It should also be noted that this interview was carried out years after the event. Had Hemphill been standing at his office window when he was interviewed he would not have made the mistake of thinking the path might have been over or north of the Citgo service station. His line of sight from his office window to the impact point passes directly over the service station (see Fig. 3), so he was particularly well placed to judge that the path he clearly remembered, and asserted in all his statements, was to the south. He insisted that the path was straight, so could not have deviated round the Citgo service station. Again we have an interview that was not carried out on location, with no mention being made that this is another exception to their claim of reliability due to location. Hemphill was irritated by the pressure of the questioning and remarked “I saw what I saw. That is where it stands.”
It is important to note that several of the witnesses Ranke was quoting “over and over” were near the Arlington cemetery. It is not reasonable to assert they could accurately judge from that distance that the plane was a little north or a little south of the Citgo service station. In contrast it would be easy for them to judge whether the plane was steeply banked, but all these witnesses stated the plane flew “flat” over the Annex and then banked only slightly, or made no mention of an unusual steep bank angle.[32] Hemphill’s words “it didn’t turn right, it didn’t turn left” correspond with Boger’s phrase “it didn’t veer” and with Morin’s assertion that the plane was “heading directly towards the Pentagon”. All these observations contradict the NOC path, as will become apparent below where we discuss the angle of bank required.
The evidence to this point leads us to infer that CIT has misled the public in regard to the witness testimonies, having failed to present the evidence of Lagasse, Turcios, Brooks, Paik, Morin, Hemphill and Boger fairly. It is our purpose to add another dimension to this discussion.
Analysis
Let us examine the dynamic feasibility of a NOC flight path.
Radar could not provide useful information close to the Pentagon as, by then, the plane would be too low, but radar tracks from four different facilities corroborate each other, leading directly toward the Pentagon. The track from the nearest radar facility, at Ronald Reagan National Airport, reaches to a point only about 6 seconds prior to impact. This is close enough to the Pentagon to indicate that all the witnesses who mentioned the distance from themselves to the plane underestimated the distance, as can be seen in the following image (Fig. 1).[33] Recall, for instance, that Deb Anlauf at the Sheraton, about 500 feet from the radar track, describes the plane as right outside her window saying, “You felt like you could touch it; it was that close.” Perhaps we underestimate distances in situations like this because we are not used to seeing large planes flying so low and interpret the large size as indicating closeness. From a statistical point of view it is unfortunate that there are many witnesses who were north of the path and few who were south of the path, close enough to form a clear impression of the position of the track, hence it is not surprising that there should be some northerly bias in the reporting. The FDR data extends the radar data for about 6 more seconds (Fig. 1) and shows no deviation right to the Pentagon.
The testimony of the witnesses cited above is in reasonable conformity with the path defined by the radar data, the FDR data and the damage trail. Some witnesses said the plane was coming along highway 395; some said it was coming along Columbia Pike, which runs close to the south side of the Navy Annex, nearly parallel with the closest section of highway 395. To be consistent with these witnesses the plane must have passed south of the Sheraton Hotel, south of the A-1 Car Repair shop of Ed Paik, and near Terry Morin. Morin may have been between the wings of the Navy Annex as the plane flew over, but said that he “ran to the outside” from between the wings to a “position where I could see it.”[34] “As he starts to descend … he basically starts to disappear … the engines disappear, the bottom of the fuselage, the wings…” He followed the plane as it dipped down over a row of trees on its approach to the Pentagon until all he could see was the tail. He does not mention bank angle.
Taken at his word, Morin witnesses a direct approach to the Pentagon along the south path. We will, however, loosen that assumption to enable our discussion to proceed further and in our initial analysis will simply assume the plane does not veer north until it has passed Morin. Already this conflicts with Morin’s testimony, in that it cuts short the distance that it would be visible to him, as will become evident below.
To favor the NOC hypothesis as much as possible, we assume that the plane passed barely north of Citgo, in fact flying directly over the northernmost corner of the station. Finally we assume that, in order for the alleged “magic trick” with the smoke to work, the plane flew directly over the impact point on the west face of the Pentagon. For the sake of argument, we set aside the numerous observations of impact, the observations of the plane hitting light poles, a fence and a generator, and observations that it flew straight and descended very close to the ground.
