9/11 - One Thousand Architects & Engineers Call for New Investigation

[spartan]

Nice piece, and very true to be honest. But there occasions, and this thread has a few of them when certain facts or allegations are clearly wrong and have been shown to be so.

We have also been over and over this subject matter and most of the "facts" dozens of times in the last 9 years and excuse me for being lazy but I'm not about to regurgitate 9 yrs of discussion right now.

After watching the AE911 press conference and presentation, tell me what they got wrong? I'm sure they DID get some stuff wrong. Just want to hear from you on it.

My response is this Joe, what FACTS do you have to support your viewpoint? My response is this, none. I've seen a lot of conjecture, and to be perfectly frank you can't prove something is right just because you can't prove wrong. I could say there was a nuclear bomb in one of those planes and you cannot prove otherwise. Does that mean I am correct? From what I have seen from the "Truthers" they pick holes and see what sticks. None of which can be proven otherwise.  Get something solid and I'm willing to listen, but even after 9 years I have heard nothing worthy of that categorization. Now I'm off to bed,  gotta work in the morning. Good night.

[ufojoe]

Nice piece, and very true to be honest. But there occasions, and this thread has a few of them when certain facts or allegations are clearly wrong and have been shown to be so.

We have also been over and over this subject matter and most of the "facts" dozens of times in the last 9 years and excuse me for being lazy but I'm not about to regurgitate 9 yrs of discussion right now.

After watching the AE911 press conference and presentation, tell me what they got wrong? I'm sure they DID get some stuff wrong. Just want to hear from you on it.

My response is this Joe, what FACTS do you have to support your viewpoint? My response is this, none. I've seen a lot of conjecture, and to be perfectly frank you can't prove something is right just because you can't prove wrong. I could say there was a nuclear bomb in one of those planes and you cannot prove otherwise. Does that mean I am correct? From what I have seen from the "Truthers" they pick holes and see what sticks. None of which can be proven otherwise.  Get something solid and I'm willing to listen, but even after 9 years I have heard nothing worthy of that categorization. Now I'm off to bed,  gotta work in the morning. Good night.

Didn't say I could prove anything now did I?

You avoided the question about AE911. Once again, explain to me what the AE911 folks got wrong.

[burger40]

i love how people say oh there were explosives rigged to go off. just how do you cover that up? I mean honestly, the gov't can't even keep information about techniques we use to track terrorist monies from being leaked to the press. How would they shut up all the policeman, firefighters, etc who were in and around the towers when they went down.

[ufojoe]

i love how people say oh there were explosives rigged to go off. just how do you cover that up? I mean honestly, the gov't can't even keep information about techniques we use to track terrorist monies from being leaked to the press. How would they shut up all the policeman, firefighters, etc who were in and around the towers when they went down.

They didn't. Plenty of police and fire reported sounds that matched what a secondary explosion would sound like. Maybe they were hearing something else but they DID report it.

And it's more than about "explosives." You would know that if you read the AE911 work.

[spartan]

Nice piece, and very true to be honest. But there occasions, and this thread has a few of them when certain facts or allegations are clearly wrong and have been shown to be so.

We have also been over and over this subject matter and most of the "facts" dozens of times in the last 9 years and excuse me for being lazy but I'm not about to regurgitate 9 yrs of discussion right now.

After watching the AE911 press conference and presentation, tell me what they got wrong? I'm sure they DID get some stuff wrong. Just want to hear from you on it.

My response is this Joe, what FACTS do you have to support your viewpoint? My response is this, none. I've seen a lot of conjecture, and to be perfectly frank you can't prove something is right just because you can't prove wrong. I could say there was a nuclear bomb in one of those planes and you cannot prove otherwise. Does that mean I am correct? From what I have seen from the "Truthers" they pick holes and see what sticks. None of which can be proven otherwise.  Get something solid and I'm willing to listen, but even after 9 years I have heard nothing worthy of that categorization. Now I'm off to bed,  gotta work in the morning. Good night.

Didn't say I could prove anything now did I?

You avoided the question about AE911. Once again, explain to me what the AE911 folks got wrong.

Took about 90 seconds:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/controversy_conspiracies_iii.html

[spartan]

i love how people say oh there were explosives rigged to go off. just how do you cover that up? I mean honestly, the gov't can't even keep information about techniques we use to track terrorist monies from being leaked to the press. How would they shut up all the policeman, firefighters, etc who were in and around the towers when they went down.

They didn't. Plenty of police and fire reported sounds that matched what a secondary explosion would sound like. Maybe they were hearing something else but they DID report it.

And it's more than about "explosives." You would know that if you read the AE911 work.

What's the difference between the sounds of a primary and secondary explosion?

