Some more 9/11 truth

[Qutb]

...provided by the industrious <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.911myths.com/html/what_s_new_.html" target="top">9/11 Myths</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->.<br><br>First, a must-read: <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.911myths.com/Remote_Takeover.pdf" target="top">Remote Takeover on 9/11: A Critical Analysis</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->.<br><br>Secondly, the first-ever <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.implosionworld.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf" target="top">analysis</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> of the "controlled demolition" hypothesis conducted by actual experts in the field of explosive demolition.<br><br>Third, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has released full <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/index.htm" target="top">transcripts</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> of the air traffic control recordings from the four flights.<br><br>Finally, <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.911myths.com/html/mom__this_is_mark_bingham.html" target="top">according</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> to Mark Bingham's mother, her son had a habit of introducing himself with his full name, even when he called his own mother. There goes that piece of "evidence" too... <p></p><i></i>

[orz]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Secondly, the first-ever analysis of the "controlled demolition" hypothesis conducted by actual experts in the field of explosive demolition.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Wow, that actually does seem to uh... demolish a lot of the controlled demolition arguments! <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :o --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>hmm... "Fresh Kills" is a hell of a name for a landfill! <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :eek --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eek.gif ALT=":eek"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>

[xsic bastardx]

<br><br><br> my buddy owned a demolishing company back east, He did it for 25 years. Lived in New York/New Jersey all his life. Worked at the Trade Center before....<br><br><br> He was and still is convinced it was an CD...so...does that mean anything?.......<br><br><br> Nope.....<br><br><br> Just like this report doesn't mean a hill of beans either....it's six one way half a dozen the other.....<br> <p></p><i></i>

[postrchild]

Ditto on the name of the landfill........my sentiments exactly on the name.....So I researched Protec and their website seems rather flimsy. . . . Only one picture of some old engineer type at a drafting table, and surprisingly few links.....You would think a highly profitable company like this would have a decent web site.......I have seen better independent sites. *long sniff of the air* Smells fishy to me... <p></p><i></i>

[xsic bastardx]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Hoglan: Once in a while he would say that. He would call up, and he was, he was a young businessman, and used to, used to introduce himself on phone as Mark Bingham, and he was trying to be, uh, strong, and level-headed, and, and strictly business. "Mom, this is Mark Bingham".<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br> Still don't buy it, he wasn't talking to a business associate and how the hell do project yourself in a calm demeanor when your plane was hijacked....and you forgot this.....<br><br><br> <!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"Mom, it's your son Mark Bingham.....you know, your son...Mark Bingham...<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>You believe me don't you Mom</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->....."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br> and there is still that thing about even being able to MAKE those phone calls in that day....<br><br> unless of course he just asked his Hijackers to slow down so he could make a call....... <p></p><i></i>

[Avalon]

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Where does the name ‘Fresh Kills’ come from? <br>It is thought that the name Fresh Kills is derived from the historical natural features of the site which, prior to landfilling, was dominated by a vast tidal wetland fed by fresh water springs and streams. It was not uncommon to use ‘fresh’ when naming places with such springs; Fresh Kills, specifically, appeared as a place name by 1750. ‘Kill’ is derived from old Dutch and means stream, brook or channel. The usage of the word ‘kill’ is seen frequently in place names throughout New York City and State where early Dutch settlement occurred. We believe that the place name ‘Fresh Kills’ refers to the abundance of these fresh water springs feeding into the Creeks (Richmond, Main and Fresh Kills).</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/fkl/fkl_faq.shtml">www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html..._faq.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>

[FourthBase]

I pretty much agree with the analysis of WTC 1 & 2, although I wonder why it ignores the possibility of explosives that destroyed the core columns. It says that since no failure was <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>visible</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> in the sub-impact floors, then there couldn't have been lower-floor failure that precipitated the collapse. Which seems to skip the possibility of failure in the core that was invisible, which might have allowed the tower to remain standing while being fatally vulnerable to a systemic top-down failure.<br><br>Instead we get a false choice of "either" explosives being placed ahead of time precisely in the impact zone, "or"...explosives being placed ahead of time precisely in the impact zone. Weird. Doesn't inspire trust.<br><br>Also, the part about the seismographs contradicts what seems to be genuine evidence of pre-collapse vibration events, as detailed on 911eyewitness.com, which I wanted to talk about in another thread.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=5715.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...5715.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>But I completely agree with the analysis about the "footprint" and the "squibs", and I tend to agree about the molten steel.<br><br>Then again, the analysis of WTC7 seems fishy. The assertion that no owner would have control is <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>irrelevant</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, because as they say later, there was a lot of unprecedented shit on 9/11, and the normal "canon" of ethics is moot if one is pondering the possibility of a 9/11 conspiracy.<br><br>The assertion that "pull it" has never and would never be used to describe that kind of apparent CD and is only used to describe a particular type of literal pulling action is also <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>irrelevant</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, since it was spoken by Silverstein who is not a CD expert. Which is ironically the same logic that many "pull it" debunkers have used in the past.<br><br>The damage to WTC7 seems to be exaggerated. And without the details, the analysis still maintains that "specific structural conditions" caused WTC7 to fall. Yeah? Tell us what conditions, then. But the analysis can't. And yet it still assumes.<br><br>Consider me skeptical of this analysis. <p></p><i></i>