For the plane to follow a path that conforms with the remaining constraints, it must deviate from its initial path. It must first turn left and then turn right. Turns for aircraft involve banking and heightened g-force, which is the apparent gravity induced by centripetal acceleration. We make the assumption that the radius of curvature, and hence the g-force, is equal for the left and right banks. This is the assumption most favorable to the NOC hypothesis. Furthermore, for a large plane to transition from a hard left bank to a hard right bank requires a roll maneuver, which takes some time. For simplicity we assume that the plane flies straight during the brief transition from left bank to right bank. Fighters are small and have their mass close to the longitudinal axis of the plane, so they can roll quickly. Large planes, with their outboard engines and heavy fuel tanks in the wings, have a large moment of inertia and would require several seconds to make the transition. However, for the sake of argument we will consider the implausibly short left-to-right roll times of one second, and one half second. Shortening the assumed roll time allows more space for the bank maneuvers, thus favoring the NOC hypothesis.
Aircraft speed
Speed is important as it is one of the two factors which determine angle of bank. Some of CIT’s witnesses estimate speeds of 350 to 400 mi/hr. These low estimates are uncalibrated guesses. There is good reason to believe that the testimony by the same and other witnesses that the plane was accelerating is more reliable, since it was based on the sound of the motors revving up. The distinctive sound of the engines would be more reliably assessed than the speed of the plane itself as our ears are sensitive to pitch. It is understandable that visual estimates of speed would be low, given that all the observers perceived the plane to be closer than it really was. If an object moving across the field of view is farther than the viewer estimates, the reduced angular motion across the field of view, due to distance, will be misinterpreted as being due to lower speed. Several witnesses use words like “spooling up,” “full throttle,” and “powered descent” to describe what they heard.[35] We recall that Morin said he heard a “… steady high-pitched whine” indicating to him that “the throttles were steady and full.” The plane was also diving, so it had assistance from gravity in gaining speed. The FDR data indicates an average ground speed of 552 statute miles per hour (mi/hr) for the last 4 seconds and the final speed measured prior to impact was 556 mi/hr. The official estimate is 530 mi/hr, which is presumably based on the final speed shown in the original improperly decoded FDR file, 465 knots (535 mi/hr). The FDR file also shows that the engines were suddenly set to full power for the last half minute, during which time the plane accelerated rapidly and uniformly. Measurements of the radar positions, recorded every 4.7 seconds, shown in Fig. 1, provide independent confirmation of the speed and acceleration, as shown in Fig. 2. Distances were calculated using the Haversine method for great circle arc length, spherical earth approximation, from latitude and longitude.
A trend line through this period gives a last 4.7 second interval averaging 520.2 mi/hr, accelerating at 6.39 mi/hr/s. Extrapolation of these figures to the next interval would give an average speed of 550.3 mi/hr, and after a further 2.35 seconds to the end of the interval, which would be very close to the moment of impact, the speed would be 565.3 mi/hr.
The last measured speed in the FDR file was 556 mi/hr. This is recorded in word 94. The impact is recorded in word 225, thus 131 words later. Each word is 1/256th of a second hence 0.51 seconds elapsed prior to impact. If the calculated acceleration was maintained during this period the final speed would be 559 mi/hr. The radar data thus lead to a final estimated speed which corresponds well with the FDR file.
As this plane, known to be aerodynamically efficient, was clean and diving, it could not possibly slow down significantly in those last few seconds as it passed the Navy Annex, even if, contrary to witness reports, it was throttled right back. Given the weight of evidence from the FDR file and radar, and the witness reports of the engine power rising, we reject the low speed estimates of 350 to 400 mph as flawed visual estimates without evidence. We will base our calculations on the official speed, 530 mi/hr, as a low estimate, and the FDR speed, averaged for the last four seconds, 552 mi/hr, as the more realistic estimate.
We know that there is only one big story of 9/11, which the United States government presented and most of the people around the world accepted it as true. However, there were some who had some minor reservations about the details but they accepted the main account. Noam Chomsky happens to be one of them.
