Huffington Post Pulls Ventura 9/11 Article Shortly After Posting

Shortly after this Huffington Post article written by Jessie Ventura was posted, it was removed and replaced. Below is the original article that was removed. Reason given? They don't do "conspiracy theories".

""...this morning, Jesse had a front-page piece on 9/11 up at Huff Post: a front-page piece that quickly slipped off that front page — and then completely disappeared."-Infowars.com

Read the rest at: Infowars.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Huffington Post/Jesse Ventura – Article #2 (”American Conspiracies”)

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON SEPTEMBER 11TH?

You didn’t see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11.
That’s right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy – because they don’t buy the government’s version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible – or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the Twin Towers and Building 7.

Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, put it like this: “The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers’ destruction.” He’s especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 447 stories came down in “pure free-fall acceleration” that afternoon – even though it was never hit by an aircraft.

This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies , published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows:

Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour.
Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don’t claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy’s underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a “gravity driven collapse” without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there’s the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn’t have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn’t mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We’re talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal , in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here’s what the paper’s lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen’s chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he’s convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7:

“Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel.” [i]

Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: “Once you get to the science, it’s indisputable.”

Read the Entire Infowars Article

ABC Interviews Loose Change

This interview was filmed at the Treason In America conference on March 6th, 2010. ABC News interviews the creators of possibly the most well-known documentary about 9/11, Loose Change. Dylan Avery and Korey Rowe thoroughly impressed me with how well they fielded these, as Avery puts it, "loaded questions". I am sure they have had a lot of practice fielding questions. Loose Change is hugely popular on the internet. In fact, it is one of the most viewed videos of all time on Google Videos.

Loose Change has indeed gone viral and back with over millions of views on YouTube.  There are 3 versions if I am not mistaken,. The most recent version is titled Loose Change: An American Coup (09/09). I think Dylan and Korey set a positive example of how people should be responding to these kinds of questions about 9/11. I am looking forward to seeing what ABC does with it. It's a good thing we get to see these full videos. I would be surprised if they (ABC) kept it honest.

Washington's Blog Lists 9/11 Truth Supporters You May Not Expect

Great new post from Washington's Blog:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Proof that 9/11 Truthers Are Dangerous

Most Americans don't know what kind of people 9/11 truthers really are. So they can't figure out whether or not they are dangerous.
Below is a list of people who question what our Government has said about 9/11.
The list proves - once and for all - that people who question 9/11 are dangerous.

Email this list to everyone you know, to prove to them that 9/11 truthers are all dangerous nut cases.
Senior intelligence officers:

• Former military analyst and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is "far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers". He also said that the government is ordering the media to cover up her allegations about 9/11. And he said that some of the claims concerning government involvement in 9/11 are credible, that "very serious questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how much involvement there might have been", that engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or psychologically beyond the scope of the current administration, and that there's enough evidence to justify a new, "hard-hitting" investigation into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony taken under oath (see this and this).

• A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials (Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job.

• A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis (William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. ... All three [buildings that were destroyed in the World Trade Center] were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11." (and see this).

• A number of intelligence officials, including a CIA Operations Officer who co-chaired a CIA multi-agency task force coordinating intelligence efforts among many intelligence and law enforcement agencies (Lynne Larkin) sent a joint letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation (they were ignored)

• 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former CIA clandestine services case officer (David Steele) stated that "9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war", and it was probably an inside job (scroll down to Customer Review dated October 7, 2006).

• A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called "perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture Syriana (Robert Baer) said that "the evidence points at" 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job

• The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup."

• Professor of History and International Relations, University of Maryland. Former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National Security Agency, former military attaché in China, with a 21-year career in U.S. Army Intelligence (Major John M. Newman, PhD, U.S. Army) questions the government's version of the events of 9/11.

Congressmen:

• According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here)

• Current Democratic U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy said "The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush's watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?"

• Current Republican Congressman Ron Paul calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that "we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on"

• Current Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich hints that we aren't being told the truth about 9/11

• Current Republican Congressman Jason Chafetz says that we need to be vigilant and continue to investigate 9/11

• Former Democratic Senator Mike Gravel states that he supports a new 9/11 investigation and that we don't know the truth about 9/11

• Former Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee endorses a new 9/11 investigation

• Former U.S. Democratic Congressman Dan Hamburg says that the U.S. government "assisted" in the 9/11 attacks, stating that "I think there was a lot of help from the inside"

• Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job

9/11 Commissioners:

• The Commission's co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)

• 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue

• 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"
  

• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up"
  

• 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."

• And the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) - who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry - recently said "At some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is not spin. This is not true."

