Terror, Toilets, and Freedom

If the implications weren’t so serious this would be humorous…

Let me point out a few highlights from the below forum post by the guy who was the unwitting cause of the terror scare on an airliner in Canada a couple weeks ago. The guy basically dropped his I-Pod (music player) in the airplane toilet (that could get expensive). He didn’t even know he did at first but then explained to the flight attendants that he thought he might have dropped it. That set off a long drawn-out ordeal that I suspect is going to become more and more common, unfortunately.

I understand being cautious but basically over reaction is becoming common place, like I thought it would. The more disturbing point is, as you will read in this guy’s account, the “authorities” were arrogant while basically “fishing“ for an incrimination. Now this was in Canada but do not think for a second this would go down any different when it happens in the US.

At one point he is asked

“What do you think about 9/11? What are your views on the Iran issue? Do you think government is too big, too powerful? Would you ever "make a point?"

…Well those questions implicate much of America. Where was this all meant to go?

Then he says…

“He asked me if I knew how to make a bomb. "I have a degree in physics, and I'm not an idiot." Of course I knew how to make a bomb -- what kind of question is that?? The better question is, WOULD I make a bomb? The answer is no.

They tried to trap me with some of their questions. I noticed they would try to get me to contradict myself. Like, I had earlier mentioned that I had never met Cara in real life, so they would later nonchalantly ask me when I had last seen Cara. Stuff like that.

He told me there was a similar bomb scare in LA today. He asked me if I was connected with it. He asked me if I was connected to the "liquid" thing from Britain.”

Like I said this may have taken place in Canada but I can tell you it would go down much the same in the US. There is a mindset of fear in place and misguided authority figures are reacting dangerously to it. This is to be expected considering the atmosphere that has been created.

Help me fight the fear. Get educated and let others know that because of the agenda of a few, the masses are living in ridiculous bondage. I for one choose not to participate.

Troy

From forum WoW post: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11211166&sid=1

This ... is going to be a long one. And believe it or not, it's a 100% true story. Its relation to World of Warcraft will not be immediately apparent. Anyway, the gist of what happened is here: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6a11bd67-f717-4aa3-80a9-840c07949730&k=28503

It all started when I got out of my seat to go to the bathroom. I went to the bathroom, washed my hands, and returned to my seat. A little while later the two stewardesses on the flight crossed each other in the aisle. They had a quick conversation that I was in earshot of.

"I locked off the front lav. There's something in the toilet that's preventing it from flushing. Run some water and see if you can clear it." My face immediately turned red. The seat cover! I thought. It must have been too big to flush! I should have thrown it out!

I was so embarrassed. I tried to act normal ... I took a sudden interest in the contents of the seat pocket in front of me, acted nonchalant and all. I watched as the stewardess got on her hands and knees in the lavatory and did unfathomable dirty work.

Sometime later, I decided it would be best if I forgot the whole thing happened, so I went to put on my headphones and drown myself in iPod music. But ... no iPod. I panicked, checked my other pockets. Where was it? Not under the seat, not in the pockets, not ... anywhere. I looked up to the stewardesses. One of them had run past me in a decent clip. She was carrying a green handbook. She brought it to the other stewardess. They flipped through the handbook, read a page, then made a call. The other stewardess had retrieved a blue metal box and was removing some equipment from it.

I put two and two together. I knew what had happened.

So I walked up to the stewardesses, both clamoring over the handbook, and tapped one on the shoulder.

"So, I had an iPod before I went to the bathroom, and now I don't. I think I know what's in the toilet."

We had a quick conversation. I told them, "You don't have to call the TSA or anything, it's just my iPod." They said, "Oh, but we already did."

So now I'm starting to realize that this is turning into a big problem. They offer their condolences, tell me that it's unfortunate, and I take a seat. Okay. So far, not so bad. I return to my seat and spend the rest of the flight trying to act normal.

That is, right up until the pilot comes over the intercom.

"Folks, this is the captain. I don't want to alarm you, but we've found a suspicious device in the front lavatory. Now, we think it's probably nothing, but in this day and age ... you can never be too careful. We'll be landing at Ottawa, where we will await further instructions."

The cabin erupted with commotion. At that very moment, my face fell into my hands. What have I done?

We landed at Ottawa, and we were taxiing to the gate. Without warning, the airplane then lurched to a sudden halt.

"Folks, this is the captain. We've been ordered to make an immediate stop. Buses are coming to evacuate the aircraft." We were to leave all of our belongings on the aircraft; we would be shuttled by bus to the terminal, where we would receive our carryon items.

My face fell deeper into my hands. Next came the waiting. Waiting and listening to more worry and commotion. A lot of us wondered if we could bring cell phones, wallets, passports, or customs forms with us. The stewardesses didn't have any answers; they had never been through this before.

On the one hand, if I brought a cell phone, wallet, etc. etc., and they confiscated it, I would have to hunt and peck for it separately from my carryon luggage. But if I stuck all of that stuff in my carryon luggage, I would only have to find one bag when we clamored for our stuff in the future. I decided the smart thing to do was to stick everything in my carryon. But, I kept my wallet, because I knew I was in big trouble at this point.

It took them 45 minutes to round up not just a bus and air-stairs, but an army of police and customs vehicles. One of the stewardesses took me aside and whispered to me. "Get off the plane last, and talk to the constable."

So I did. I exited the plane last, and spoke to the Ottawa police officer waiting at the air-stairs. I told him that the device was my iPod, and he took down my license number.

I continued to the bus. After a brief wait, it did NOT take us to the terminal. It took us to some industrial facility, where they housed utility vehicles. There, in the open garage, we were instructed to sit and wait. And wait we did ... another 30 minutes or so.

This was possibly the worst part ... While we were waiting I got to overhear the passengers talking about me. Well, they didn't know it was me, but they knew someone had dropped an iPod in the toilet, and they made aaallll sorts of assumptions about this person.

"Why didn't he have it on a clip? He could have clipped it to his damn pants." Or, "Why didn't he tell the stewardesses? Why is he hiding it from them and making us go through this?"

I could have corrected them. I could have told them that it WAS on a clip and I DID tell the stewardesses. In fact, it was a lot of self-restraint to just keep my mouth shut and not make things worse.

By this time the sense of guilt had left me. This wasn't my fault. Anyone could have dropped his stupid iPod in the toilet. It's really the government here. I mean, at this point the building contained six customs officials, an army of policemen, people from various security agencies, a bomb squad, and a couple of detectives. No one was doing anything. No one was taking charge. *I* didn't create this mess.

The whole time, the officers were watching me. They had told me to keep in sight of them at all times.

Finally, five or six customs officers set up a table and made an announcement. "We will be interviewing each of you one by one. Please form a line. Before we have our chat, make sure you have your ID, passport, and customs information with you."

One person asked, "What if that stuff is still on the plane?" The customs official responded, "Then we will have a more formal chat."

I got in line with the rest of the people, but shortly thereafter two police officers took me out of line. "Come with us."

They took me to a discreet corner. They brought out a tape recorder. I was told to put my hands up on the wall and spread my legs, and I was frisked from head to toe. They removed my wallet, disassembled it completely, and placed each of its contents in its own plastic evidence bag.

"Now Tim, for the sake of the tape recorder, I want you to state your full name and address." I did. "Now, each of us will state our name and position into the tape recorder." There were two detectives from the police department, a detective from Customs, and two members of the bomb squad.

Then started the questions. They were easy at first. They asked me where I lived. What do I do for a living? Why am I unemployed? How come it's taken me 4 months to find a job?

They asked me why I was visiting Canada. I was to visit a friend I met on World of Warcraft, Cara. They took down her name and what I could remember of her address. They asked me how we met.

