Video of WTC attack 2nd impact
posted by WhodaThunkit at 2:16 PM
0 comments
Friday, April 21, 2006
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Bush snr & Council on Foreign relations talk on the NWO
YouTube : ""
posted by WhodaThunkit at 1:25 PM
0 comments
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
More Looney Lunar Spectacles
smh.com.au
A NASA spacecraft will deliberately crash into the moon in January 2009, a collision so violent it will be visible on Earth through a telescope.
The impact will help scientists search for water that might be lurking in deep, dark craters.
In part, the aim of the mission - announced by NASA on Monday - is to help find landing sites for human exploration, a goal announced by the US President, George Bush, in 2004.
Early lunar missions identified abundances of hydrogen in craters near the south pole that are permanently shielded from sunlight, leading to speculation that the hydrogen was bound with oxygen in the form of water.
If shadowed areas on the moon contain water ice, NASA officials said, they would be prime landing sites for humans. Water can be broken apart to produce hydrogen for rocket fuel and oxygen for fuel and breathing.
The spacecraft - the first to strike the moon since NASA's Lunar Prospector in 1999 - will be part of a previously announced mission in which a larger craft, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, will fly around the moon to map its surface. Both craft will be launched on the same rocket in October 2008, but the smaller impact craft will circle the Earth and moon for 90 days before slamming into the moon's south pole.
The project is called LCROSS, for Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite. Its manager, Daniel Andrews, of NASA's Ames Research Centre in California, said the upper stage of the rocket that sends the orbiter to the moon would be used as an impact vehicle.
When the 2000-kilogram used rocket slams into a crater at about 9000kmh, Dr Andrews said, it should send up a 1 million kilogram plume of vapour and debris rising 48 to 64 kilometres above the surface. About 15 minutes later the trailing spacecraft, loaded with equipment to determine chemical composition, will fly through the plume, taking and relaying data before it hits the moon.
"We're going to see the impact," Dr Andrews said, "and then fly through the plume while looking into the crater and also looking sideways 90 degrees out into space to see the plume material against the darkness."
The mission will not be NASA's first attempt to do geological studies by smashing robotic probes into distant bodies. In 1999 scientists decommissioned the orbiting Lunar Prospector probe by crashing it into the moon's south pole, but it disappointed them by producing little or no debris because of its shallow impact angle.
The robotic moon missions are the first steps in NASA's plans to return astronauts to the moon by 2018 as a stepping stone to Mars.
The New York Times
posted by WhodaThunkit at 11:52 PM
0 comments
Friday, March 31, 2006
Saturday, March 25, 2006
Cathy O'Brien and Mark Phillips on MK Ultra Mind Control - Google Video
posted by WhodaThunkit at 5:49 PM
0 comments
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Charlie Sheen Questions "Official" Conspiracy Theory
Guest blogged by David Edwards of Veredictum.com
CNN's Showbiz Tonight picked up on an interview Charlie Sheen did for Alex Jones' radio show where Sheen expressed his doubts about the "official" 9/11 story.
Besides Showbiz Tonight, the story has gotten some critical coverage by the New York Post, The Boston Herald and Human Events. Alex Jones' Prison Planet website explains "The mainstream media has finally seen fit to cover Charlie Sheen's comments on 9/11... penning hit pieces that seek to smear Sheen as an unstable crackpot."
Blogged by David Edwards
posted by WhodaThunkit at 4:06 PM
0 comments
Monday, March 20, 2006
Intl Citizen's Inquiry Into 9-11 - Flight 93 Gnn Video
posted by WhodaThunkit at 12:17 AM
0 comments
MSNBC Reports: NYC Police Find Bombs
YouTube - MSNBC Reports: NYC Police Find BombsRick Sanchez
posted by WhodaThunkit at 12:08 AM
0 comments
Sunday, March 19, 2006
FILE 911 UNSOLVED PART 1&2 - NEVER BEFORE SEEN
YouTube - FILE 911 UNSOLVED PART 1OF2 - NEVER BEFORE SEEN: "http://AmericasNewsToday.Com is your all in one for online news, breaking news, feature stories, entertainment and more. Includes US and International stories and fair analysis,
posted by WhodaThunkit at 11:26 PM
0 comments
Pentagon 911 No ID
YouTube - Pentagon 911
Short unidentified video no airplane to be seen
Short unidentified video no airplane to be seen
posted by WhodaThunkit at 9:42 PM
0 comments
9/11 - Greg Palast talks about 911 & the Bush Administration
posted by WhodaThunkit at 9:23 PM
0 comments
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Professor David Griffin 911 Speech "The New Pearl Harbour"
YouTube - VIDEO"
The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and DistortionsProfessor David Ray Griffin"Hypocrisy With Regard To The Sanctity Of Life Has Long Been a Feature Of Official U.S. Rhetoric".Professor Griffin argues that "omissions and distortions" in the report amount to a cover-up by government officials and says that the available evidence suggests that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.Broadcast On C-Span 2 - Thursday, April 28, 2005Professor Griffin covers topics he says have been inadequately answered by the commission. These include questions surrounding the attack on the Pentagon, the way in which the World Trade Center towers collapsed, and the behavior of President Bush and his Secret Service detail following notification that a second plane had hit the WTC. The talk was hosted by the Muslim- Jewish- Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth (www.mujca.com) and took place at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Includes Q&A.Author Bio: David Ray Griffin is professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology, where he taught for over 30 years (retiring in 2004). He has authored or edited over two dozen books, including "God and Religion in the Postmodern World," "Religion and Scientific Naturalism," and "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11."
