World Trade Center Building 7’s Controlled Demolition​: 9/11 Consensus Panel Releases New Evidence from Witness Testimonie​s and Architectu​ral Drawings

PRESS RELEASE:  World Trade Center Building 7’s Controlled Demolition: 9/11 Consensus Panel Releases New Evidence from Witness Testimonies and Architectural Drawings

June 1, 2014 –The 24-member 9/11 Consensus Panel – which includes physicists, chemists, engineers, commercial pilots, attorneys and lawyers – today announced three new studies confirming the controlled demolition of World Trade Center 7.

The studies scientifically refutes the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) claim that, for the first time in history, fire caused the sudden and complete collapse of a large, fire-protected, steel-framed building on 9/11. 

(Note that whereas the Consensus Panel uses a scientific methodology to peer-review its work, the NIST report was not peer-reviewed.)

The first Panel study deals with the NIST computer simulations, which purported to show that fire-induced thermal expansion caused a girder to be pushed off its seat at Column 79, thereby initiating a global collapse of the entire 47-storey building at 5:21 in the afternoon.  

However, a recent FOIA request has produced WTC 7 architectural drawings showing that the NIST simulations omitted basic structural supports that would have made this girder failure impossible.

The second Consensus Panel study deals with NIST’s claim that it did not recover any steel from this massive steel-frame skyscraper.

This is extraordinary, given the need to understand why a steel-frame building would have completely collapsed for the first time in history from fire alone, and to thereby prevent a recurrence.

We know now that some of the steel was recovered.  Photographs recently obtained by researchers show the strange curled-up paper-thin WTC 7 steel, with a NIST investigator pointing it out. 

The third Panel study shows that on September 11, 2001, many people were told hours in advance that WTC 7 was going to collapse.

MSNBC reporter Ashleigh Banfield said early in the afternoon: "I’ve heard several reports from several different officers now that that is the building that is going to go down next.” 

Many members of the New York Fire Department were confidently waiting for the building to come down:

Firefighter Thomas Donato: "We were standing, waiting for seven to come down. We were there for quite a while, a couple hours.”

Assistant Commissioner James Drury: "I must have lingered there. There were hundreds of firefighters waiting to -- they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down.”  

Chief Thomas McCarthy: “So when I get to the command post, they just had a flood of guys standing there. They were just waiting for 7 to come down.”

In addition, CNN and the BBC made premature announcements.

This foreknowledge corroborates the evidence presented in previous Consensus Points (WTC7-1 to WTC7-5) that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition.

Source:            The 9/11 Consensus Panel   @911consensus  consensus911@gmail.com

Contact List:    http://www.consensus911.org/media-contacts/

Co-founders:    David Ray Griffin, Elizabeth Woodworth 

Thinking About Conspiracies: BASIC Analytical and Information-Filtering Principles

While some people will believe anything labelled 'conspiracy' some will not believe in any claim of conspiracy no matter how hard the evidence. Not everything is a conspiracy but they do exist, as evidenced from history.

Often a lot of relatively ordinary actions are conspiratorial in nature, especially in business and government. A lot of the problem in comprehending how things work comes with the idea of a 'big conspiracy'. When something seems impossible or too heinous to have been the work of elements from 'our own side' the mind tends to reject the notion.

The key for the interested observer is to engage in some level of research, to check basic facts, while thinking logically and conservatively. Look for hard, concrete proof that can settle the case/debate one way or another. Also look for fundamental errors in official accounts that will consist of internal contradictions, impossibilities, or unprovable conjecture masquerading as fact. It basically comes down to recognising the difference between the unsubstantiated (official) claims versus the ones you can trace to hard data or observation. You should also be thinking about the nature of primary and secondary sources of information when it comes to determining what happened. When the verifiable evidence runs contrary to the official narrative, you can be fairly certain that the said account is false (or a half truth).

The following text, taken from a previous post, highlights the fundamental truths that underpin the forensic evidence proving the 911 attacks on the World Trade Centre Buildings MUST have involved inside help:

''People who are unfamiliar with the scientific evidence, that proves the World Trade Centre buildings were destroyed using explosives on 911, commonly make the mistake of ASSUMING that it would be 'impossible' to rig these structures for demolition.

This is not true: it would be difficult, but NOT impossible.

However, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find Molten Steel, Thermite traces, plus actual fragments of high tech explosives in the rubble pile, and to have the freefall collapses of these buildings, WITHOUT the presence of chemical incendiaries/explosives of the sort commonly used by the military and demolition companies."

Another big problem faced by many before they even begin to filter information (looking for fundamental points of evidence) is the fact that there is a mixture of disinformation artists and kooks that can dissuade many from looking into the details of a case.