"In an online game."
"What online game?"
"Umm ... World of Warcraft," I responded meekly.
"What kind of game is this?"
"It's a fantasy game ... it takes place online."
"Fantasy ... like it's got wizards and warlocks?"
"Well, it's got warlocks." (And they need to be nerfed.)

They asked me to describe my relation to Cara. I told them that people meet up in the game and go on adventures together, and that Cara and I were in a guild together that I was the leader of. They confused the concept of a guild with the game, however, and I had them believing that I was the Lord and Leader of all of WoW until I was able to correct them, and explain to them what a guild was.

So, when they put the pieces together; namely, that I was visiting a female person that I had met over a computer game, their next line of questioning went down an obvious path.

"So you and Cara are friends?"
"Yes."
"How long have you known her?"
"About 5 months I think? Maybe less."
"Do you have a romantic relationship with Cara?"
"No."
"Do you want a romantic relationship with Cara?"
"No."
"OK, so ... if you and Cara were drunk together, and she turned to you and said, 'Tim, let's go--'"

I interrupted him. "Excuse me ... what's the point of these questions?" The detective hardened. "Let me make things clear. I ask questions. You answer them. Do we have an understanding?"

"Yes." I paused. "I just don't see how this is relevant."

He spoke right in my face. "I've got 5 good men going into that airplane right now. Five of my best bomb squad guys. If there is any reason that I should be concerned for their life, then I need to know now. So just answer the questions, and do as I say."

Now the questions became really pointed. What do you think about 9/11? What are your views on the Iran issue? Do you think government is too big, too powerful? Would you ever "make a point?"

He asked me if I knew how to make a bomb. "I have a degree in physics, and I'm not an idiot." Of course I knew how to make a bomb -- what kind of question is that?? The better question is, WOULD I make a bomb? The answer is no.

They tried to trap me with some of their questions. I noticed they would try to get me to contradict myself. Like, I had earlier mentioned that I had never met Cara in real life, so they would later nonchalantly ask me when I had last seen Cara. Stuff like that.

He told me there was a similar bomb scare in LA today. He asked me if I was connected with it. He asked me if I was connected to the "liquid" thing from Britain.

Finally, he was done. He and the two bomb squad guys left. The customs lady followed up with more prying personal questions. She asked me more about Cara, how I got to know her, how we interact, etc.

The interviewers would periodically withdraw to talk about me in French, then return with followup questions. I was picked apart by these questions. They wanted to know how I could pay for my ticket, being unemployed, and what my motivations for visiting Cara were. They had me on the defensive the whole time.

She had finished her interview and I was then returned to the garage where they were questioning everyone else on the plane, one by one. I waited for another hour or so as the bomb squad did their thing (I assume). Eventually, they loaded everyone up on the bus to take them to retrieve their stuff. Except me -- I and two others were to be inspected by Customs.

They took my photo, asked me to wait in the cold for 30 minutes, and then escorted me to a red van. Along the way I passed the detective who had first interviewed me. He was carrying a green paper bag. He called me over.

"I just got it back from the bomb squad. It's an iPod. Do you want it back?"
"It's been in the toilet."
"Yeah, it's messy." Then he walked right up to my ear. "Tim, you're not in any trouble anymore. Nothing you say now is going to be on record. I want you to answer a question honestly, just for me, not for my agency."
"OK?"
He whispered into my ear. "Did you ... did you take a dump, and then drop your iPod in the toilet on accident?"

"No!" I yelled a little too loudly. "Like I said ... I didn't notice it was missing until after!"

"OK, OK. I believe you. You did great, Tim."

I got my wallet back and was escorted by police to the van. I waited some more on this van, and finally it took me to a harmless immigration office. I waited some more there, the whole time being watched and followed by police officers. Finally, they escorted me to the baggage claim to fetch my stuff, and took me to a very private room with some bomb-screening equipment and tinted mirrors for windows.

It was me and a gruff, humorless customs official. He unpacked my luggage entirely, ran the contents of my wallet through a bomb sweep, and carefully examined all of my belongings. He then asked me to turn on my laptop. I did, and he began using it. I saw him open Spotlight and begin searching.

"Do you connect to the Internet on this laptop?"
"Yes."
"Have you downloaded and images?"
"Huh? What do you mean?"
"Do you have any pornography?"
"No."

I waited in total silence for about 10 minutes as he kept searching and searching, until I finally asked him, "What are you looking for?"

"Contraband," he said without looking up at me.
"Such as?"
"Child pornography, hate propaganda."
"Child porn I can understand, that's illegal. But hate propaganda is protected speech."
Now he looked up. "What country do you think you're in?"
"Oh, it's illegal in Canada?"
"I honestly don't know. But that doesn't matter. I get to decide what goes in this country. Do you have a problem with that?"
I paused for a long time while I thought about what I should say to this. "Yes."
"Yes, you do have a problem?"
"Yes, I do. If it's illegal in Canada I'll understand, but saying 'I don't want it in my country' isn't good enough when you're a government official."

Now he was pissed. "Don't fool around with me. I'm sure you want this to end as much as I do. So I will ask you questions, and you will answer. Do you understand?"

Another long pause while I thought. "Yes, I do."

He continued his exhaustive audit of my computer's contents, then returned it to me. We waited for a Customs escort, who showed me out of the room and back to the terminal. There they left me without saying a word, and I was free to go.

I found Cara and Andy, and my vacation in Canada began.

(The first three people that post "TLDR" get negative haikus written about their character names.)

***Today's posts are highlights of previous blogs I've posted elsewhere***

Just to get things rolling here...

A Christian Manifsto: America's moral decline by the late Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, 1982 sermon

Click to read the whole sermon here
Remember this was a 1982 sermon but boy does it ring relevant 2006. Please take some time when you guys have it to read or get the audio and listen to the entire sermon.

Excerpts from Francis Schaeffer:
.."We have forgotten our heritage. A lot of the evangelical complex like to talk about the old revivals and they tell us we ought to have another revival. We need another revival -- you and I need revival. We need another revival in our hearts. But they have forgotten something. Most of the Christians have forgotten and most of the pastors have forgotten something. That is the factor that every single revival that has ever been a real revival, whether it was the great awakening before the American Revolution; whether it was the great revivals of Scandinavia; whether it was Wesley and Whitefield; wherever you have found a great revival, it's always had three parts. First, it has called for the individual to accept Christ as Savior, and thankfully, in all of these that I have named, thousands have been saved. Then, it has called upon the Christians to bow their hearts to God and really let the Holy Spirit have His place in fullness in their life. But there has always been, in every revival, a third element. It has always brought SOCIAL CHANGE!"...

..."We must absolutely set out to smash the lie of the new and novel concept of the separation of religion from the state which most people now hold and which Christians have just bought a bill of goods. This is new and this is novel. It has no relationship to the meaning of the First Amendment. The First Amendment was that the state would never interfere with religion. THAT'S ALL THE MEANING THERE WAS TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT. Just read Madison and the Spectator Papers if you don't think so. That's all it was!"...

..Throughout the whole history of the Christian Church, (and again I wish people knew their history. In A Christian Manifesto I stress what happened in the Reformation in reference to all this) at a certain point, it is not only the privilege but it is the duty of the Christian to disobey the government. Now that's what the founding fathers did when they founded this country. That's what the early Church did. That's what Peter said. You heard it from the Scripture: "Should we obey man?... rather than God?" That's what the early Christians did....

Please read the entire sermon . You may still be able to get it from Focus on the Family as well, that's where I first heard and ordered it.

