In a report detailing Rosie O'Donnell's confirmed plans
to have 9/11 truthers debate the attacks on The View
before she leaves in June, The New York Times has responded
by penning an extremely
poor attack piece which cites previous shoddy debunking
efforts while completely ignoring key evidence often referred
to by the many scientific experts, ex government officials,
whistleblowers and truthers in general that have declared
the event an inside job.
Skipping over the fact that some guys in
a cave in Afghanistan were able to coordinate a total
stand down of US air defenses, and completely ignoring
the mountains of evidence of prior knowledge, the Times
makes four main points in an effort to debunk solely the
controlled demolition aspect of the 9/11 truth movement's
assertions.
Here are those points with our counter points:
1. The buildings collapsed from
the top down and because controlled demolitions are carried
out from the bottom of buildings they were not controlled
demolitions.
Many witnesses, including WTC janitor William
Rodriguez and firefighters,
reported explosions
at the base of the buildings and white
smoke was also seen emerging from the base of the
north tower immediately prior to its collapse and after
a boom shook cameras and registered on microphones. Initial
reports cited FBI statements which suggested they believed
some form of explosion had occurred at the base of the
towers in addition to the plane impacts above. I posted
videos of these reports in this
recent article.
The Times also ignores the fact that all
3 buildings fell at almost free fall speed with no resistance
whatsoever, a feat which defies the laws of physics.
2. The steel did not melt, it was
weakened by fire which caused the buildings to gradually
collapse.
Molten
steel was found under all three collapsed buildings.
Firefighters described "rivers of molten steel, like
flowing lava". According to, among other experts,
former Brigham Young Physics professorSteven
Jones buildings not destroyed by explosives would
have insufficient directed energy to produce the large
quantities of melted melted that was discovered. The molten
steel was found five days after the collapse, on Sept.
16, when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) used an Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer
(AVIRIS) to locate and measure the site’s hot spots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let us help you reach a huge audience of potential customers.
Help support the website and take advantage of low advertising
rates. Click
here for more info.
Find out the true story behind government sponsored terror,
7/7, Gladio and 9/11, get
Terror Storm!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The reason 7 World Trade Center
collapsed straight down was most likely the large amounts
of diesel fuel stored in the building’s lower levels.
The fuel was meant to power emergency generators.
The idea that diesel fuel stored in Building
7 is to blame for the collapse was promoted by a New York
Times article in 2002 and is pure speculation. According
to the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST), between 11:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. on 9/11, “No
diesel smells [were] reported from the exterior, stairwells,
or lobby areas” of WTC 7.
Fires were observed in Building 7 prior
to its collapse, but they were isolated
in small parts of the building, and were puny by comparison
to other building fires. In any case raging fires could
still not cause simultaneous and symmetric damage needed
to produce a collapse with the precise symmetry of the
vertical fall of building 7. This building had 58 perimeter
columns and 25 core columns. In order to cause the building
to sink into its footprint, all of the core columns and
all of the perimeter columns would have to be broken in
the same split-second.
4. Explosives would have had to
have been pre-placed in the buildings and no witness has
ever reported such suspicious activity taking place.
Yes
they have. Power downs of both towers were reported
the weekend before 9/11. In addition rescue
workers, EMT's
and witnesses on the ground were warned WTC 7 was going
to be intentionally brought down by explosives.
The Times article, like any other poorly
researched piece, cites
Popular Mechanics, the now infamous Hearst Publishing
yellow journalism rag that is edited by a tabloid
TV critic as their bastion of credibility for standing
up to 9/11 truthers, despite the fact that the magazine's
9/11 hit piece has been debunked
over and over and is the target of Professor David
Ray Griffin's new book , Debunking 9/11 Debunking.
Although it is easily countered, the Times
exposure highlights the fact that 9/11 truth movement
has exploded into the mainstream. It also underlines the
fact that the debunkers are losing the battle to quell
the public's desire to uncover the lies and discover what
really happened on 9/11 as their line of argument becomes
more diluted and weakened with each ill informed and poor
researched attack piece they produce.