The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and DistortionsProfessor David Ray Griffin"Hypocrisy With Regard To The Sanctity Of Life Has Long Been a Feature Of Official U.S. Rhetoric".Professor Griffin argues that "omissions and distortions" in the report amount to a cover-up by government officials and says that the available evidence suggests that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.Broadcast On C-Span 2 - Thursday, April 28, 2005Professor Griffin covers topics he says have been inadequately answered by the commission. These include questions surrounding the attack on the Pentagon, the way in which the World Trade Center towers collapsed, and the behavior of President Bush and his Secret Service detail following notification that a second plane had hit the WTC. The talk was hosted by the Muslim- Jewish- Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth (www.mujca.com) and took place at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Includes Q&A.Author Bio: David Ray Griffin is professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology, where he taught for over 30 years (retiring in 2004). He has authored or edited over two dozen books, including "God and Religion in the Postmodern World," "Religion and Scientific Naturalism," and "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11."
posted by WhodaThunkit at 10:53 PM
0 comments
Monday, February 13, 2006
FEMA early for 9-11 but late for Katrina
Why was FEMA Dispatched the night before 9-11??
Listen to Dan Rather interview
FEMA Spokesman Tom Kennedy Tells Dan Rather that FEMA Arrived in NYC the Night Before the Attack
Listen to Dan Rather interview
FEMA Spokesman Tom Kennedy Tells Dan Rather that FEMA Arrived in NYC the Night Before the Attack
posted by WhodaThunkit at 5:00 PM
0 comments
Sunday, November 13, 2005
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Iraq and 9/11 myths
Iraq and 9/11 myths Iraq and 9/11 myths
On Hardball, David Shuster issued a report about the alleged link that the WHIG's spun between Iraq and 9/11.
Video-WMP Video-QT
Isn't it interesting that Dick Cheney said Iraq and 9/11 were not connected back in '01?
Russert: Do we have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraqi's to this operation?
Cheney: No.
Why was Rumsfeld targeting Iraq so early on? Does the group PNAC come to mind? There are great clips from Bush and Cheney trying to link Iraq with 9/11. Remember those pesky polls (that the White House now down plays) that showed 45% of Americans thought Saddam was personally involved in 9/11? Do you think Judy Miller had anything to do with that also? The White House sent a letter to Congress telling lawmakers that force was authorized against those that "aided in the 9/11 attacks."
On Hardball, David Shuster issued a report about the alleged link that the WHIG's spun between Iraq and 9/11.
Video-WMP Video-QT
Isn't it interesting that Dick Cheney said Iraq and 9/11 were not connected back in '01?
Russert: Do we have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraqi's to this operation?
Cheney: No.
Why was Rumsfeld targeting Iraq so early on? Does the group PNAC come to mind? There are great clips from Bush and Cheney trying to link Iraq with 9/11. Remember those pesky polls (that the White House now down plays) that showed 45% of Americans thought Saddam was personally involved in 9/11? Do you think Judy Miller had anything to do with that also? The White House sent a letter to Congress telling lawmakers that force was authorized against those that "aided in the 9/11 attacks."
posted by WhodaThunkit at 6:30 PM
0 comments
Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC
By Elaine Jarvik
Deseret Morning News
The physics of 9/11 — including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell — prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor. In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones. In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.
Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven E. Jones says. Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations. "It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes — which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes. As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation." Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the 47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official explanation — that fires caused structural damage that caused the buildings to collapse — can't be backed up by either testing or history, he says. Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science" conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk science.' "
document.writeln(AAMB6);
In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these arguments:
• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" — and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."
• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.
• WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.
• With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."
• Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.
• Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.
• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.
• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.
Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which point "everyone around me started applauding." Following several months of study, he presented his findings at a talk at BYU in September. Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for "independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.
E-mail: jarvik@desnews.com
Deseret Morning News
The physics of 9/11 — including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell — prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor. In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones. In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.
Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven E. Jones says. Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations. "It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes — which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes. As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation." Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the 47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official explanation — that fires caused structural damage that caused the buildings to collapse — can't be backed up by either testing or history, he says. Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science" conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk science.' "
document.writeln(AAMB6);
In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these arguments:
• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" — and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."
• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.
• WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.
• With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."
• Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.
• Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.
• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.
• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.
Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which point "everyone around me started applauding." Following several months of study, he presented his findings at a talk at BYU in September. Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for "independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.
E-mail: jarvik@desnews.com
posted by WhodaThunkit at 5:59 PM
0 comments
About Me
- Name: WhodaThunkit
- Location: Michigan, United States
Recovering from Republicanism, sober for 21 years. Desperately trying to find the "Compassionate" in "Conservatism". Fighting Fristian Fungimentalism
Links
Previous Posts
- Video of WTC attack 2nd impact
- Bush snr & Council on Foreign relations talk on th...
- More Looney Lunar Spectacles
- Freedom Or Fascism: The Choice Is YOURS!
- Cathy O'Brien and Mark Phillips on MK Ultra Mind C...
- Charlie Sheen Questions "Official" Conspiracy Theory
- How to run a convention on a record of failure!
- Rolling Thunder
- Illuminati 6 Parts David Icke
- Intl Citizen's Inquiry Into 9-11 - Flight 93 Gnn V...
Archives
- 11/06/2005 - 11/13/2005
- 11/13/2005 - 11/20/2005
- 02/12/2006 - 02/19/2006
- 02/19/2006 - 02/26/2006
- 02/26/2006 - 03/05/2006
- 03/05/2006 - 03/12/2006
- 03/19/2006 - 03/26/2006
- 03/26/2006 - 04/02/2006
- 04/09/2006 - 04/16/2006
- 04/16/2006 - 04/23/2006