But what does the truth movement about the 9/11 say? A lot of experts, physicists, metallurgists, and engineers have offered their views that contradict the official version. Can some luminary explain why the opinions of these experts have been marginalised, ignored or not taken into account to look into the whole scenario of 9/11? There are far too many questions still in the air.
The following paper written by two experts throws some light on The Pentagon Attack on 9/11. Let’s hope among others Professor Chomsky will also find time to read it:
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/09/06/the-pentagon-attack-on-911/
There are many points to consider. Among them, men ponder that the fragile nose cone that hit the twin towers came through to the other side of the building without damaging the nose’s shape. The 10-foot ceilings on a 14 foot plane seems in consequential regardless of the chaos the sandwiching of it between floors naturally would have caused.
Masks at ready! Truth sets us free.
The nose cone would be the first thing to be completely pulverized. There is no evidence of a surviving nose cone. That is a red herring. Look at the Pentagon tab at http://www.911speakout.org and down at the bottom watch the crash test of a plane moving 500 mi/hr. That is a rough rendition of what to expect from the plane that hit the Pentagon. This is the approximate speed of the plane, so there would be the same amount of kinetic energy per unit mass, and the damage would be similar.
I want to say that I do not agree with terrorism, and I am just an Amateur Investigative Journalist who comments on matters following the Journalistic Code of Ethics of always being Honest, and of only stating genuinely held opinions.
England, France, and America are protected more than other Countries from revenge attacks that are labelled terrorism, especially given the fact that England France, and America are the Perpetrators of Evil Injustices on other innocent and defenceless Countries.
I read that the attack on the Pentagon on 11September 2001, could be only be done by American Elites, and that it was an unmanned American drone that hit the Pentagon.
The Video: The pentagon was not hit by an airliner, See for yourself, can be found on the internet at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJR7OVJSdHs , unless the CIA changes the contents and location of that video in order to try to discredit me, and it does raise some very interesting questions.
There is an essential truth that needs to be made known, and that is that Satan and his demons want to have false stories that use only explanations that are natural in nature in order to Deceive People over true stories should give true explanations that are Supernatural explanations.
In other words, the Supernatural and true story of Creation, is explained by Secret Worshippers of the Invisible Demons using false stories of evolution that only give explanations that are natural in nature, but are lies.
It is the same with why England, France, and America have not been hit as hard with Terrorism as should be expected, because the Invisible Demons see everything that goes on in those Devil Worshipping Countries, and they torture in the invisible realm any Terrorists or revenge seekers to stop their activities or to be captured by looks like good Police and Intelligence gathering work (Mark 5:1-13).
England, France, and America are cunning, and so they allow some incidents that appear to be Terrorism to occur on their soil, like the London Bombing and September 11 thing, but these are manufactured by England, France, and America and blamed on Terrorists.
America had a foreign policy objective to invade and occupy Afghanistan and Iraq, and so they needed the excuse, and so they manufactured the excuse.
We, the Anglo-American Plutocrats are committed to Secret Devil Worshipping and to the Law of the Jungle, or Might is Right Rule.
The Politicians of England, France, and America asked the Invisible Demons to supernaturally torture Radovan Karadzic and General Ratko Mladic in the invisible realm until they surrendered, but it was made to look like naturally good Police Work.
America and the Modern Day Nazis of Europe are Secret Worshippers of the Invisible Devil and his Invisible demons, who are as real invisible and real as Gravity is, the Earth’s Magnetic Field, and Radio Waves.
Kosovo is a such a perfect example that nothing good can come from Devil Worship, because Devil Worshippers refused to love the truth and so be saved, they choose to delight in wickedness.
Illegally changing boundaries, or pressuring nations to change their borders is Devil worship, and that is why all decent people are opposed to it.
“You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbour. You shall not covet your neighbour’s house. You shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour” (Exodus 20:13-17).
“Cursed is he who moves his neighbour’s boundary mark. And all the people shall say, Amen” (Deuteronomy 27:17).
“Do not move the ancient boundary which your fathers have set” (Proverbs 22:28).
