9/11: So, You Don’t Believe The Government?

Ziad Jarrah and Mohamed Atta. Happy-go-lucky Terrorists or NWO dupes? The 9/11 Commission conveniently left out the fact that Atta had himself an American girlfriend, drank and enjoyed doing lines of coke. He also partied in Las Vegas — maybe that Pakistan Intelligence (ISI) General was too free with the CIA dough? The 9/11 Commission let the public go on believing he was some kind of Muslim fanatic that hated “American Freedoms” too much. We’re told this video (frame above) was found in a Al-Qaeda stronghold in Afghanistan by US forces. How convenient.

So, you don’t believe the US government, INCOG MAN?

Yeah, that’s a real good guess, Sherlock. No, I sure as hell don’t. There’s way too many questions that have come up since that infamous day. It doesn’t add up right. Oh, I know any historic event has a few “anomalies.” But this is not just some Grassy Knoll thing. Not at all. For one thing, the physical evidence is enormous. There’s quite a few things that have not been adequately explained by any of the pro-government “theory” crowd: The Bush Insider and Jew Philip Zelikow-run 9/11 Commission, some hobbyist magazine or the so-called experts trotted out by companies with big government contracts.

Many issues have been obviously ignored and for reasons we can only guess at. Let’s take, for example, the issue of the 80 or so security camera videos around the Pentagon, that day. All are now classified by the FBI. Oh sure, five frames from one were released but hardly showed anything except a big explosion. The question I have — is why are these videos even classified? The explanation, sometimes given, is of issues of copyright; kinda like what happened with the Kennedy Zapruder film. Say what? Yes, that’s what they’ll say. Like that’s something that should make one whit of difference!

Now, I’m not saying some kind of weird missile hit the Pentagon, at all. As far as I know, it was a American Airlines passenger plane, for real. The point I’m trying to make, is why the hell don’t they release the dam videos? That’s it!

I love it whenever you question any one lousy thing about 9/11. Immediately, people will say something like: “Then you must believe all the people on those planes are still alive someplace?” Like, I’m trying to put forth the stupid idea that all those people are alive at some kind of governmental Fantasy Island location! “Look Boss, De Plane, De Plane, De Flight 93!”

Now, I don’t want to get into all the questionable things that day– that’s enough for more than a post. Hell, whole books are out there now. One excellent book is David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 911 Debunking. Griffin seriously demolishes the Popular Mechanic’s efforts to explain away only some of the evidence.

See, that’s the thing. They select only some of the what’s out there and expect the casual American not to know anything about all the rest. Like they did on the History Channel’s (Global Zionist-owned) debunking documentary. There’s all kinds of questionable events that happened that day and many of the real tough ones are being patently ignored by those with possible vested interests in the status quo — like Jews.

One famous issue is the World Trade Center 7 building collapse. Sometimes called the “The Smoking Gun of 9/11″ and for dam good reason. Here’s a day when three entire skyscrapers collapsed due to fire (and some unknown amount of impact damage for the first two), when no building ever has done so –anywhere! Now, I know that everybody has seen those big jets careening into WTC 1 & 2, blowing up and all, and it sure does look like enough serious damage was done to them (more on this in minute). But what about WTC 7 which was never even struck by a plane and only “collapsed” hours later?

They’ve explained all this away as due to damage caused by debris falling from the WTC 1 & 2, fires fueled by the kerosene fuel stored for generators, even internal electrical transformers exploding (total BS). All this weakened the structural steel and combined with a guessed at 25% of the building destroyed by the falling debris, caused a perfectly symmetrical collapse into the building’s general footprint.

Now, one of things about this story that doesn’t add up (among many) is the fire temperatures required to weaken or melt steel. And this also goes for the fire damage said to have been the main reason for the first two tower collapses.

This is a “hot” topic to the whole 9/11 thing and has been endlessly debated. Here’s the basic questions: Steel has a melting point of 2,750° (F). Diffuse, open-air fires, of any sort, can only reach temperatures of 1,200° maximum, but usually are much, much lower (in the 700° to 1000° range). Think about a butane gas stove or a space heater in your home. Do temperatures ever climb high enough to melt any parts or even turn them close to red? How about that steel grill in gas barbeque outside on the deck? Can you imagine the heat ever getting anywhere like blast furnace conditions and weakening the steel grate? Even turning cherry-red?

Sometimes fires can hit 1,800°, but only extremely briefly in something called a “flash-over.” That’s when conditions happen to be just right, when a combustible fuel –- like kerosene jet fuel –- is mixed with oxygen in the air in a fairly precise way. Think of the movie Backdraft. It’s a fast, explosive burning of fuel and only lasts, at most, a few seconds. Far too short to transfer enough heat to cause steel to buckle.

The First Interstate Bank Building burned fiercely for hours in 1988 and stayed upright.