Keep your eyes on Jesus,
Troy
www.patriotbeliever.com

The Real Threat of Nuclear War...

(Originally posted at www.patriotbeliever.com)
The United States has maintained a nuclear option since the inception of atomic weapons. We were of the mutually assured destruction camp that held the logic that no one in the world would destroy you if it was assured that they would in turn be destroyed. Apparently this way of thinking is old fashioned and we now have a more forward thinking bunch of leaders. We now have the Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations which calls for the use of nuclear weapons as a strategic offensive capability. The "Joint" in the title apparently refers to the merging of conventional and nuclear forces more than joint services.

The plans are in place for the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield, particularly when we attack Iran. This is real and we need to inform and be informed. Remember that radioactive material scattered by nuclear weapons, even from the depleted uranium being used in current armor piercing munitions, has a half life of over 4 billion years (basically you can't make it un-radioactive). Any use of nuclear weaponry will be a bad thing no matter where they are used. Couple those concerns with the fact that there are many countries besides the United States that posses a nuclear arsenal and would be threatened by America's use of such weapons offensively, not the least of whom are Russia and China, Irans longtime allies and suppliers. I believe that the stage is set to employ such weapons in Iran. I hope I'm wrong.

For a very detailed analysis on this topic read the article by Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research entitled Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust? Will the US launch "Mini-nukes" against Iran in Retaliation for Tehran's "Non-compliance"?

Learn about nuclear weapons and nuclear war: Trinity Atomic Website

Related: Port Chicago "Disaster" - Last Wave online book and website

9/11 Liberal/Conservative nut cases

I must confess, as most who know me can attest, I am no liberal. By far, I am completely the opposite. I am as conservative as anyone that I know. I am a literal Bible believing conservative Christian, patriotic (combat) veteran, pro-gun, anti-abortion, pro-small government, pro-(true) free market, pro-home school you get the point. My views have not changed. These major talk show hosts that are fair and balanced and conservative blindly defend the most non-conservative, "conservative" administration that I have ever seen. What has happened?

Alright, I was listening to the Rush show on the way to lunch as I sometimes do and a guest host was at the microphone named Mark Belling. Part of his opening segment was a rant about Kevin Barrett, the UW-Madison professor (or lecturer) that has stated he believes the US government, or at least some within it, carried out the 9/11 attacks that brought down the Twin Towers

Mr. Belling took the unyielding position throughout his dialogue that not only is Mr. Barrett a left-wing nut case, but anyone that questions the official story of 9/11 must be a left-wing crackpot. This seems to be the way that conservative thought is being controlled.

This is the typical handling of the 9/11 issue by most big conservative talk show hosts lately. Shawn Hannity will usually immediately spew loud, repetitive statements about how we can not speak of 9/11 facts out of concern for the victim families. He usually does that while talking over someone making a point or stating a fact for discussion. He doesnt want listeners or watchers to hear the person. What are these people afraid of?

All those who question the official theory do not believe the same thing either. There are so many problems with the official story that it is hard for anyone to truly have a grasp on what really took place, let alone what to believe about it. Talk shows generally deal in tiny sound bites in case you havent noticed, and 9/11 is a behemoth of an issue comprising of cumbersome amounts of public data that has gone almost entirely unreported in television and radio talk.

Even a cursory, yet honest look at the events before, during and after September 11, 2001 by anyone, regardless of political persuasion, causes one to question what we have been told and led to believe about the most pivotal event of our lifetimes (just try it, you wont self-destruct or instantly change party affiliation.) Most conservatives, like everyone, have been slow to realize that things, hundreds or even thousands of bits of information, do not add up.

Now that the "shock and awe" of 9/11 has worn off and many conservatives (true conservatives) are beginning to think about what they are learning, the tactic of associating questions about 9/11 with extreme liberalism has become standard practice. No true conservative wants to be called a liberal so this is a very effective technique of control. I think some would even insist that the sky is green if they were told its liberal to think its blue. This polarization of thought has controlled the masses for ages. The two-party system itself is designed as a control mechanism. This is why you think you must vote for the lesser of two evils come election time, and then you feel good about it and feel like you had some control over the outcome, whether the candidate really represents your views or not.

Once one looks at the facts about what happened on 9/11, they are forced to look closer or consciously retreat into willful denial. I challenge you who consider yourself to be patriotic Americans to look at it seriously, if you have any concern about where our country is going at all. I can promise you if you still think that America was just asleep or that those 19 hijackers really planned and prepared enough to pull it off, you have not looked at the facts, facts that are widely available on the internet from mainstream sources. It will not make you more liberal or conservative but it will change the way you think.

Conservative big wheels can continue to put their followers heads in the sand about 9/11 through associative implication, but the masses are waking up by not listening and it only serves to drive informed conservative audiences away. Become a thinking conservative, ditto-ism isnt as cool as it once was. American patriotism is.

What is the current situation and who is the enemy?

Before I get in trouble

Just for the record, I am pro-Israel (the people, not those within their government that are neo-conservative, Zionist extremists). However, I do not consider myself a Christian Zionist as it is beginning to be known. I have changed my affiliation with such a label because much like the label conservative, the term no longer is anchored to the truth it once was thanks to the neo-conservative powers that have attached themselves with traditional conservatism. This relativity shift has confused and deceived many in both groups, conservatives and supporters of the Jewish people.

My purpose in this little writing is not to discuss the distinction between biblical Judaism, the people of Israel and modern day Zionists state or the corruption within Israels government, some of its leaders and the Mossad. Israel is in a very similar situation as the US as far as corruption within goes, just diluted by a smaller bureaucracy than our own government is. Remember also that Jesus said (in Rev. 2:9 and 3:9) that there would be those that claim to be Jews but are not true Jews. Let me just encourage you all to look into what modern traditional Jews think about it all through some of these sources, Im not agreeing with all they support either but consider these Jews in your thinking and prayers about this subject:

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

http://www.nkusa.org/

http://www.barrychamish.com/

and a bunch of them here: http://www.doublestandards.org/jaz1.html

Having said all of that, I continue: I believe Israel has a right and should defend itself against enemy attacks. I believe that the Jewish PEOPLE, are Gods promised. And, just so its clear, regardless of what Joel Olsteen said to Larry King about what it takes to get into heaven or what George Bush says about Christians and Muslims praying to the same god, Jesus is the ONLY way to the Father (from a traditionally Christian point of view anyway). That means the Jewish people still must get to the Father through Jesus Christ, just as Gentiles do, as He Himself told his Jewish followers. They must be personally born again. I am also well aware of the Abrahamic covenant and Gods promises to Israel, but it is irrelevant in this case because it is Gods job to fulfill His promises, not mans.

July 12, 2006 Israeli soldiers kidnapped

Just to be clear, the beginning of the current flare-up in Lebanon has been all but erased in the daily mainstream press. I believe this is to form an intentional public opinion and keep people in fear and anticipation. Please follow the links that follow to the very first news stories after the Israeli soldiers were kidnapped. LOOK AT THE DATES of these stories and notice that they all state that the soldiers were captured on the Lebanese side of the border with Israel. This fact has been buried for good. [Forbes 7/12/06] [Hindustan Times 7/12/06] [Bahrain News Agency 7/12/06] [fr.news.yahoo 7/12/06] [news.monstersandcritics.com 7/12/06] [AFP 7/12/06] [chinabroadcast 7/12/06] [Asia Times 7/15/06] [voltairenet.org 7/18/06]

There should be no surprise here, yet the terminology in almost all reports after those early stories use the word kidnapped. That includes both the liberal and fair and balanced news agencies.