If we read Acts 17:26-28 carefully, we will see that God wants people to worship Him in the boundaries of their country, and in a non-racist manner.
“And He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, For we also are His children” (Acts 17:26-28).
The true story of Kosovo is the true story of how the invisible Satan the Devil and his invisible demons have taken over the administration of America who controls the United Nations.
I know that people do not want to believe that such a thing can happen in Europe with the blessing of the United Nations, which is the main accomplice in this monstrous crime.
America wants to puppetize the Serbian people to steal their land and their resources.
We the people of Democracyland, whose national borders are defined by the United Nations Charter and International Law are committed to the highest form of democracy known to Mankind.
Democracyland will be a true democracy, by having no military alliances, by being 100% against racism, by having no genetically modified crops, by planting many trees, and by having 100% recycling.
We are left to wonder why FBI agents seized all videos from near-by places of business, and why they refuse to produce those videos, or any other evidence of a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200022.html
Viewer discretion advised:
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200042.html
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200045.html
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200047.html
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200048.html
Plane or not, the big question is why the videos have not been released. The with-holding of that evidence should create suspicion in all skeptical and inquiring minds.
Indeed. It could be argued both ways. Some speculate they are withholding the evidence because it doesn’t show a plane hitting the Pentagon. I find this argument entirely unpersuasive (as this paper delves into), and there is no shortage of evidence that the plane hit the building. But one could also speculate that they are withholding the evidence precisely because permitting such speculation and “conspiracy theory” to persist helps to undermine the 9/11 truth community as a whole. The Toronto Hearings are an encouraging step forward:
http://torontohearings.org/
As an initial step I would suggest a common sense analysis of the available evidence from such sources as.
– The planes,where are what was left of them, the black boxes, or why they were not recovered. I gather evidence such as seating, passports? etc were recovered so there should be a wealth of evidence available which seems to be missing.
– The text-book collapse of the towers. In what circumstances is this possible?
– The time-line of the collapse of the towers including lead up and the collapse from beginning to end.
– The dust-cloud,its composition, quantity etc. Were samples taken? Where are they? What do they tell us?
After all this is where the proof is to be found.
Did the titanium alloy in the engines vaporize upon impact with the reinforced concrete walls? There aren’t obvious impact marks, although I’m not sure what would be the fate of titanium under such extreme conditions.
Honestly, though, the 9/11 movement is fragmented because it’s a theoretical guilty pleasure. Absence of evidence or full comprehension of the mechanics that led to WTC collapse or an unusual Pentagon impact zone for the claimed projectile are all inconsequential. Planes most certainly struck WTC, and although I’m curious to see the withheld Pentagon video evidence, I believe a plane struck the Pentagon, in accordance with the majority of eyewitness accounts. I didn’t always believe this as I allowed myself to be consumed with online CTs, and of course, the major independent internet documentaries produced on the subject. However, as I became more connected with the greater world, it started sounding more and more far-fetched. That’s because it is. Most 9/11 truthers, in my experience, are isolated in their own cliques (even in academia) and often do not participate in a substantial way in greater global society, as common 9/11 truth requires assuming unimaginable intentions and capabilities of an American organization. If 9/11 had truly been a coup, then it would look like a coup. It wasn’t enough to warrant martial law nor a profound expansion of emergency executive authority. Had it been a black op, as involved as rigging the WTC for collapse, it would’ve (successfully) included the Capitol building to ensure unprecedented powers for the American government and military during a complete crisis of government.
WTC did not collapse due to demolition. After the core steel was weakened and compromised, the downward acceleration of the in-tact upper floors into the lower floors beneath the impact zone would most certainly cause the runaway structural failure observed. I know this because it did. We all watched it on TV. It’s the same reason an entire deck of cards collapses simply because the top row does: the impulse from the falling part of the structure, accelerated by gravity and exerting a greater downward force than was ever intended or anticipated in the structural design, would clearly cause such a failure. It’s a simple explanation which is observed repeatedly in nature and is the only explanation which doesn’t require accepting something as fantastical and improbable as all 3 collapsed WTC towers were rigged for demolition. I no longer see the purpose of fabricating elaborate stories several orders of magnitude less likely than the commonly understood event, and suggesting extremely nefarious internal plots in the process. Citing the observed jets blasting away from the building during the implosion is the same fantastical approach to the available data (grainy videos). Knowing the elevator shafts in the buildings were hermetically sealed, extreme pockets of pressure were certainly created during the downward accordion-like compression. Such high pressure fissures would be expected to be present when considering the topography of the building in a collapse event; the secretly planned demolition of the two tallest structures in America, however, (and Building 7 for some undoubtedly extremely elaborate purpose) just sounds like 9/11 wasn’t mentally stimulating enough for certain people as it was.