[spartan]

How about this:

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

[doobiedoright]

I've got a few questions for some of you that are soooo sure of themselves of no cover-up-
(Note-questions 1-24 being, I feel the most important that I want answers to)

Pentagon Missile Batteries
   
   
   
   

http://www.911myths.com/index.html


Consider your woo debunked!

[doobiedoright]

i love how people say oh there were explosives rigged to go off. just how do you cover that up? I mean honestly, the gov't can't even keep information about techniques we use to track terrorist monies from being leaked to the press. How would they shut up all the policeman, firefighters, etc who were in and around the towers when they went down.

They didn't. Plenty of police and fire reported sounds that matched what a secondary explosion would sound like. Maybe they were hearing something else but they DID report it.

And it's more than about "explosives." You would know that if you read the AE911 work.

What you fail to understand is explosives would have shattered windows and ear drums for blocks around the area!
Unless of course you are going to claim hushabooms!

[burger40]

Airplane fuel is'nt even a hot enough fire burning fuel to melt steel, theres absolutely no way. Kerosene burns alot hotter than airplane fuel. What happened to Building 7? It wasn't even hit by a plane. Why did BBC announce it's collapse prior to it collapsing? Did they have prior knowledge? Why are the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 the only 3 buildings in history to collapse due to fire damage? Why did each building implode like a controlled demolition?  That is just a fraction of the questions that need to be asked, I could go all day! Do your research before you critcize others who have, quit believing everything the mainstream media tells you.

TB, have you ever seen strength curves for metals and how they trend as their temperature increases? I have when I took metallurgy as one of my required courses for my engineering degree. it was funny because our professor talked about how stupid the arguments were that the WTC structural steel had to have been hit by explosives because they wouldn't melt at the temperatures that were reached (around 1800-2000 degrees). He then showed us the strength curves for the steel and aluminum used in the building.

The steel's strength was 40% of what it was at room temperature and the aluminum's was pretty much nothing.

And you think the BBC was in on it too. So basically, the US gov't led by Bush who is apparently a bumbling idiot according to so many but able to orchestrate the biggest cover up in world history, the BBC, the rescue personnel and many others were all in on this thing.

Color me skeptical.

[Vatican_Assassin]

   You might want to look up Steven Jones, PHD in Physics who discovered Military Grade Nanothermite in World Trade Center dust samples. Nanothermite can be easily applied by even painting it on, it also melts steel quite easily. I guess the people who actually WERE there were making this up about their eye witness accounts of explosions going off prior to and during the collapse of WTC Towers-

I should say that people in the street and myself included thought that the roar was so loud that the explosive - bombs were going off inside the building.
James Drury -- Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.)

... I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes.
Kevin Gorman -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22]

Then a large explosion took place. In my estimation that was the tower coming down, but at that time I did not know what that was. I thought some type of bomb had gone off.
Gregg Hansson -- Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.)

At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear "Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop"? That's exactly what -- because I thought it was that.
Daniel Rivera -- Paramedic (E.M.S.) [Battalion 31]

We originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down
Ed Cachia -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 53]

... you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.
Craig Carlsen -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 8]

.. there was what appeared to be at first an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.
-Frank Cruthers -- Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Citywide Tour Commander]

Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode.
Karin Deshore -- Captain (E.M.S.)

I thought there had been an explosion or a bomb that they had blown up there.
Michael Donovan -- Captain (F.D.N.Y.)

... and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions. 
-Rich Banaciski -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22] 

“All of a sudden at 8:46… we hear ‘BOOM!’ An explosion so powerful and so loud that push us upward in the air coming from below. It was so powerful that all the walls cracked, the false ceiling fell on top of us, the sprinkler system got activated and everybody started screaming in horror: ‘HELP! HELP! HELP!’ �
� William Rodriguez

"It sounded like a bomb and the lights went on and off," said Sanchez in the tape recording. "We started to walk to the exit and a huge ball of fire went through the freight elevator. The hot air from the ball of fire dropped Chino to the floor and my hair got burned," said Sanchez in the tape recording. "The room then got full of smoke and I remember saying out loud 'I believe it was a bomb that blew up inside the building.'
-Jose Sanchez

I heard this metallic roar, looked up and saw what I thought was just a peculiar site of individual floors, one after the other exploding outward. I thought to myself, “My God, they’re going to bring the building down.� And they, whoever they are, had set charges. In fact the building was imploding down. I saw the explosions, and I thought, ‘This is not a good place to be, because we’re too close to the building, and it’s too easy for the building to topple over.’
-John Bussey

We were standing underneath and Captain Stone was speaking again. We heard -- I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now, 1 World Trade Center.
-Greg Brady -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.) [Battalion 6]

But it seemed like I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion
-Timothy Burke -- Firefigter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 202]

Some people thought it was an explosion. I don't think I remember that. I remember seeing it, it looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building....My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV.
Thomas Fitzpatrick -- Deputy Commissioner for Administration (F.D.N.Y.)