I stated to some people back when Israel pulled out of Gaza that they would eventually use some pretext to come back with force. Israel knew that any soldier crossing the border was subject to capture (or kidnapping)by its enemy so this was no surprise (see the stories at [JPost 7/12/06] and [SFGate 7/21/06].)

Having pointed these facts out, let me state again that yes, Hezbollah, Hamas, militant Islamic extremists, and Al Qaeda are mean and evil. Yes they want to kill westerners and see the Jewish people destroyed. I dont try to detract from that. (I dont believe they are omnipotent like they seem to be made out to be, but thats a different subject - fear) It will be that way until Jesus returns. Check out what Pat Buchanan has said: Where are the Christians? and No, this is not 'our war'. He is right about this.

Is this the beginning of Armageddon?

If it is, and it may or may not be, how do we act or react as believers? Does God require us to encourage war to help hurry the end times along so we can hurry up and get on with our promised heavenly eternity? Is God using Rush, Shawn Hannity and OReilly to guide our thinking, influence our opinions as believers? I have heard several big-time conservative hosts and leaders (Newt Gingrich for one) state that this is world war 3 and that this is good for America. What a statement! I dont think so!

We are blessed with Gods Holy Word as our ultimate guide to Gods character and how we should act, react and think. I say that, to contrast how our thinking and opinion is to be formed and guided by Holy Scripture, not by fair and balanced news, conservative talk show hosts or even big, successful Christian leaders.

The more we allow man and not God to form our thinking the more things get blurred and confused. For example, terms like anti-Semitism become representations of a new meaning, sometimes slowly over generations (anti-Semitism used to mean against the Semitic speaking people, in short all Middle Eastern languages, to include Arabs and Jews. It now means anti-Zionism as a label.) The same is true of many modern profanities and of the confederate flag of the southern United States, which is interpretable as being a racist symbol but was nothing of the like originally.

These meanings are formed by powerful influences on society usually with agendas.

What is the effect of blindly buying into the idea that this is it and cheering on an aggressive war in the Middle East, not to mention patriotically supporting taking over the entire region permanently for ourselves? I believe all of this may be in order to distract Americans and particularly those who believe strongly that this is justified at least partly because it might be the beginning of the end according to scripture, so that the global agenda being so blatantly pursued and accelerated by certain world leaders can take place with little or no resistance from the truly conservative, truly patriotic, thinking free people of America and the world. Not to mention, Syria and Iran are linked to it all so we are heading towards American involvement faster than you know, another pretext against them both. See - Syria emerges front and center.

What is the current situation and who is the enemy?

This brings us full circle back to the title I used. What is the current situation and who is the enemy? If we are being distracted as I suggested previously so that an agenda can move forward, who is the true enemy? Being a Bible believing Christian and considering all I have said in this piece I must conclude that the ultimate enemy is not radical Islamic terrorists, as evil and deliberate as they can be. It is the system of antichrist which is in our world and moving us closer to that goal which one day will require that all people be controlled and bow to it or die.

Thus it should not surprise us that our liberties are threatened by nearly all legislation being passed by our legislators or by nearly every executive order treaty, secret or public, that our President signs.

The fact that we Christians should expect this, however, does not necessitate that we sit idly by as falsely patriotic Americans and accept all the propaganda and loss of liberty that has been dealt our republic from within these last decades and years. On the contrary. Our founding fathers fought such a mindset. If they hadnt, we would not have gained independence from Britain.

Wake up, get informed and pray

So before you cheer too loudly for more war and aggression in the Middle East, consider where we find ourselves here at home. Who is the real enemy of the people of the United States? Are we being enraged towards the wrong objectives?

I propose that according to scripture, there has been an age old agenda by an enemy, Satan himself, that does appear to be peaking in recent times and that Islamic terrorists and rogue states are dangerous patsies for bigger principalities and powers that are often operating hidden in plain view. Why then does our culture of fear focus on the lesser of the evils? Because we are not supposed to notice the big storm clouds of global dominion gathering on the horizon through the erosion of the original American Republic. If we notice it, we can pray against it, pray that Gods will be done, we can speak out against it. But for sure, we have to see it first.

Dont be lulled into acceptance and complacency towards mans policies, they have proven to be corrupt more times than not throughout our worlds short history. Americas history has not been exempt and the Middle East is pivotal in both those histories.

Reminding you that nothing catches God by surprise and He wants us to resist and expose the works of darkness. To not do so is to be in fellowship with it according to Ephesians 5.

9/11 Stereotyping is making me sick! Get the facts.

Fox News, I used to love it, like most conservatives. Its fair and balanced. Of course now, apparently I don't qualify as a "conservative" because I question Bush and 9/11, even though I am for smaller government, against abortion, Im pro gun, pro marriage between a man and a woman, etc.

Anyway, now Fox News' John Gibson says that I "don't believe the 9/11 story" because I "hate Bush". So let me get this straight

Don't believe 9/11 = Hate Bush

Hmmm, that's funny. It makes a lot of since that I would vote for someone twice because I hate them.

And last night Bill OReilly smugly jumped in with his wisdom on the 9/11 nutty theories. He and James Meigs of Popular Mechanics attempted to make it sound like a few nutty professors and some foreign internet sources started all of the questioning of the official 9/11 story years ago, and the American people are so ignorant that a good portion are believing them. This is completely false. By the way, OReilly acts surprised that a new poll shows that 36% of the population question the government version of 9/11 I guess he has not seen the 8/30/04 Zogby poll of 66% of New Yorkers, or the 11/10/04 CNN poll of 89%, or 03/23/06 CNN poll of 83%, or the current AOL poll of 51%, or the current CNN poll of 73%. (Results were as of this writing.)

The fact is many Americans began questioning what happened on the day of the attacks. I was much slower than that, not questioning what happened until about a year ago. At least one person, Alex Jones on his local access cable TV show, was calling for Americans to call the White House and Congress on July 25th of 2001 thats right before the attacks, and tell them not to pull this to use Bin Laden to attack America, to prevent an attack. Dont believe it?... Watch it here. I guess you could say he started it.

Why is Fox News and other mainstream press all over the 9/11 truth movement all of the sudden and why are they all associating the fact that many Americans dont believe the official story with hatred or nutty professors theories? Maybe its the same reason Two major motion pictures and a graphic novel based on the official story are releasing the same year as the fifth anniversary. Because people wont forget and time allows for consideration of where we have come from and where we are headed.

Think about it, several cable television documentaries, a television version and theatrical version of flight 93 (United 93) have already come and gone this year, Oliver Stones World Trade Center comes out this month as does the 9/11 Graphic Novel based on the 9/11 Commission Report. Why is the fifth anniversary so magical? Remember, we went to war because of 9/11, or was it WMDs? No thats right, its to spread democracy, I forgot.