The disinformation artists, often posing as experts, or using their expertise to deceive, plus those that believe them, will peddle false explanations and heap ridicule that can mislead and discourage the unwary. Because of this, many people shy away for fear of either being wrong, in the face of authoritative rhetoric, or in fear of being labelled a 'conspiracy-tard' or 'truth-tard' with associations to stupidity or mental illness. On the other hand the genuine kooks (plus the disinformation artists posing as such) will dissuade the inexperienced thinker via their confabulation of the conspiracy in question to all manner of fanciful, or seemingly fanciful issues.

However, once you accept that there is a culture of ridicule, a psychological barrier, and disinformation surrounding important 'big conspiracies', you can go forward with your evidence-seeking mind-set and look for hard facts. The only thing that will be imporant is the hard evidence. Often there will be glaring points of data that reveal the real story - but you have to take the time to look !

Fundamentally the term 'conspiracy' is only a dirty word for those that have (an understandable) trouble discerning fact from fiction. This exercise is not helped by a 'consensus' forming corporatised and untrustworthy media, including online, that is populated by various disinformation artists and professional propagandists. Verified facts can help sort out this mess and undo our psychological programming.

Please note: Stuck on my computer is a small piece of paper that reads: Always Ask Questions. Don't Assume Too Much. Be Curious. Investigate.

Spook

NMSR´s Dave Thomas Has a Melt-Down As His Conduct Is Exposed

I exposed Dave´s shameful behavior in an article posted on April 21, 2014, called Steel-Wool Iron Spheres Debunked Again: Shame on NMSR´s Dave Thomas. The article debunks Dave´s claim of getting "iron spheres" via burned steel-wool, since the alleged iron spheres are neither iron nor spheres. It also uncovers the fact that Dave continued to advertize iron, even though his buddy Oystein had called him out on the JREF forum for making "a false statement" regarding iron...Oystein had noticed that Dave´s EDS readings actually showed iron-oxide.

Dave´s ranting response on his NMSR webpage is one for the records: Dave is telling his followers that I am lying when I say he did not retract the false statement, because he did respond to Oystein by editing the length of the video - and my original article (now updated) did not mention the editing. The editing did not matter, however, because it did NOT actually retract the false claim - instead Dave simply removed the EDS section that exposed the false claim!

Dave also implies I am lying because he may have removed other false claims besides those addressed in my April 21 article, but that is irrelevant even if true. This gives you a very good insight into the mentality of one Dave Thomas, who continues to advertize the video with the same old false statements about "iron" and "spheres" on his webpage - Dave Thomas on May 28, 2014:

"...watch the video on NMSR's YouTube channel, 'theNMSR', in which a BIC lighter is used to burn steel wool, creating numerous iron microspheres without any Thermite at all!" http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911.htm

It should be noted for context, that Dave has not bothered to retract other false statements from his NMSR webpage either, even though his JREF colleague Chris Mohr has noted them:

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/csicops-dave-thomas-thermodynamic-size.html
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/matching-peaks-part-2-dave-thomas.html

And see the article that Dave could not respond to:
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/05/nmsrs-dave-thomas-concedes-errors-iron.html

Finally, for better understanding of Dave´s desperation, see this article:
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/05/jrefs-chris-mohr-agrees-it-is-time-to.html

A Quick Debunking of Flight 800 Propaganda (the ridiculous zoom climb without the forward section)

If you are interested in air crash investigations and cover-ups ...

The following clip about the 'crash' of Flight 800, in 1996, is an example of the authorities (FBI-NTSB) trying to push a completely false account of what happened - despite numerous eyewitnesses and physical evidence that utterly refutes their version of events.

The relevant part starts at 18:30 and continues until about 25:40.



The person who made this clip, who is obviously well read when it comes to the official story, is either too naïve to understand what happened, or is a paid propagandist trying to put out material in light of a recent documentary on this disaster - in which ex-NTSB officials admit that the FBI, and their own bosses, organised a cover-up to hide evidence that the aircraft had been struck by surface to air missile(s).

According to the now retired officials, the aircraft was lost due to an external initiating event, not a centre fuel tank explosion. The clip above twists the witness statements saying they only looked in the direction of the aircraft after there was an explosion. Actual interviews with many witnesses show that they observed the missile-like object(s) first before seeing the aircraft explode. The FBI changed the witness statements or mischaracterised them. There were protests about this during the investigation.

The most glaring error in the featured clip is the recreation of the 747 climbing after its nose section allegedly fell off because 'it was now lighter and the engines were on full throttle'. This fiction was made up by the cover-up artists to try and explain away the eyewitnesses to the missile(s). The propagandists 'explained' that the witnesses simply saw burning fuel or contrails after hearing the explosion. According to them, the burning fuel came out as the aircraft climbed which 'accounted' for the 'flare-like light rising from the ocean' described by many witnesses. The FBI-NTSB even got the CIA (no kidding) to make a cartoon film (recreation) showing the 747 climbing without its heavy nose section.