I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing. I was there in '93.
Kennith Rogers -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)

I took a quick glance at the building and while I didn't see it falling, I saw a large section of it blasting out, which led me to believe it was just an explosion. I thought it was a secondary device, but I knew that we had to go.
-Jay Swithers -- Captain (E.M.S.)

[ufojoe]

Nice piece, and very true to be honest. But there occasions, and this thread has a few of them when certain facts or allegations are clearly wrong and have been shown to be so.

We have also been over and over this subject matter and most of the "facts" dozens of times in the last 9 years and excuse me for being lazy but I'm not about to regurgitate 9 yrs of discussion right now.

After watching the AE911 press conference and presentation, tell me what they got wrong? I'm sure they DID get some stuff wrong. Just want to hear from you on it.

My response is this Joe, what FACTS do you have to support your viewpoint? My response is this, none. I've seen a lot of conjecture, and to be perfectly frank you can't prove something is right just because you can't prove wrong. I could say there was a nuclear bomb in one of those planes and you cannot prove otherwise. Does that mean I am correct? From what I have seen from the "Truthers" they pick holes and see what sticks. None of which can be proven otherwise.  Get something solid and I'm willing to listen, but even after 9 years I have heard nothing worthy of that categorization. Now I'm off to bed,  gotta work in the morning. Good night.

Didn't say I could prove anything now did I?

You avoided the question about AE911. Once again, explain to me what the AE911 folks got wrong.

Took about 90 seconds:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/controversy_conspiracies_iii.html

LOL. You're obviously uninformed as to the detail of the work of the AE911 group. Next time, try more than 90 seconds and maybe you won't look so ignorant about what they have reported.

[ufojoe]

i love how people say oh there were explosives rigged to go off. just how do you cover that up? I mean honestly, the gov't can't even keep information about techniques we use to track terrorist monies from being leaked to the press. How would they shut up all the policeman, firefighters, etc who were in and around the towers when they went down.

They didn't. Plenty of police and fire reported sounds that matched what a secondary explosion would sound like. Maybe they were hearing something else but they DID report it.

And it's more than about "explosives." You would know that if you read the AE911 work.

What's the difference between the sounds of a primary and secondary explosion?

Seriously? LOL. You really don't know what's going on here.

It's not about the sound being different. It's about the timing. Do your own reading on that. You come across as totally ignorant on this subject and I'm not doing the simple legwork for you.

[ufojoe]

How about this:

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

Wow, I guess that's the be all, end all. Anybody who disagrees with that must be wrong.

I'm not saying AE911 are right. But I think the credibility of all of the folks who have signed their petition warrants further examination of their work.

[ufojoe]

About the Author:

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Hon. Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, public service, and journalism. He served in the Congressional staff and as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. From 1971 until 2004 he was associated with the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. A former editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal and columnist for Business Week and the Scripps Howard News Service, he is a nationally syndicated columnist for Creators Syndicate in Los Angeles.

* * * * *

For OpEdNews: Paul Craig Roberts - Writer

The Washington Times is a newspaper that looks with favor upon the Bush/Cheney/Obama/neocon wars of aggression in the Middle East and favors making terrorists pay for 9/11. Therefore, I was surprised to learn on February 24 that the most popular story on the paper's website for the past three days was the "Inside the Beltway" report, "Explosive News," about the 31 press conferences in cities in the US and abroad on February 19 held by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of professionals which now has 1,000 members.

I was even more surprised that the news report treated the press conference seriously.How did three World Trade Center skyscrapers suddenly disintegrate into fine dust? How did massive steel beams in three skyscrapers suddenly fail as a result of short-lived, isolated, and low temperature fires? "A thousand architects and engineers want to know, and are calling on Congress to order a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7," reports the Washington Times.

The paper reports that the architects and engineers have concluded that the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology provided "insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction" and are "calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials."

The newspaper reports that Richard Gage, the spokesperson for the architects and engineers said: "Government officials will be notified that "Misprision of Treason,' U.S. Code 18 (Sec. 2382) is a serious federal offense, which requires those with evidence of treason to act. The implications are enormous and may have profound impact on the forthcoming Khalid Sheik Mohammed trial."

There is now an organization, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. At the main press conference in San Francisco, Eric Lawyer,the head of that organization, announced the firefighters' support for the architects and engineers' demands. He reported that no forensic investigation was made of the fires that are alleged to have destroyed the three buildings and that this failure constitutes a crime.

Rest of the story, here:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Road-to-Armageddon-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-100225-925.html