Other government officials:

• U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time."

• Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter (Morton Goulder), former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a who's who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11

• Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence."

• The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility

• President of the U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board, who also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, and who was awarded Distinguished Flying Crosses for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals (Lt. Col. Jeff Latas) is a member of a group which doubts the government's version of 9/11

• Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog that doesn't hunt"

• The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission

• Director of the U.S. "Star Wars" space defense program in both Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force colonel who flew 101 combat missions (Col. Robert Bowman) stated: "If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an old interceptor pilot—I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were, and I know what they’ve changed them to—if our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!"

Numerous other politicians, judges, legal scholars, and attorneys also question at least some aspects of the government's version of 9/11."

9/11 Eyewitness - Top Documentary

Thanks to Top Documentary Films, I came across this: "Best Historical Documentary 2007 - New York International Independent Film Festival" winner that I had not seen about 9/11. This is another excellent and rare set of footage due to the quality, angle, transcript and calls of the news report. This video is another very tastefully presented addition to the pieces of evidence we have available to us of the WTC tragedies. Like the last few of these posted, I highly recommend that everyone see this.

"And there was just a hole and black smoke. It just looked like a cigar standing up on end with burning tip and black smoke. Which again, why black smoke? It’s ready to go out. And then it went on and the building was just burning away and it wasn’t too exciting until all of the sudden it’s disappearing and there was no real sign, there was no sign that this was going to go down because of all the black smoke. And the black smoke is really indicative that the fire is out.

Local news radio coverage was recorded by the on-camera microphone while Rick Siegel videotaped the events of 9/11 from the Hoboken pier. Scientific analysis is presented in an easy to understand manner. The pictures tell the story and this is one story that all New Yorkers, and anyone who was traumatized by the shocking attack on the WTC, must see. In memory of all those who perished, 911 Eyewitness is a voice of the victims that must never be forgotten.

This powerful documentary features eyewitness testimony and scientific analysis of the collapse of the Twin Towers and Seven World Trade. The American Public and American Republic have been betrayed and now it’s time to learn the truth and share it with your skeptical friends. (Excerpt from 911eyewitness.com)"

Click here to see this documentary now. You can download it at the link above. Part 1 appears to be a combination of part 2 and 3. Not sure what is going on there because when I checked on 2 and 3 they appeared to be shorter versions of what was in Part One. If anyone else notices differently, please post a comment and let me know. Thanks.

National Security Alert - 9/11 Documentary. MUST SEE

"In 2006 Citizen Investigation Team launched an independent investigation into the act of terrorism which took place at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

This exhaustive three-year inquest involved multiple trips to the scene of the crime in Arlington, Virginia, close scrutiny of all official and unofficial data related to the event, and, most importantly, first-person interviews with dozens of eyewitnesses, many of which were conducted and filmed in the exact locations from which they witnessed the plane that allegedly struck the building that day.

Be forewarned: Our findings are extraordinarily shocking and frightening. They are also deadly serious, and deserving of your immediate attention. This is not about a conspiracy theory or any theory at all.

This is about independent, verifiable evidence which unfortunately happens to conclusively establish as a historical fact that the violence which took place in Arlington that day was not the result of a surprise attack by suicide hijackers, but rather a false flag “black operation” involving a carefully planned and skillfully executed deception." (Excerpt from citizeninvestigationteam.com)

 This is another MUST SEE documentary that shows that there are some serious discrepancies between the "official reports" and what credible eyewitnesses claim took place on September 11, 2001. The flight path described by these witnesses of the plane said to have hit The Pentagon do not match the south flight path described in the official story. In fact, several police officers and at least 12 other witnesses independently point out that they saw the plane coming from the north, not the south and in great detail. They stand by their statements but are forbidden by superiors to discuss 9/11 anymore. These witnesses saw the plane at a close distance.  This was not a matter of a change of path causing confusion. There was not time for that in the flight paths described and drawn by the witnesses at that point in the flight. The south path is where there was evidence of damage to the light posts and a taxi cab, so it is even more odd that this path is not corroborated by these witnesses.

What caused that damage to those light posts if these witnesses claim to have seen the plane coming from a different direction? Did all 13 of these people who work in this area every day get it wrong, but all report almost exactly the same path? If a person saw something like this, I would assume it would be unlikely they would not remember where they saw a plane traveling that low. The statements made by "Lloyd - The cab driver" are very revealing and suggest that he is either unsure of what happened or he is being dishonest. The latter seems more likely considering what he was willing to say when he wasn't aware that he was being recorded. You should see it for yourself. This was a fair and tastefully produced documentary. I highly recommend that everyone watch this and will continue to examine the events surrounding the Pentagon and all events that took place on 9/11/01.