I made up stories along with everyone else in disconnected online pockets, each picking and choosing which event was a cruise missile, which was hijacked airplanes, etc, but all it served was the exact same purpose 9/11 served: to delude people into believing an extreme about our government, whether one of willful international retribution or an Orwellian state which fabricates a foreign policy in order to pursue a material foreign policy. Both are misleading and contribute to polarized views of policy: some being there are no such things as terrorists (as every terror event is false flag), the rest that we have an inherent right to pursue non-descript enemies into whatever country we are led. Neither serve us, as one avoids an unfortunate contemporary danger, the other is the breeding ground of said contemporary danger.
Osama bin Laden is (was) a real guy. A Navy team killed him. He really did finance and direct an extremist group. He crossed common paths for common interests with the US in the past, much like Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia did. But after the Gulf War and the installation of US military bases in the Saudi Peninsula, extremely unpopular in Arabia, the stage was set for a retooling of his organization after the fall of Communist Afghanistan to direct his efforts against the occupation of Arabia and Palestine.
It makes perfect sense, the main official story. It’s the truth about 9/11. There is rich geopolitical history leading up to the tensions which eventually boiled over in the latest of a string of terror attacks perpetrated by a well-known and well-born fanatic. Maybe Flight 93 was shot down over Shanksville; there may be variations between the official account and reality, but the pith is the historical truth.
The government ‘knew’ there would be more attacks by al Qaeda after the US Embassy bombings in Kenya and the USS Cole. You can choose to believe the highest intelligence circles were aware of the attacks, or that particular government structures were altered to favor incompetence in the face of aviation crises (such as Norad being placed under the command of Dick Cheney), but to what extent of this is true and what’s coincidence is also inconsequential. The US has no desire to adjust its foreign policy which have guaranteed full access to the most convenient form of energy on Earth. Preventing an attack would not allow the US to mobilize into key resource bearing states with a permanent presence, so again, whether or not our intelligence community was aware is inconsequential, as the attacks were going to occur with or without prior knowledge, allowed to happen as it was a contained catalyst, or simply an event no one bothered predicting as, again, it was in the interest of our greater foreign policy for it to occur. Since the top layer, the New American Century layer wanted it to occur, there would be no need to direct intelligence toward islamic terrorist threats.
The truth is the very issue being avoided as straw men are chased: the US has an energy problem. We have allowed oil men, in the wake of an unimaginable tragedy caused by a sinister retaliation to our subjugation of middle eastern peoples, to ironically throw our entire nation’s economy into a new war effort, with taxpayer dollars flowing into Dick Cheney’s companies. But really, what else would you expect from a capitalist Vice President overseeing an administration attacked by the very people sitting on the oceans of gold he wants to extract? The problem is not Dick Cheney; we should expect crooked men like that to abuse their power. He probably intended to oversee legislation to promote favorable business conditions for him, yet his fate gave him access to more than he could’ve imagined. He actually would get to participate in the New American Century at government’s top tier, a philosophy who’s value has been quickly measured as we come to terms with the New Chinese Century.
American Intelligence, at whatever layer or allegiance, did not perpetrate 9/11. It took 10 years for me to fully accept this. I now feel shamed for the wasted time, but it has allowed me to consider our honest situation as a nation: the planet’s finite energy resources are rapidly coming into contention much sooner than anticipated due to the rise of Asia. Our dinosaur oil men leaders during 9/11 decided the way to deal with expected religious blow back from our national energy policy (huge amounts of wealth being exchanged with the gulf region) was to invade and install permanent military bases in two sovereign nations, one being possibly the most islamicized government on Earth, the other being a predominantly ethnic Arab country, unrelated to the terrorism that brought us but directly related to the energy we came for. Before 9/11, only extremists carried such an unfavorable view that they would sacrifice their lives in the name of Islam against the US. Now, we have secular Iraqis, who’ve lost wives or children, who wish revenge on us, and rightly so I might add.