The truth is that I don't believe the "9/11 story" because after about a year of seriously educating myself on public information (and I'm not talking about sitting in front of the television and staring at Fox, CNN, MSNBC or watching a movie about United 93 based on the commission report to know what happened. Remember we remain on an Elevated Alert in America. Its scrolling 24/7/365 across the bottom of Fox.) I no longer believe the official story of 9/11 because I cannot reconcile the information with the official story. I challenge anyone to prove it to themselves or me with facts. Just a sample:

• I have watched videos of WTC building 7 (about a block away from the towers) collapse in less than 7 seconds straight down into it's footprint late that day; A 47 story steel building that had localized fires and was not struck by a plane. This is a building the news does not talk about. It looked exactly like a Las Vegas style demolition complete with smoke squibs and penthouse crimp. Buildings closer to the towers still stand today. (Side tip look into the tenants of that building.)
• I have read many emergency worker's statements transcripts (hundreds were reluctantly made public, although highly censored with black marker), many of which mention multiple explosions within the towers before and during the collapses.
• I have listened to WTC maintenance man William Rodriguez tell his story of massive explosions within the building (North Tower) sub-basement just before (yes before) the first (yes first) plane struck and how his (closed door) 9/11 commission testimony was completely left out of the public record (as were many, many others).
• I have considered the impossibility that the worlds premier and multi trillion dollar air defenses of the United States could be forced to stand-down for almost 2 hours while four hijacked planes had their way with 75% of their targets. Maybe it was the multitude of drills that were admitted to have been going on with the military, NORAD, NEADS and the FAA (as well as FEMA and others) on that morning. What a coincidence.
• I have considered the fact (yes fact) that a debris field of 8 miles (the reports are out there, just not talked about) is impossible if a plane dives into the ground without being shot down, as weve been told by the commission (and the movie).
• I have heard eye witness Samuel Danner talk decisively about what he described as a global hawk UAV strike the pentagon, and I cant disprove him with the released pentagon video official proof (Ive yet to find the 757 in the video or stills, can someone please help me with this?) This makes the resistance to release the thousands of other videos and pictures (including publicly admitted confiscated tapes from the Citgo across the street and the Sheraton National Hotel much more compelling.)
• I have observed that anytime someone asks the government for the release of information (literally thousands of videos, pictures, whistleblower testimony, logs, etc.) it is denied in the name of national security. Did not 9/11 already happen? What is being secured by not providing known information of the attacks to the public? Someones rear-end? Some information has been released to the public after courts forced the issue. So let me get this straight, we should understand the government locking down, not sharing any information about 9/11 and protecting itself, giving itself the freedom to do what it must to protect itself all while we give up liberties to be safe. I remember the wash that national security is everyday that goes by that the borders are open. If the war on terror was real, the borders would have been closed immediately on 9/11/01.
• I have used common sense after watching the multitude of publicly available videos of the tower collapses. 110 floors, 1300 feet of steel and concrete building could not have collapsed in 10 seconds (times 2 that day). Sorry it is just not possible. A ball dropped from the same roof would have reached the ground at about the same time. It's physics 101. 110 floors did not fall through a vacuum, they fell (actually disintegrated) around 47 massive core columns, some bigger around than soda machines at their bases, through concrete slabs, office equipment (non of which was found intact in the rubble, just micro dust), steel joists etc (in each tower). The point is that 10 seconds is barely enough time for one object without resistance to fall through the air yet two entire modern towers dissolved at near freefall speed. If you want a million dollars you can have it if you can prove that the towers collapsed WITHOUT the help of explosives. Businessman Jimmy Walter has made that public offer to anyone who can prove it. As far as I know, no one has even attempted it.
• The list goes on; I am just now getting a fraction of the legitimate problems up on my website www.patriotbeliever.com. There are literally so many problems and unanswered questions its difficult to catalogue. And thats not story enough for the evening news?

Now, If my unbelief in the 9/11 story was based in hatred for Bush, as John Gibson says, all of the questions I have would only provide more excuses to hate him. But, on the contrary;

• I am very concerned about a President who the Secret Service would allow to remain in a publicly planned location (Booker Elementary School, Sarasota) for at least 30 minutes after a known national attack had begun, endangering not only the President (undoubtedly a potential target himself) but also a school full of children, faculty and media. Does this sound like standard Secret Service operating procedure? Did they not consider he could be a target as well?
• I am concerned about a President (his mental state at least) who has publicly and firmly stated (twice) that he watched the first plane hit LIVE, something no one else in the world can claim as no live broadcast aired the first strike, live. (My source? The White House website.) He obviously is delusional. Remember, officially these planes into buildings attacks were a complete surprise to the government, yet our president witnessed the first plane live? But this discrepancy in the public record is not newsworthy so most of you have never heard it.
• This list goes on and on as well

No, I dont hate Bush. I hate what he has proven himself to be (see my website for more on this).

Now we are seeing these stories about the theories about 9/11 because the news agencies are realizing that the people are not buying the simple shut-up and trust us method of reporting. The pentagon is now under fire for lying to the 9/11 commission. I think this is to place some blame after five years and no government individuals being held accountable for the failures on 9/11 precisely because so many Americans are beginning to question the official story. We are now to believe the Pentagon and NORAD were just really confused.

So once again, hatred has nothing to do with questioning the 9/11 story, for me anyway. The shock and awe is wearing off and people are beginning to think.

It is impossible to prove a lie (give it a try, I dare you.)

Troy

Latest - Out of Control Fear Mongering - Foiled Terror Plot

Within the last couple of days I actually stated to several people that it has been almost five years that America has been on the Yellow or elevated terror threat level and that it almost means nothing to anyone anymore. Then this morning on the ride to work what do I hear? We are now on Orange (and Red for incoming UK flights) threat level because of the foiled terror plot in the UK to blow up multiple airliners with liquid explosives.
Just a few observations;

Let me just point out something about the threat level system. The Washington Times reported in 2002:

The latest alerts were issued "as a result of all the controversy that took place last week," said Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer, referring to reports that the president received a CIA briefing in August about terror threats, including plans by Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network to hijack U.S. commercial airliners. (Emphasis mine)

I dont know exactly why Ari Fleisher would say that publicly but remember he resigned as press secretary in 2003. So the Presidents press secretary admitted that they basically used fear to distract the publics attention away from the fact that Bush was definitely specifically warned of a threat a month prior to 9/11.

The reason I bring that up is because not only has the public become accustomed to living under fear dictated by the threat level, as Ari Fleisher admitted in 2002, the government has used that very system to distract the publics attention from issues they dont want publicized (there are other public instances). In case you didnt catch that, it was an admission. Also see this 2003 WorldNetDaily story about this very subject.

Keep in mind another little aspect left out by most reports today, this current terror plot was known to our President at least as early as Sunday, according to Forbes magazine today. Read it for yourself then ask yourself, why was the terror alert not raised at that time? Once again it appears the threat system has more to do with the government protecting itself than the American Public!

One aviation security expert said today that the plot resembled a 1995 plan code-named Bojinka.

Let me tell you a little bit about Operation Bojinka. (The DIA refuses to declassify further information on Project Bojinka by the way). It was a 1995 plot led by Ramzi Youssef which involved blowing up 10 Western airliners simultaneously, among other things. In September, 1992 Youssef came to the US with Ahmad Ajaj whose luggage contained documents on bomb making and fake IDs and passports. Ajaj was arrested while Youssef was released, for some reason (apparently he was protected by powers within the government). Youssef ended up being the WTC 93 bombing mastermind.

What is not reported much anymore is that the FBI was handling an informant involved in the 93 bombing named Emad A. Salem whos secretly recorded conversations with the FBI revealed that the FBI knew a lot before the 93 attack. The problem with this sting is that an FBI supervisor apparently had opportunity to prevent the actual bomb from being built (or at least substituting fake ingredients) or the plan from happening in the first place. Why didnt he? See how it looks to you.

So this currently foiled plot is a recycle of the 1995 plot. I thought these guys were brilliant mastermind killers. Thats a subject for another rant.

This current threat appears to be following a pre 9/11 mold so be aware. If there are a couple of these foiled plots in the near future be prepared for a real attack to slip through the cracks at which time we will truly be locked down indefinitely for national security. I hope this does not happen but I see a pattern based on passed incidents and think we need to watch and pray. I will not be surprised if there is a link discovered to Iran and/or Syria and maybe North Korea with this plot. You know what will happen then. Fear is proving to be quite a means indeed.