Now, one of the main questions is at what temperature does the structural steel lose enough strength to fall down on the job. It doesn’t even start to get red hot until well over 1500°. Some say it loses 50% of it’s strength at 1200° to 1500°. However, structural engineering tests done in England well before 9/11, said otherwise. It said it doesn’t lose ANY strength whatsover until it goes well past 1800°. And you have to remember that no building has ever collapsed due to fires in the first place — anywhere, like EVER. Buildings have burned for hours on-end and still remained standing. Another thing to keep in mind is that the steel we’re talking about is extremely thick (2 inches), giant structural steel I-beams clad in protective cement (in the major support columns).

Then there’s the curious thing with some of the steel found in the debris pile, afterwards. Many of the workers clearing the scene weeks and months later, noticed that some parts of the steel were glowing red hot. Now for that to occur, they would have to have had blast furnace-like conditions within the debris pile. This is all explained away by saying that all the stuff in the towers; the papers, carpeting, the computer plastics, the sulphur from the gypsum board, etc. etc., all combined in some weird, exotic, new way to create the high temperatures that matched the steel mills we once had in this country:

Some of the witnesses spoke specifically of steel beams. Charlie Vitchers, a construction superintendent said, “There were cherry-red pieces of steel sticking out of the ground. It was almost like being in a steel manufacturing plant,”

– P. 182, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, David Ray Griffin

Yeah. Like I’m going to believe some cornucopia of office and building materials in some giant cement dust slag heap are going to do all this? Right.

Also, this steel debris was carefully guarded (one truck driver was even fired for taking an unauthorized break) and then quickly bundled off to some Asian scrap metal plant and very little of it was scientifically examined. One engineering school (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) that did manage to examine some of the steel from WTC 7 and said it was full of strange holes and had signs of being exposed to welding-like temperatures.

And another thing about 9/11 bothers me. Here’s two jets, generally built with light-weight alloys, causing so much damage to the 47 heavy-duty, structural steel support columns deep inside World Trade Centers 1 & 2. The jets only have a hard titanium spar in the engine mounts (two) and in the narrow keel section running the length of the plane. And I do know that the planes were traveling in excess of 400 miles an hour, but they would have been slowed down quite a bit, losing tons of energy just in hitting the outside of the buildings first. Remember that the outside box columns to WTC 1 & 2 were dam strong, too.

I just can’t see how the planes would have cut through enough of those inner core structural columns — on two different buildings, no less — to cause the collapses in pretty much a symetrical fashion and so soon after the planes hit. I know the explosions looked spectacular, but logically that’s it!

And then there’s the time it took for them to collapse. Nearly at the speed of gravity (only a few seconds longer). Just like there was barely anything at all below the collapsing mass, which you would normally expect to have some kind of slowing effect. All the supporting structure just seems to disappear, even though the steel columns are much thicker and thicker as you go down. Those two towers seem to explode downwards — pretty much like a reverse demolition job.

They blew this thing “up” – but in the opposite direction from how they usually demolish buildings. They only had to place a few cutting charges (Thermate) in strategic locations and even less conventional explosives to start the ball rolling. This was the real brainstorm in creating the ”shock and awe” that inflamed America, as well as removing a costly real estate problem.

No, I just don’t buy the whole thing. Something is just not right here, across the board, my friend. “Well then, Mr. Nazi, I guess you must think that hundreds of co-conspirators labored secretly, wiring the place with miniature nuclear bombs, in the all the elevator shafts?!”

Not at all. I do know they do have all kinds of high-tech explosives out there that we just don’t have a clue about. Explosives, or high speed burning substances (like Thermate), that can generate heat in the thousands of degrees, instantly, and can cut through steel like a hot razor blade through butter. Plus, they have low-flash, high explosives that generate huge pressures and can be directed. Like at the entrance of a caves to blast inwards, destroying evil Taliban deep within.

What, do I gotta be some kind of demo expert to even question any of it?

And I know that they don’t necessarily have to run any miles of wiring, either. They always say that, to make it sound ridiculous. We have plenty of sophisticated remote control technology out there. So no, I don’t buy the come-back about how impossible such a thing had to have been, at all. It also appears that WTC 7 was a foul-up of some sort. Like they wanted to bring it down when the other towers were destroyed, but had some kind of delay. To prevent any later discovery, they had to ”pull it” as the owner Larry Silverstein famously said.

Remember that old Pentagon mantra, a little while back, for any of our military excursions? Every-time we were going to blow the living shit out of some AIPAC enemy, our military brass would threaten to bring down ”Shock and Awe.” I think that’s what was done to us on that day. It was “Shock and Awe,” but this time it was on the American public — that’s the real thing behind what most Americans don’t want to believe happened at all.

– Phillip Marlowe

ZERO: An Investigation into 9/11. On the steel structure and evidence, part 2 of 10 (10:50).

Patriots Question 911