9/11 conspiracy theories and 9/11 reactionarianism have completely missed the soon-to-be crisis that this tension is ultimately about: a finite and rapidly depleting resource. I’ve been saying this every 9/11, but a decade later and with the troop numbers diminishing in the middle east, I feel it’s more important than ever to remind Americans that we should not and should not ever have bound ourselves and our economy and industry to energy resources from outside our country. I’ve heard it said that America has a policy of consuming the greater world’s resources before our own, but we don’t need it anyway. We don’t need Saudi Arabia. Our soldiers don’t belong in a desert outpost indefinitely. The middle east has suffered oppression, tyranny, and 3rd world conditions in many parts, despite the fabulous natural resources, due to the West’s historical suzerainty and recent political influence and installments, in order to exclude as much national gain from the people of the host country as possible from the oil exports, maximizing US corporate profits. It was only a matter of time before our affairs reached our doorstep.
Energy research. There truly are exciting new technologies on the horizon. Imagine if we chose not to go to war after 9/11, withdrew all troops from the Arab World, and instead invested the 1 trillion dollar war tab paid to the profiteers into fusion research, a state of the art energy distribution system to support electric vehicles, research into the mass fabrication and commercialization of breakthrough low energy absorption / high-energy transmission ultra-efficient semiconductors such as Gallium Nitride based substrates to dramatically reduce transmission/energy losses, investment into additional grid power plants to support the addition of electric vehicle demand, and even massive research undertakings of similar scope to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo missions, by beginning to experiment methodologies with which to export solar energy from outside of our atmosphere in a massive scale to the surface for consumption. It sounds like science fiction to those who reacted to 9/11 as a need to further involve ourselves in the middle east; to much us, though, it’s an approaching reality which will be dealt with in our lifetimes, preferably on our terms.
We can do this. It needs to start with having a mature, forward thinking, undistorted view of how our internal crises or shortcomings are manifested in foreign policy, be honest with ourselves as to its cause, and rid ourselves from the countdown to total war the oil dependent world is slowly marching toward. Dick Cheney won’t be alive for it; I will be. Please help me make sure we’re comfortably watching it from the sidelines.
Peace on 9/11…
TO JC, who posted on 9/11/11:
Your post began promisingly, but ended as though written by a member of the Bush cabal. You cannot possibly produce the science that allows for the total collapse of the WTCs in their own footprints in near free-fall acceleration, after small fires in contained areas, of less than two hours duration. David Chandler, one of the authors of the article on the Pentagon to which you are responding, has written and spoken extensively on the impossibility of the buildings collapsing as described by FEMA and the 9/11 Commission Report.
Your logic seems to be that “it must have happened that way because we saw them ‘collapse’, and therefore it happened, just the way were were told by the authorities” without any critical thinking whatsoever. And what of WTC 7, the building that was not hit by any plane, yet collapsed in a perfect controlled demolition at 5:20 p.m. that same day. David Chandler has demonstrated that this building accelerated at free-fall speed for over 2 seconds. That is impossible without explosives being used to destroy the structure.
While your comments about depleted energy are relevant and important, you have completely missed the boat on the bigger topic of 9/11. To say that it was not a black ops or coup because the government was not destroyed entirely and Marshall law was not declared is facile; the Patriot Act eviscerated our civil rights, three wars have been fought in the name of the endless “war on terror”, millions have died for no reason, the Bush cabal was illegally elected twice through vote rigging and Supreme Court shenanigans, our Treasury has been depleted while the corporate powers have been enriched beyond their wildest expectations.
“It makes perfect sense, the main official story. It’s the truth about 9/11.”