Jesus answered them, "See to it that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name and say, 'I am the Christ,' and they will deceive many people. You are going to hear of wars and rumors of wars. See to it that you are not alarmed. These things must take place, but the end hasn't come yet. (Matthew 24:4-6)

Also see: Endless Fake Terror Alerts: Fear Based Mind Control

Jonathon Moseley, 9/11 Bush Basher WND article analysis

This is somewhat of rant... with no apologies...
WorldNetDaily is having to clean up Moseley's article NOTE: There is now an editor's note at the top stating that he asserted something that was false (obviously because he was called on it on the radio with Alex Jones. Here is the prisonplanet.com's write-up about the article and today's radio debated with the author.

Below is the article text and my comments...
***The original article text is in black and comments are red and blue***:

9/11 Bush bashers

By Jonathon Moseley

On this fifth September 11 anniversary, some who hate Bush will gather in New York to profane the memory of the 3,000 victims. They will try to convince the country that 9/11 was not an attack by Islamic terrorists, but criminal mass murder by the Bush administration. Amazingly, fully one-third of Americans now believe that the government is guilty of some conspiracy concerning 9/11. So admittedly at least one third (conservatively) of America need no convincing. Everything liberals believe about foreign policy was proven to be disastrously false on 9/11. Therefore, liberals must somehow deny that 9/11 actually happened. This is somehow a partisan issue?

After debating these characters extensively examples?, I believe people need to know who they really are. Organizations like "Scholars for Truth" do not ask any questions seeking truth not true - see their 14,000 signature petition to congress for release of information which is strictly questions, but announce absolute gross generalization conclusions that the Bush administration executed a criminal conspiracy to murder 3,000 Americans. Literally, they offer science fiction, not science specific examples from st911 missing of course. Remarkably, many 9/11 conspiracy peddlers resorting to name calling already spontaneously slander the Jews without rhyme or reason any examples? This is news to me as I have not heard any such slanders. It would be nice if he directed the reader to an example. What does Rush call this type of reporting, drive-by reporting?

At a national conference broadcast nationwide on C-SPAN, key conspiracy leader more slanderous labels Alex Jones a conservative by the way announced that the American government has already collapsed and a shadow government is now running our country this is at least partly true, and has been for as much as a hundred years or so, but subject too huge to get into here. This radio talk-show host next announced on tape that Osama bin Laden is now a paid agent of the CIA. UBL (bin Laden) was an asset for the CIA and the US since the Afghanistan war, this is admitted public information. We supported him against the Soviets to drive them out. The tale since then is a long and involved one including many peculiar links to the US. Again, too much to get into here.

***We now know from the radio interview yesterday and from WND editor's note that the author decided to invent much of the slander in his article, for all to see by the way.***

Professor Steven Jones of Brigham-Young University accused George Bush of being a dictator I watched this event personally and actually Jones, very soft spoken, "reluctantly concluded"... "that our constitution is literally hanging by a thread" this is not that drastic of a statement and actually is truer than most want to believe. , mimicking the preamble of the Declaration of Independence. When asked if violent revolution was necessary, this scientist declared in front of national TV cameras that there is no peaceful way to achieve the group's goals. I did not see this in the C SPAN airing either In the context of the question, professor Jones was calling for the violent overthrow of the government. What he actually said was "we're not done, we still have a constitution" and "we have remedies we can keep that, if we work together," and thats an exact quote.

James Fetzer, a philosophy professor at the University of Minnesota who poses as a scientist? where has he "posed" as a scientist?, praised Venezuela President Hugo Chavez and promoted Chavez's proposal for an international criminal tribunal to put the Bush administration on trial. I am not able to verify this statement either. I believe he probably did call for an international criminal tribunal. Mysteriously the author fails to mention or refute any of the statements about 9/11 made by Fetzer. By e-mail, professor Fetzer accused me of being Jewish sadly, I am not because I disagree with his theories ? Is he willing to divulge actual verifiable quotes from the email? Its easy to talk about private conversations.

The goal is to convince Americans that there are no foreign enemies . We can all drop our guard. Stop defending America. Don't be ready to fight. ? where, when and who said this? Such agitprop helps America's enemies to more effectively attack the United States.

First, al-Qaida has repeatedly admitted planning and executing the 9/11 attacks. In a captured videotape recording of a private meeting in November 2001, bin Laden talks in detail about the 9/11 plot ? UBL's very first statement (suppressed) after 9/11 was that he had nothing to do with it. All subsequent videos have been suspect. , comparing his expectations in advance to what actually occurred.

End of discussion, right? Nope. The 9/11 conspiracy peddlers labels reply that bin Laden is today on the payroll of the CIA and the Israeli Mossad. To explain away al-Qaida's proud admission, they "out" bin Laden as a CIA agent. ? who has said this? He give no example. Most who doubt the official 9/11 speculate the UBL has been dead for a long time (Where is Joe Wilson when you need him?) Some also insist that Al Jazeera is a television network operated by Israel, because Qatar lacks technical skills. ? who has said this? He give no example. Most who doubt the official 9/11 speculate the UBL has been dead for a long time. Israel keeps being drug into his article to make anyone who questions 9/11 appear to be anti-Israel. Some examples would clarify who he really means.

Second, of the World Trade Center, professors Fetzer and Jones insist "there was not enough kinetic energy to cause one floor to bring about the collapse of the floor below it. Jones, a physics professor, actually has an extensive peer reviewed physics paper about the collapses. kinetic energy is but one very small part of the discussion " Yet about 29 floors tilted and fell onto the crumbling floor where the aircraft gouged out and removed support structure.? Why would a university professor talk about "one floor" falling when everyone knows that 29 floors, this is what's called a straw man argument plus 140 tons of aircraft and cargo, fell? Fetzer is intentionally deceiving the gullible. (But I am Jewish, he says, for disagreeing with him.? inside argument evidently that he feels is relevant - the reader is left out but swayed again to think this is anti Jewish, questioning 9/11)

What about WTC building 7????

Third, Fetzer and Jones argue that the Twin Towers could not have collapsed so neatly without a controlled demolition.

Actually this is obviously a distraction for surely a person so critical of Professor Jones would know in preparing for this article that Jones has recently announced the result of analysis done on samples of metal drippings from WTC steel obtained from multiple sources has shown to have thermite and sulfur on them. Thermite is used for cutting structural steel. The addition of sulfur means that thermate (a specifically designed type for cutting structural members) was present. This topic was talked about extensively by Professor Jones in the previously mentioned (by the author) symposium which aired on C SPAN but somehow did not merit the author's mentioning it at all. Architects clarify that any such building is designed to load-shift actually some of the original engineers of the WTC towers have said this specifically about the towers themselves. The failure of part of a floor causes other parts of that structure to compensate and take up the load True. This means that each floor must always fail symmetrically (emph. is mine...this is a concoction, inserted in the middle of the truth, by the author and he points to no specific quote to back it up).

As long as any part of the floor remains intact, it is designed to pick up the remaining load True. Thus, it was inevitable that the towers collapsed symmetrically and down the center Another concoction shrouded in true statements. Furthermore, controlled demolitions start from the bottom up traditional controlled demolitions. The WTC collapse bears no resemblance to that whatsoever I agree, it bore no resemblance to it in the sense that no buildings of this magnitude have ever been demolished before.

Fourth, many conspiracy peddlers can't let the reader forget that, what he doesn't realize is that he hurts any credibility may have doing this insist that no airplanes ever hit the World Trade Center or Pentagon Deceptive use of a straw man argument. Lumping what people say they believe about the planes that hit the towers and the Pentagon together is intended to make it sound like they are the same subject.

