WTC Building 7

are we finally closing in on the truth...?

geraldo...



BuildingWhat?

More than eight years after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, New York Supreme Court Justice Edward H. Lehner was hearing arguments in a courtroom less than a mile from Ground Zero about a ballot initiative to launch a new investigation of the 9/11 attacks. When the lawyer for the plaintiffs sponsoring the initiative explained that the 9/11 Commission report left many unanswered questions, including “Why did Building 7 come down,” the Judge replied quizzically, “Building what?”

Like Judge Lehner, millions of people do not know or remember only vaguely that a third tower called World Trade Center Building 7 also collapsed on September 11, 2001. In any other situation, the complete, free fall collapse of a 47-story skyscraper would be played over and over on the news. It would be discussed for years to come and building design codes would be completely rewritten. So, why does no one know about Building 7? And why did Building 7 come down?

The answers to these questions have far-reaching implications for our society. The goal of the “BuildingWhat?” campaign is to raise awareness of Building 7 so that together we can begin to address these questions.

i ain't holding my breath but any step in the direction of truth is welcomed...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

9/11 conspiracy theories (MSNBC story and poll)

take a look at the accompanying story...


click on image to vote in poll

thanks to kevin at cryptogon...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Why I Wouldn't Vote For Ron Paul-Apology

Apologies to Dr. Ron Paul,
The quote below, taken from Hot Air, was not complete on that site. I was able to find the rest of it at Ace of Spades site. Ron Paul, no apparent relation to Dr. Ron Paul the candidate, pointed out the quote was part of a joke post. This appears to be true. Dr. Ron Paul did give a short radio interview where he does state he is not affiliated with the "Trutherism" group(s) and he doesn't believe that the gov't was involved in 911. I hope that Dr. Ron Paul does, however, have an open mind toward the idea of continued LEGITIMATE investigation into the 911 attack.
My failure to properly confirm the quote below not only damages the credibility of further investigation into that important issue, but it is also an unfair attack of Dr. Ron Paul.
I still can't vote for a candidate running as a memeber of either party for reasons I have posted in the past, however, this will not be one of those reasons.
I won't remove the original post I made below. I refuse to hide my mistake and I take full responsibility for my errors.
All I can ask is that ProfMarcus, my fellow contributors, the readers of this blog, Ron Paul, and Dr. Ron Paul accept my apology for my error.

Below is the original post.
Like I have said before, I won't speculate if the US gov't was in any way involved with the destruction on 911, but there is a lot of very rational, technical and sensible reasons to investigate the failures of those buildings in further detail.
If only for basic building and fire safety reasons, we need to understand how fuel driven fires caused the actual implosions.
Ron Paul, as I also said before, has some good ideas but he is still a Republican party member. This makes his true goals suspect, as I suspect any member of the DC Millionaires' Club.
Labeling folks who want to know more as "Truthers" is closed minded at best.
Here is a statement from a post on Hot Air.
Why do All these Truthers Keep Thinking I’m One of Them?
by Ron Paul
Look, I’m not a hateful person or anything—I believe we should all live and let live. But lately, I’ve been having a real problem with these Truthers. You see, just about wherever I go these days, one of them approaches me and starts talking about melted steel and conspiracies.
Take last Sunday, for instance, when I casually struck up a conversation with this guy who was attending one of my rallies. Nothing weird, just a couple of fellas talking about the gold standard and the true meaning of the Constitution. The guy looked like a real conservative, with the proper opinions and fervor for the cause. He didn’t seem the least bit crazy. At least not until he handed me a DVD with the movie “Loose Change” on it.
Where does this guy get the nerve to hand me that video? Did I look Truthery to him? Was I wearing a “Investigate 9/11″ t-shirt without realizing it? I don’t recall the phrase, “9/11 Truth” entering the conversation, and I don’t have a sign around my neck that reads, “Please, You Truthers, Talk to Me About Melting Steel.”
There are a lot of conspiracy nuts who are pushing for further investigation of 911. However, there are a lot of very credible individuals who are calling for a re-investigation of the collapse. Dismissing these individuals smells like a cover-up, or a total lack of care for finding the truth and protecting the public safety.
That's not somebody I would vote for in any election.
Paul should spend some time while he is on the Internet at Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth. He might actually start to open his mind.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The "Tipping Point" We Missed?

ProfMarcus directed me to a video so I could put my engineering eyeball on evidence regarding the WTC collapse.
Like the Scholars for 911 Truth & Justice, these people are professionals in the fields of Architecture, Structural Engineering, and Controlled Demolitions.

I can say now, after reviewing hundreds of technical reports, videos, and eyewitness accounts that in my professional opinion the aircraft damage and ensuing fires did not lead to a spontaneous collapse of all three of these buildings. In fact, I think there is currently enough evidence to prove that none of the three spontaneously imploded as officially reported. This video puts that information into plain language, unlike my previous post which was necessarily technical.