$7 Gas Prices to Meet Obama's CO2 Emissions Cut - That Should Do It...

Again, no surprises here. I am hoping this is a generous estimate.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
March 2, 2010, 6:35 pm

Fuel Taxes Must Rise, Harvard Researchers Say

By SINDYA N. BHANOO

"To meet the Obama administration’s targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, some researchers say, Americans may have to experience a sobering reality: gas at $7 a gallon.
To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, the cost of driving must simply increase, according to a forthcoming report by researchers at Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.
The 14 percent target was set in the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget for fiscal 2010.
In their study, the researchers devised several combinations of steps that United States policymakers might take in trying to address the heat-trapping emissions by the nation’s transportation sector, which consume 70 percent of the oil used in the United States.
Most of their models assumed an economy-wide carbon dioxide tax starting at $30 a ton in 2010 and escalating to $60 a ton in 2030. In some cases researchers also factored in tax credits for electric and hybrid vehicles, taxes on fuel or both.
In the modeling, it turned out that issuing tax credits could backfire, while taxes on fuel proved beneficial.
“Tax credits don’t address how much people use their cars,” said Ross Morrow, one of the report’s authors. “In reverse, they can make people drive more.”
Dr. Morrow, formerly a fellow at the Belfer Center, is a professor of mechanical engineering and economics at Iowa State University
Researchers said that vehicle miles traveled will increase by more than 30 percent between 2010 and 2030 unless policymakers increase fuel taxes."

SOURCE: NY TIMES/ DOT EARTH

9/11 Documentaries + New Press Conference by Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth

I haven't posted as often or as much as I normally do. I have been busy watching documentaries, reading, and living life offline. I have seen some interesting things and will post links to all of them at the end of this post. First off, I have watched a few more 9/11 documentaries because I like to know what is being presented to the public and even if I don't agree with what I see, I don't want to ignore it. I will go into more detail later about what I believe, what I don't believe, and what I am unsure of. I absolutely think that the 9/11 "official story" is severely inadequate, as several recent posts should have made clear.

I tend to be passionate about this because the media and people who seem to have done little to no research are so quick to assume that anyone who doubts the official story is a kook, crazy, dangerous, nasty, terrorists, conspiracy theorists and those are just some of the polite words that have been used by mainstream media to describe - not only the 9/11 Truth Movement - but anyone who admits that they doubt the official story. Survivors and families of victims are not immune to this cruel and ignorant personal attacks. They have been invited to come tell their sad but loving stories about their lost loved ones and have been turned on once they are filming and called conspiracy theorists. Despicable. If the media says it is so - it must be true, right? Very wrong. That is an ignorant way of thinking, but chances are that if you are reading this you already know that.

Let's not forget the credentials of those who've made themselves known for doubting this "official story": Families of victims, survivors, veterans, architects and engineers, pilots, scholars, congressmen, teachers, religious leaders, police and firemen, and thousands of others who feel they have good reasons to question the events of that day. As I have said before, there are at least 40 valid questions that the official story fails to properly address or explain and that is a very polite way of putting it.

The is so much evidence of a controlled demolition with the evidence of nano-thermite at ground zero, I don't understand how it can be denied that explosives were used. It is not a commercial grade explosive. It is manufactured and used by the military. Yet, some people still have the nerve to ignore this important issue. People are either not being honest with themselves, are unknowingly brainwashed, uninformed, and/or remain willfully ignorant. It's the only logical conclusion I can come to for considering that important group of people crazy for such an innocent reason.

Most of these truth-seeking individuals just want an independent investigation with hopes that those whom are responsible will be held accountable. That should not be considered crazy or unpatriotic. If you think it is, then in my opinion, you may consider turning off your television and actually try to investigate the other side a little more.

Documentaries? Here is a link to at least 28 Documentaries about 9/11. Yes, 28. I have not seen them all yet but I plan to give them all a look. The worst one I have seen yet was a ridiculous, disappointing, insulting smear campaign brought to you by The History Channel. 9/11 Conspiracy: Fact/Fiction was by far the worst and most disrespectful documentary I have seen on the subject thus far.

These are the documentaries that I have watched most recently and recommend:
9/11 Mysteries - Excellent Important Documentary


Blueprint for Truth: Architecture of Destruction (Excellent Evidence From Architects&Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Core of Corruption: In The Shadows - More About Terrorist Evidence and Odd Intelligence Failures

9/11 Press For Truth - (Families Are Still Searching For Answers)

Most Recent:
Press Conference: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth in San Francisco, CA on Feb 19, 2010.
As of today when I counted 8,400 people have signed their petition for a new independent investigation. This is progress.