I have read nor heard anyone saying that no plane hit the towers. What hit the Pentagon is questioned extensively because 1. No useful video or image in the public domain shows a 757 (if someone has it I would love to see, maybe its on the thousands of video and pictures that the Pentagon refuses to release why?) 2. There was very little debris left and whatever was left was quickly policed up. 3. Eyewitnesses stories of what they saw vary greatly from each other. Some say they saw a 757 and even some saw the people in the windows (at 500 mph?) and then some say they saw a small private jet, one very specific individual says he saw what appeared to be a Global Hawk UAV. We simply can not know for sure until real video (which is admitted to exist but is being kept) is released. Why this is being held from the public Im not sure, but it sure doesnt help end conspiracy theories.

The airplanes never existed The straw man goes on. This is where the author leaves the highway of his own topic and drives off on a dirt road into the distance. Does he cite any examples of someone who believes this? No, because no one credible does, especially none of the Scholars for 9/11 truth or most who doubt the official story. Although there are many different theories about 9/11 out there, one is hard pressed to find many that ascribe to this theory and the author is attempting to associate those he already mentioned with it. I have seen neither one of them state their adherence to a no plane theory, regarding the WTC.

They refuse to acknowledge that tens of thousands of eyewitnesses went outside and watched the WTC burn before the second airplane hit. News footage was faked, Straw man continued. Hes out there, but the reader is now supposed to have exited the subject with him, thinking that all who question 9/11 subscribe to such outrageous theories. This is a blatant but very ineffective tactic. However, the goal I think is to influence those who have not looked at 9/11 for themselves at all (or are to lazy to) so they will think that this is what most doubters think, when it absolutely is not. And he still does not give one good example of a person who believes no plane hit the towers (there may be a minority who believe that, but I havent found them), yet thats what he is contending.

but they do not explain how thousands of journalists and New Yorkers all watched the airplane hit or how dozens of cameras all show the same thing. They ignore how American Airlines crash investigators verified their airplanes from the wreckage in order to file insurance claims and prepare for lawsuits. They do not explain why hundreds hundreds huh? It sure would have been nice to see some sources for this statement of civilian air traffic controllers and airport radar operators confirm the official explanation (indeed, are the sources for much of it) actually, NORAD and FAA information released in the last month shows massive and debilitating confusion by at least their controllers - because various drills were going on in parallel to the actual attacks - of course the author would have no reason to mention that.

They assume that hundreds of local police and firefighters crawling over the wreckage covered up for the murderers of their fellow firefighters and cops. This statement is simply intended to input an emotional exit, it has nothing to do with the author's contention that "conspiracy peddlers insist that no airplanes ever hit the World Trade Center or Pentagon" Of course a reader could easily have forgotten the point by this time.

Fifth, conspiracy mongers oh a new label, the other one most have wore out - peddlers just doesn't get the point across any more claim that no steel building has ever collapsed which is a good circumstantial point from fire alone, so the Twin Towers couldn't, either. However, the heavy-steel-construction McCormick Place Exhibition Hall this was a roof, a very EXPANSIVE roof collapsed, not a tower or even a moderately comparable structure. It is a ridiculous comparison, but if that's the best he can come up with, ok collapsed after only 30 minutes of an ordinary fire in Chicago. No physical damage. No jet fuel. Just an ordinary fire softened the steel to the point of structural collapse. The real fact still remains, NO STEEL AND CONCRETE SKYSCRAPER HAS TOTALLY COLLAPSED DUE TO FIRE, EVER UNTIL THREE DID ON 9/11 when three did (he somehow manages to NOT include WTC building 7 in the entire article which is of major concern to most people who question 9/11) And that steel was not carrying the load of 110 floors above it And neither was the steel floor joists of the towers, the 47 massive core columns, some measuring four feet wide, WERE. A dozen other fires in steel buildings have also collapsed floors because the steel softened and buckled. Guess it would be to much to list all dozen he is referring to? The Hotel Windsor oh heres one lost its entire upper half in a fire. Clearly, the temperature of an ordinary fire can make a steel structure fail.

This is very important to follow closely since he brought up the Windsor: Pay attention The Windsor Hotel was a different type of structure completely, steel reinforced concrete construction (that means concrete poured around re bar columns etc.) the WTC buildings were steel structures (wide flange beams and massive steel box columns, some as wide as four feet with steel as thick as five inches), the intense Windsor fire burned for almost an entire day and still only the top third, which was completely engulfed in intense flames, gradually and partially collapsed around it's core.

In steel structures, heat is conducted into the larger structure, so the steel remains lower than the fire temperature. In concrete fire causes spalling (flaking or crumbling). This is because concrete has a low percentage of latent moisture which fire converts to steam by the heat. Large fires eventually erode the concrete and a structure can collapse. The heat does not have to be nearly as high and extended as it does to weaken steel beams.

From: http://911research.wtc7.net/...

Of the Windsor "The portion of the building that collapsed consisted of the outer portions of floor slabs and perimeter walls throughout the upper third of the building (the 21st through 32nd floors). The outer walls consisted of steel box columns arranged on 1.8 meter centers and connected by narrow spandrel plates. The columns had square cross-sections 120mm on a side, and were fabricated of C-sections 7mm thick welded together. (these were a fraction of the dimensions, and spaced about twice as far apart as the perimeter columns of the Twin Towers.) The perimeter columns lacked fireproofing throughout the upper third of the Windsor building"

Also, the Windsor building, only gradually and partially collapsed (top third outer portion) after many hours of the top 10 or so floors being totally engulfed in fire.

But, of course, the WTC towers did not collapse from fire alone, but from the severe physical damage of a 140-ton aircraft traveling at 540 mph shredding the support structures, shredding structures is extremely misleading... what did shred was the aircraft and a small portion of the exterior wall lattice not to mention the weight of the planes themselves. Incredible temperatures resulted from approximately 30,000 kilograms of jet fuel. most of which was observed burning off outside both buildings at the time of impact in the form of massive fireballs ejecting outside the buildings

But the fireball itself was an enormous, cataclysmic bomb (whatch out, the B word), shattering (complete assumption to state shattering) the building's interior. Very misleading statement and assumption as the reports admit, very little is actually known about the damage inflicted in the interior, particularly the core areas. How did the commission deal with this? By implying the towers cores were weak and flimsy which is completely false. As already mentioned, the 47 ( in each building) core columns were massive, as large as four feet (visualize steel box columns the size of a soda machine, times 47) and in between these massive columns were the many dense elevator shafts

They ignore how this fantastic bomb of jet fuel damaged the building. (Uh oh, the B word is used again, but since he keeps using it; the official theory actually implies that the planes basically disintegrated on impact, because speeding hollow aluminum tubes would not likely fare well against hardened structural steel (physics) and that, at best the jet fuel bomb blew the fireproofing off steel in the impact area).

Now how one is to believe that some of the jet fuel was exempted from the initial fireball and hung around to burn slowly is beyond me, one of the many things that do not make sense. It seems logical that if jet fuel is ignited, it all is going to explode or burn right then, not some now and some later. This is kerosene in the open (from an crashing, exploding fuel tank) not kerosene burning on a wick or controlled some way. How could jet fuel survive an exploding fuel tank, land in the building while a fireball is blasting through it and last to burn slowly? Some may have pooled, but it couldnt have been much. I contend that a good portion of the jet fuel was burned off in the explosion, at impact.

During the ensuing fire, the expansion of steel in 1,500 degree fires Misleading statement, first of all, the fires likely never reach much past 650 degrees based on test fires conducted for car parking garages (carbon based fire just doesnt burn that hot) Iron workers have to use acetylene torches, bottled oxygen, forced air, etc. to reach higher temperatures to weaken steel. Steel melts at 2800 degrees F, by the way. At 1022 degrees F structural steel retains 60% strength of normal temperatures. Since structural design engineers over design structures to be capable of bearing five times the maximum load for static loads, 60% reduction in strength would still support three times the rated load. distorted the building and sheared off bolts and connectors total speculation, as the steel expanded, buckled and warped ignoring the fact of the 47 core columns, of course the commission report ignored them as well. Later, a "fuel air bomb" gees from jet fuel leaking down the elevator shaft shook the entire structure So jet fuel leaking down an elevator shaft (very long elevator shafts, but few of which travel the entire height of the buildings) caused some sort of secondary explosion? Is that what he is implying? I suspect this is an attempt to explain the many reports, by firefighter and others, of multiple explosions within the towers during the attacks.

Something else the author fails to mention here (an appropriate place to bring it up) is how ignored testimony from 20 year WTC employee William Rodriguez states that there was a massive explosion in the sub-basement BEFORE the first plane struck. His testimony before the commission was behind closed doors and was not included in the 9/11 report, like many others. He was recognized and met the President for saving many people that day.

Sixth, conspiracy mongers let's use that on again engage in pure science fiction about whether the WTC buildings should have collapsed as they did. Such calculations are meaningless because we can never know the actual circumstances: What was the temperature inside? Did he not just state 1500 degrees? This would be almost laughable if it werent so serious We will never know. Was there substandard construction material? Well lets just see, Underwriters Laboratories (the organization that certifies such things, weve all seen the labels) employee Kevin Ryan was fired from UL for writing the following to the NIST investigating the cause of the collapses:

"We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F Remember, he lost his job for making these points."

Was the construction perfect? What kind of question is this?

Was there corrosion from the salt air of the ocean during 35 years? In a totally enclosed structure? This is reaching.

Was the architectural design as good as the architects thought? Apparently. But why not speculate some more.

All such calculations are pure science fiction because there are a hundred variables we can never know. The mythmakers ignore the structural damage from the 1993 bombing. New label to add to the name calling

A bomb that could have been prevented because the US had agents handling the terrorists to the point that an FBI supervisor did not take the opportunity to substitute fake ingredients, a suggestion from the informant he was handling by the way. That informant recorded his conversations with his FBI handler and it came out at the trial. This is totally public information.

Islamic terrorists had calculated that their truck bomb in the basement garage would bring down the Twin Towers completely. The towers stood, but with what damage? At any rate, is the author privy to some information about substandard repair work after the 93 attack? He sites no source. The buildings were supposedly repaired to better than before condition. Whats he saying? Those in charge of insuring building safety are accomplices?

Similarly, the mythmakers He's determined claim that the towers fell at the same rate as objects in free fall. Actually, the towers fell in a span of between 12 and 20 seconds, Actually, you can time them yourself and see they were completely ("dissolved" is more like it) in a little more that 10 second each, inputting a number like 20 seconds is wishful thinking whereas free fall is 9.22 seconds. Dr. Frank Greening's exhaustive paper demonstrates brilliantly that the Twin Towers collapse is entirely explainable from gravity alone. Furthermore, how the government can make buildings fall faster (consistent with the news footage) is never well explained that would be the thermate cutter charge theory (isn't that what the whole discussion is about here? The author himself talks about Fetzer and Jones believing that controlled demolition was used), which in effect would have remove all resistance of 47 core columns and other important pieces... 110 floors of concrete, steel joists, re bar, office machines, furniture, ductwork, piping, wiring, people, etc. The towers did not fall through air or a vacuum .

Seventh, engineers at the Pentagon measured the hole from Flight 77 at 90 feet wide. Yet the fiction-peddlers big surprise claim that the hole was only 16 feet wide, based on a French author who apparently has never visited the United States. Conspiracy peddlers argue that a Boeing 757 would have made a hole wider than 16 feet. It did. Yet vast arguments, websites, books and careers are based on the hole being only 16 feet, instead of the actual 90 feet 90 feet would probably be accurate for the gap left AFTER the outer wall collapsed. However, I have looked at photos of the pentagon wall where firefighters first responded and honestly I even have a hard time finding any hole because of all the black soot, smoke, people fighting the fire etc. around and close to the impact area. The author of course fails to point this out, the fact that initially the pentagon outer wall was intact for sometime before the wall collapsed. The pictures you always see in the mainstream is after the collapse.

Regardless, with a little searching on the web, anyone can find the pictures of the attack before the outer wall collapsed and there is not much of a hole (any actual measurement given is a guess) but it is undenialbly not very big considering what was supposed to have hit it. Also worth noting is that the two giant engines from a 757 would have had the best chance of inflicting a great deal of noticeable damage on the façade of the Pentagon, but this type of damage or anything resembling a 757 engine is absent from the early, pre-collapse photos.

Eighth, other mythmakers Just to be clear, let's remember who was being questioned last week when some NORAD recordings were released - all of the sudden the Pentagon is being pointed at by the 9/11 commissioners for deception in there statements about 9/11???? I suspect there will likely be more of this happening in the future. point to lists of victims on each flight. They claim that the hijackers are missing from the passenger manifests, which proves that the government slipped the hijackers past security gates This statement is put at the end of a true statement. Who has said that "the government slipped the hijackers past security gates, I have never heard or read this". But lists of victims obviously do not include the murderers who killed them. They also do not show up on the one Autopsy list of bodies from the pentagon crash obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. This autopsy shows that nearly all remains from flight 77 were identified.

Ninth, the 9/11 conspiracy peddlers Oh boy, at what point does this give his intentions away? all contradict each other. Collectively, they will claim that there is "overwhelming evidence" against the official explanation of 9/11 generalization, but somewhat true. However, what is overwhelming is a mish-mash of contradictory and mutually exclusive scenarios. Each of the conspiracy peddlers proves the others wrong Not sure this would matter if it were true.. Moreover, the conspiracy theories keep changing Care to give any examples?. When confronted by the falsehoods and contradictions, they simply change their story examples?. This proves that they are not seeking the truth, but any excuse to bash Bush. Ok?

In general, conspiracy theorists point to elements of the official explanation they find hard to believe true but then adopt infinitely less believable, preposterous scenarios not true, in general . Their scenarios do not answer their own questions any better than the official explanation irrelevant but not necessarily true. Most truth seekers can point to the fact that there are so many questions left unanswered, this was the job of a not-so independent commission, remember, not that of the public. (or even as well). These activists are simply intent on bending the truth, not finding it, to bash George Bush. Has nothing to do with it for most. Some people will politicize anything and 9/11 is no different, as the author proves with his last four words. I voted for Bush both times.

Most people questioning the official story of 9/11 (a number that is getting too large to ignore now) do so because the story given doesn't add up to what has been seen and said (that includes liberal Bush haters as well as true conservatives). Add to that the sad fact of history; governments including our own have consistently proven themselves to be untrustworthy. Why this would surprise anyone is beyond me. This is a representative republic and the people are to hold their government accountable. Thats the point of our countrys original system. It is our responsibility to question. In the case of 9/11, the importance of being sure, 100% of what happened, who failed, who benefited, who had the means etc. is paramount. We began a war on terror that is likely to extend beyond our lifetime and we are now told to live according to a doctrine of fear from now on, all the while trusting an evermore powerful domestic government to oversee our safety at all costs, even essential liberties thus we are reminded daily that 9/11 changed everything. If we are going to operate like that we should have been 100% correct and sure before going down that road, but unfortunately the facts have pointed to the contrary.

blog.myspace.com/troyperkins
www.myspace.com/troyperkins