[darkbeforedawn]

More total blather by paid shills. Fact: Huge solid steel girders weighing tons do not fly hundreds of feet in horizontal directions as caught by the film of numerous cameras on 911 while in the midst of a gravity driven collapse. It seems this particular case of "cognitive dissonance" as evidenced by this totally absurd thread must be extremely pernicious. <p></p><i></i>

[greencrow0]

we have put the issue of CD behind us...only the true disinfo agents try to recycle it.<br><br>we're moving on to 'who'. <br><br>GC <p></p><i></i>

[realp]

as usual, i'm just skimming the surface of things, i'm not an erudite 911 researcher, but please spare me the idea that larry silverstein revealed the plot to the world. it has been said that he was referring to pulling the firefighting operation, which is orders of magnitude more plausible than that he was telling us all that they decided to demolish the building. i believe 7 wtc was demolished, but silverstein's remark gives us nothing to go on whatsoever. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=realp>realp</A> at: 8/20/06 12:17 pm<br></i>

[Qutb]

Must resist urge to enter this debate again... must resist urge... oh well, dammit. 4th base, see the <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.911myths.com/html/what_s_new_.html" target="top">post</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> dated August 15 on the 911Myths site. If you click on the link, you'll see a video clip which shows that the core remained standing for a short while after the floors had begun to pancake. This proves that the core didn't fail first, and is consistent with the NIST's explanation. It is also inconsistent with any theories proposing that the collapses were caused by explosive charges on the core columns (as is everything else about the collapses).<br><br>BTW, small surprise that some of the more reality-challenged here still don't "buy" the fact that Mark Bingham called his mother... because you don't think he would have used exactly the words he did use. This without ever having known the guy, of course, and while scoffing at the words of his mother, who don't seem to have any doubts about the authenticity of the phonecall. Nutjob conspiracism in a nutshell. <p></p><i></i>

[Qutb]

4th base said:<br><br>"The damage to WTC7 seems to be exaggerated."<br><br>They were there, you weren't. <p></p><i></i>

[FourthBase]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Must resist urge to enter this debate again... must resist urge... oh well, dammit. 4th base, see the post dated August 15 on the 911Myths site. If you click on the link, you'll see a video clip which shows that the core remained standing for a short while after the floors had begun to pancake. This proves that the core didn't fail first, and is consistent with the NIST's explanation. It is also inconsistent with any theories proposing that the collapses were caused by explosive charges on the core columns (as is everything else about the collapses).<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Thanks for the link, I guess that just about does it for CD.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>They were there, you weren't.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Don't be like that, dude. <p></p><i></i>

[OnoI812]

change of tune?<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Alice Hoglan was visiting her sister-in-law, Kathy Hoglan, in Saratoga, Calif., when the phone rang. It was 9:42 Eastern time. Kathy's nephew, Mark Bingham was on the line.<br><br>"Alice, talk to Mark," Kathy said, handing her the phone. "He's been hijacked."<br><br>"Mom? This is Mark Bingham," the voice said. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>It sounded strange for her son to introduce himself by his full name. She knew he was flustered.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>"I want to let you know that I love you. I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb," he said.<br><br>"Who are these guys?" Alice Hoglan asked.<br><br>There was a pause. Hoglan heard murmurs of conversation in English. Mark's voice came back.<br><br>"You believe me, don't you?" he asked.<br><br>"Yes, Mark. I believe you. But who are these guys?"<br><br>There was a pause. Alice heard background noise. The line went dead.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028flt93mainstoryp7.asp">www.post-gazette.com/head...toryp7.asp</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br><br>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>From Qutb's PDF link of Blanchard's hit piece:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Protec and it's employees have not been paid or hired by anyone to analyse this event, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>nor do we</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> posess any political affiliations or <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>contribute</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> to any political party or individuals.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>(...)<br><br>Newsmeat: <br><br>CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION SEARCH (individual donations of $200 or more made after 1977)<br>Contributor last name<br> First name (optional)<br> State<br> <br> or <br>Show all donors by zip<br> <br><br><br>Contributor Date<br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Blanchard, Brent</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>Mount Laurel, NJ 08054<br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Protecs</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->/Sales <br>Candidate or PAC : AMERICA COMING TOGETHER (Soros)<br>Amount: $357<br>Date: primary 08/21/04<br><br><br>America coming together- <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=America_Coming_Together">www.sourcewatch.org/index...g_Together</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=onoi812>OnoI812</A> at: 8/20/06 4:05 pm<br></i>

[FourthBase]

OK, that makes the Bingham call much, much more suspect. The "You believe me, don't you?" seems designed to cement the verity of the call in the mother's head, despite any possible misgivings she may have developed about perhaps the sound of her son's voice and what-have-you. Really weird. Especially how it's been gradually portrayed that him giving his full name was perfectly normal. <p></p><i></i>