The problem is that when a 333 ton aircraft loses 50+ tons of weight - all of it forward the wings - the centre of gravity (the balance of the aircraft) immediately shifts towards the tail. When this happens the aircraft is no longer balanced on its wings, which it needs to do to maintain lift. The plane basically flips backwards and then goes down (it stalls) - the same as if you had a model glider and then cut a large chunk of the nose off and then threw it. The centre of gravity on an aircraft is vital.

What is being dramatically presented here is literally impossible. If you know anything about aircraft design and construction then this part of the story is obviously rubbish.

One thing that is important to the case, as revealed in the clip, is the fact that Flight 800 passed through, or near, a US Navy missile testing area.  

(Note: I ran into the propaganda clip the other day and it bugged me because many people will end up believing it. The dramatization will 'convince' a majority of viewers since most people have little understanding when it comes to the basic principles of flight. Below I've added the best documentary on the incident that came out in the year 2000. The recent doco on the same event came out late last year, or early this year - which featured ex-NTSB officials confirming what was reported in the 2000 doco.)

Silenced: Flight 800 And The Subversion Of Justice

No Vet Left Behind

A little something I wrote a few years back at care2.com that's still relevant for this Memorial Day.

Jul 11, 2007

As the health care debate in America continues, so does the suffering of Vietnam veterans and citizens due to the toxic defoliant Agent Orange used in the war. The substance has been linked to everything from cancer, to birth defects of children whos parents were exposed. Gary D. Moore, SSgt USAF 1968-1972 has compiled an alphabetical index of the many diseases related to the effects of herbicide exposure, as well as medical and scientific terms used when reading about it.

Despite what any of us think about the wars our soldiers fight in, I think we can all agree our vets deserve nothing but the best health care available. Especially when one considers that many of their medical woes come as a direct result of their own Governments actions.

The Wikipedia article on the subject states that...

"At the time Agent Orange was sold to the U.S. government for use in Vietnam, internal memos of its manufacturers reveal it was known that a dioxin, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin (TCDD), is produced as a byproduct of the manufacture of 2,4,5-T, and was thus present in any of the herbicides that used it."

In other words they knew the risks! In 1984 a $180 million settlement resulted in one time lump sums of $1,200 being paid out to affected veterans. I am sure many affected veterans never saw a dime of this money. For the ones that did, I am sure that $1,200 did not go far!

The US has refused to compensate Vietnam's Agent Orange victims and canceled a study looking into it's affects in the country.

It is also of interest to note that a April 17, 2003 study found that Agent Orange Use Was Underestimated. It has also been exposed that the American army tested Agent Orange in Canada.My friend Karen Stillwell has been fighting an uphill battle with the Department of Veterans Affairs. She has recently written the agency a letter detailing her struggles and pleading for help. Here is the intro to that letter...

"I am writing with regards to my husband, James Maurice Stillwell. Honorably discharged from the Army, on January 15 th, 1971, who applied for benefits through the local veterans administration, back in the first part of February 2007. James was diagnosed with agent orange in his lungs, only half of his liver is working, and getting worse daily. His spleen is enlarged, the gallbladder has already been taken and his digestive track and large and small intestines are rotting away, again, due to agent orange, environmental issues, and herbicides via the police action in Viet Nam. He is going on the list for a liver transplant if the next medicine he starts taking doesn't work. That will be probably after the month of July. He has to see the doctors again in Nashville ,TN. at the Veterans Hospital in a couple of weeks for another appointment. We have not heard from nor have we seen any type of benefits as of this date, July 11 th/2007."

I strongly suggest you read the whole letter HERE.

Their struggle detailed in the letter is amazing. At every corner they have been met with apathy and contempt. The sad thing about it is similar struggles have been taking place for decades now. Vets have been fighting for what is owed them to no avail.

Even more shocking is the fact that things of this nature still continue with our Military today.

The makers of the documentary film Beyond Treason which covers topics such as Gulf War Illness and the current use of Depleted Uranium  state in their film description...

"What you don't know about your government could kill you... Department of Defense documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act expose the horrific underworld of the disposable army mentality and the government funded experimentation upon US citizens conducted without their knowledge or consent" 

So it's a new war and basically the same old crap! Watch the trailer HERE.
 
We have to fight for justice for the veterans and citizens of Vietnam while remembering that history is repeating itself as we speak. The following links are some activist websites and petitions to get you started.   

http://www.vn-agentorange.org/petition.html

http://www.petitiononline.com/aoalert/

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/AO_takingresponsibilty/

http://www.veterans.state.ny.us/faq/faqagentorange.htm#What1