This is a video, as painful as it is to watch, that we all need to see.
From Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth.
I still will not speculate as to whether our government in any capacity participated directly or indirectly in this destruction. However, our government HAS actively engaged in a cover up and disruption of any further investigation of how the ultimate destruction of these buildings occurred and who was responsible for their ultimate demise.
I know it was terrorists who flew planes into the building, but had they not collapsed, thousands of people would still be alive today. Maybe the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would have occurred anyway, but many of those folks in the Trade Center would still be with us.

This would have been the tipping point for any American had the truth been revealed by people we trusted.
Today, we know how politicised our government agencies have become. It takes no imagination at all to realize we have been mislead about the greatest tragedy to strike our nation since Pearl Harbor.
As if the attack on 911 isn't bad enough, that tragic day has been used as the basis for war and the attack on our rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

I submit that there is a third war taking place. It is, like the one before, a "Cold War". It is a war of fear, brinkmanship, cover ups, covert ops, and unreported casualties.
It is the war of the Government Of The United States Of America against The People Of The United States Of America.
My heart and soul are shattered. If the current leadership of this country is the best America has to offer, then indeed we are lost and the terrorists are victorious.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Riggs, Bank of the Elite and the Corrupt

I find it interesting that all of the worlds players swim in the same toilet.
And they say only conspiracy nuts come up with this stuff. Check out some of the connected names in these paragraphs.
Here is some snippets from Wikipedia on Riggs bank. Many more links available at the Wikipedia site.

Saudi money transfers
A Saudi named Omar al-Bayoumi housed and opened bank accounts for two of the 9/11 hijackers. About two weeks after the assistance began, al-Bayoumi's wife began receiving monthly payments totaling tens of thousands of dollars from Princess Haifa bint Faisal, the wife of Saudi ambassador and Bush confidant Prince Bandar bin Sultan, through a Riggs bank account.[1] Upon discovery of these transactions, the FBI began investigating the bank for possible money-laundering and terrorist financing.

The FBI was cut off from that investigation right quick.

Although the FBI and later the 9/11 Commission ultimately stated that the money was not intentionally (emphasis added)being routed to fund terrorists, investigators were surprised to see how lax the safeguards at Riggs Bank were. Several Saudi accounts were discovered to have financial improprieties, including a lack of required background checks and a consistent failure to alert regulators of large transactions, in violation of the law. Many of these transactions involved Prince Bandar personally, often transferring over $1 million at a time.

So I guess the money wasn't intentionally directed to terrorists, which implies that it was ultimately directed to terrorists! Little Georgy and his friends, funding terrorists.

Following British investigations on the Al Yamamah deal, reported by The Guardian Prince Bandar would have received over $ 1.5 billion in briberie from BAE Systems through the Riggs Bank

Jonathan Bush, uncle of President George W. Bush, was an executive at Riggs Bank during this period.

Pinochet's frozen funds
Augusto Pinochet, the former dictator of Chile, has been widely accused since 1973 of corruption, illegal arms sales, and torture. In 1994, Riggs officials invited Pinochet to open an account at Riggs Bank. Arrested in 1998 in Britain for possible extradition to Spain, his accounts were ordered frozen by court orders. A recent U.S. Senate report has revealed that Riggs executives helped Pinochet disguise millions of dollars that had been stolen from the Chilean people, although some of Pinochet's supporters have claimed that the money came from supporters outside Chile. By using shell companies and hiding accounts from federal regulators, Riggs illegally allowed Pinochet to retain access to much of his fortune[2].

The Senate report also indicated that regulators were negligent in holding the bank accountable. Although Pinochet's accounts at Riggs had been reported in U.S. and British newspapers, and although these accounts were largely unreported to regulators, those same regulators never made a serious effort to investigate. The comptroller tasked with investigating Riggs in 2002, R. Ashley Lee, was later given an executive position at Riggs.

The disclosure of the Riggs accounts reignited the case against General Pinochet, and a ruling that he was not mentally competent to stand trial was overturned when it was proven that the general himself had orchestrated some of the huge transactions. In 2004, he was ordered to stand trial for crimes against humanity, and additional claims of mental and physical incompetence have been overruled.

In the "good old days", public figures labored to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
I think they're over that these days.
How can you take them ( Bush & Co.) seriously and trust them when all of these names keep appearing together, again and again, in the same scandal ridden stories?They even come up with terrorists and dictators. Yet, we are to believe they have our best interests at heart? We are supposed to trust their judgement?
The most astonishing thing of all is that we do trust them, again and again. We then wonder how things could be so wrong.
The NeoCons may be correct about the human masses. We may just be cattle that wants to be led and not know the real truth.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments