, and that involves a human factor which makes it even harder to make assumptions...

 

Frank DeMartini, a project manager for the WTC, said the buildings were designed with load redistribution capabilities to withstand the impact of airliners, whose effects would be like "puncturing mosquito netting with a pencil." Yet they completely collapsed. How is this possible?

nither one of the buildings colapsed from the impact now did they...

 

Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700*F, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, and UL certified the steel used to 2,000*F for six hours, the buildings cannot have collapsed due to heat from the fires. How is this possible?

any man who knows anything about iron works realizes that you dont need to melt metal in order to bend it, the thing with heat is that the hotter the metal becomes the easier it will be to bend, and once the meta bends and key structural frames start collapsing, you can not stop the collpse of millions of tonns of steel on to anything, as they did, both buildings completely collapsed...

 

Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?

here is a claim back, they hitched a ride with the little grey guys with big eyes from far far away.... seriously what kind of claim is that? it dissapeared from radar or from the eyes of the person looking at the screen, so far there is only one way to record radar findings and that is with pictures, no storage media is big enough to hold the amount of information constantly going through those things for hours, so how can they claim that it dissapeared from radar? also, there are ways to make planes dissapear from radar screens, it is called flying low to the ground, works pretty well, especially for commercial radar technology...

 

Foreign "terrorists" who were clever enough to coordinate hijacking four commercial airliners seemingly did not know that the least damage to the Pentagon would be done by hitting its west wing. How is this possible?

willing to bet that it was not the point of the attack on the pentagon, the attacks, as much as they were to kill many americans, unfortunately, but also to kill american sense of security, and what a better way to show that then to attack the very heart of the US security, still not plausible?

 

Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, in an underground bunker at the White House, watched Vice President Cheney castigate a young officer for asking, as the plane drew closer and closer to the Pentagon, "Do the orders still stand?" The order cannot have been to shoot it down, but must have been the opposite. How is this possible?

and how would you like to be responsible for killing 70 odd people in the airplane, well it would not look too good for the secretary there either, the orders i would give is to evacuate the wing and not fire until the last second possible and definitely stand by until then.....

 

A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?

and we have one inspector general's claim to go with, i dont care what it is, the plain could have hit a tree, and sebris would have started flying out waay before the plane hit the ground, and then there is the actual hitting, you can hit rocks and parts like engine's which are still spinning would have flown off by themselves far away, look it was not an impact due to failure, it was an impact due to a killed pilot....

 

A tape recording of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11 was deliberately crushed, cut into very small pieces, and distributed in assorted places to insure its total destruction. How is this possible?

so if it was crushed, how do we know what was recorded on it? plus officicals=do stupid things...

 

The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?

you can not know how accurate that simulation was, whether it accounted for burning fuel and all the weights, all forces, places and such, again the buildings did not collapse because of the imact either so the simulations and engineers must have done a pretty good job...

 

Their own physics research has established that only controlled demolitions are consistent with the near-gravity speed of fall and virtually symmetrical collapse of all three of the WTC buildings. While turning concrete into very fine dust, they fell straight-down into their own footprints.

lastly, demolitions are done on the lower levels of 10-20 story buildings to make them unstable and collapse on themselves, only lower stories are really effected, now, the WTC buildings both started their collapse in the middle somewhere, milions of tonns of steel just started bending, if you have seen the footage of the crane collapse while the roof of some staduim was being put up, you would notice that a rigid frame becomes bery rubbery and fals wown quick with steel, so no surprize, as to the third building, if you did not read the news, all of the WTC buildings are connected to the same foundation (course each has its own, but there are connections that make them one too) a ruptured base of the other building would have lead it to a similar fate as the demolition crew workers leave design for their buildings, point is that it is quite possible for such collapses to happen and its not as they claim way out of ordinary...

 

finally, i am not saying that the gov-t is not hihing info from the general public, and in some 30 odd years the truth will leak out, i am saying that such articles are taking an extreme view on the matter and are not willing to really reasonably test their theories before releasing them to the general public which can just post things like i just did and contradict just about every statement such people make.... (now, this is a science forum, if anyone beleives in these points mentioned in the article, please present some evidence and we can reconsider, but for the moment...)