I can’t help but get the impression that your expressed views as exemplified by the statement above are designed to distract people from the real truth about what happened that day. It cannot possibly have been that the main official story was in any way true; that has been shown over and over again by many reputable scientists and investigators, from Richard Gage to David Ray Griffin. It is too bad that you have chosen the path of dishonesty and distraction, when it seemed that you at one time had some real insight.
Other statements included in your analysis are patently wrong. You failed to mention that Osama Bin Laden was a CIA asset. And how are you so sure he died recently, when no photos have been released (Pentagon redux?), and the story of his alleged demise has changed many times.
I am extremely disheartened by the distortion of known events in your post.
(Noam Chomsky happens to be one of them.)
Chomsky spread the US government lies about 9/11 to protect the zionist tribe’s interest.
No one trusts Chomsky and his ilks ‘democracy Now’. Everyone believes this gang spread US goverent rubbish to fool people.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26948
Chomsky who presents himself as “anti imperialism’ accepted US government’s lies on 9/11 which was an inside job to protect the interest of Israel and her supporters the United States elite.
Chomsky also supported the war in Libya, quitely, and in print confess that NO FLY ZONE CAN BE JUSTIFIED. Don’t trust the pseudo ‘left’, which in fact spread the lies of the US imperialism/zionism.
TO JC, who posted on 9/11/11:
Your post began promisingly, but ended as though written by a member of the Bush cabal. You cannot possibly produce the science that allows for the total collapse of the WTCs in their own footprints in near free-fall acceleration, after small fires in contained areas, of less than two hours duration. David Chandler, one of the authors of the article on the Pentagon to which you are responding, has written and spoken extensively on the impossibility of the buildings collapsing as described by FEMA and the 9/11 Commission Report.
Your logic seems to be that “it must have happened that way because we saw them ‘collapse’, and therefore it happened, just the way were were told by the authorities” without any critical thinking whatsoever. And what of WTC 7, the building that was not hit by any plane, yet collapsed in a perfect controlled demolition at 5:20 p.m. that same day. David Chandler has demonstrated that this building accelerated at free-fall speed for over 2 seconds. That is impossible without explosives being used to destroy the structure.
While your comments about depleted energy are relevant and important, you have completely missed the boat on the bigger topic of 9/11. To say that it was not a black ops or coup because the government was not destroyed entirely and Marshall law was not declared is facile; the Patriot Act eviscerated our civil rights, three wars have been fought in the name of the endless “war on terror”, millions have died for no reason, the Bush cabal was illegally elected twice through vote rigging and Supreme Court shenanigans, our Treasury has been depleted while the corporate powers have been enriched beyond their wildest expectations.
“It makes perfect sense, the main official story. It’s the truth about 9/11.”
I can’t help but get the impression that your expressed views as exemplified by the statement above are designed to distract people from the real truth about what happened that day. It cannot possibly have been that the main official story was in any way true; that has been shown over and over again by many reputable scientists and investigators, from Richard Gage to David Ray Griffin. It is too bad that you have chosen the path of dishonesty and distraction, when it seemed that you at one time had some real insight.
Other statements included in your analysis are patently wrong. You failed to mention that Osama Bin Laden was a CIA asset. And how are you so sure he died recently, when no photos have been released (Pentagon redux?), and the story of his alleged demise has changed many times.
I am extremely disheartened by the distortion of known events in your post.
nikogriego – I agree. JC’s post was misleading.
J.C: “It makes perfect sense, the main official story. It’s the truth about 9/11.”
The WMD story put about by Bush and Blair and Powell also made “perfect sense” and was “the truth” until it all turned out to be a fabricated lie.
The “Anthrax Posted by Evil Arabs” made perfect sense and was punted as “the truth” until it turned out the Anthrax was made in a secure US lab and was posted by Americans, killing other Americans. ie. Arabs had nothing to do with it.
The “Evil Ones Pulled Babies Our of Incubators and Left Them to Die” story punted by a young girl in the US Congress, swinging the vote for Bush Snr’s first Gulf War, seemed to make “perfect sense” and be “the truth” until it was proven to be a press release drafted by Hill & Knowlton PR agency and read out by one of the Bush crony-Arab dictator’s young female relatives.