Well, Professor, if the powers that be within the U.S. Government actually killed 3,000 fellow Americans, wouldn't it be logical for them to kill an additional 75 academics to keep the atrocity quiet?
Sleep tight ..... or with the fishes.
Posted on 09/06/2006 7:45:51 AM PDT by Vasilli22
Fury as academics claim 9/11 was 'inside job' by JAYA NARAIN
The 9/11 terrorist attack on America which left almost 3,000 people dead was an "inside job", according to a group of leading academics.
Around 75 top professors and leading scientists believe the attacks were puppeteered by war mongers in the White House to justify the invasion and the occupation of oil-rich Arab countries.
The claims have caused outrage and anger in the US which marks the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on Monday.
But leading scientists say the facts of their investigations cannot be ignored and say they have evidence that points to one of the biggest conspiracies ever perpetrated.
Professor Steven Jones, who lectures in physics at the Brigham Young University in Utah, says the official version of events is the biggest and most evil cover up in history.
He has joined the 9/11 Scholars for Truth whose membership includes up to 75 leading scientists and experts from universities across the US.
Prof Jones said: "We don't believe that 19 hijackers and a few others in a cave in Afghanistan pulled this off acting alone.
"We challenge this official conspiracy theory and, by God, we're going to get to the bottom of this."
In essays and journals, the scientists are giving credence to many of the conspiracy theories that have circulated on the internet in the past five years.
They believe a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century, set on US world dominance, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran.
The group says scientific evidence over the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon is conclusive proof.
Professor Jones said it was impossible for the twin towers to have collapsed in the way they did from the collision of two aeroplanes.
He maintains jet fuel does not burn at temperatures high enough to melt steel beams and claims horizontal puffs of smoke seen during the collapse of the towers are indicative of controlled explosions used to bring down the towers.
The group also maintains World Trade Centre 7 - a neighbouring building which caught fire and collapsed later in the day - was only partially damaged but had to be destroyed because it housed a clandestine CIA station.
Professor James Fetzer, 65, a retired philosopher of science at the University of Minnesota, said: "The evidence is so overwhelming, but most Americans don't have time to take a look at this."
The 9/11 Commission dismissed the numerous conspiracy theories after its exhaustive investigation into the terror attacks.
Subsequent examinations of the towers' structure have sought to prove they were significantly weakened by the impact which tore off fire retardant materials and led the steel beams bending under heat and then collapsing.
Christopher Pyle, professor of constitutional law at Mt Holyoake College in Massachusetts, has dismissed the academic group.
He said: "To plant bombs in three buildings with enough bomb materials and wiring? It's too huge a project and would require far too many people to keep it a secret afterwards.
"After every major crisis, like the assassinations of JFK or Martin Luther King, we've had conspiracy theorists who come up with plausible scenarios for gullible people. It's a waste of time."
But University of Wisconsin assistant professor, Kevin Barrett, said experts are unwilling to believe theories which don't fit into their belief systems.
He said: "People will disregard evidence it if causes their faith to be shattered. I think we were all shocked. And then, when the voice of authority told us what happened, we just believed it."
As the fifth anniversary approached, the 9/11 Scholars for Truth is urging Congress to reopen the investigation claiming they have amassed a wealth of scientific evidence to prove their version of the terror attacks.
Good points! Again, I lived in Battery Park City (just across the street) for several years. You are right; the towers were huge - high, and "thick." The street between the towers and 7 was indeed just a crevice, as other pictures have shown.
Being on the 100th floor gave the same view as you'd get from an airplane after takeoff. There were days when "fog" obscured the tops of the towers. But it wasn't fog so much as a cloud!
These people are absolute kooks. What on Earth has happened to create this many absolute fools?
oh, BS!
I SAW it happen!!!!!
I watched it live... As people plummeted to the ground. I watch as the second plane hit, a huge fireball of exploding jet fuel. I watched as the fires raged out of control. I watched as a concerned president was told the news that we were at war. I watched as the reports came in live from the Pentagon. I watched the smoke and fire billowing from the heliport entrance. I watched as the towers fell, and people ran for their lives, those not dead or dying already.
I didn't then and don't now need an EXPERT to tell me what happened that day. I certainly don't need an anti-American lying "academic" telling me what I saw didn't happen.
They're taking a $hit on America and the 9/11 victims, and are now trying to rub our noses in it
A leading scientist is defined in the article as a lecturer in physics and/or assistant professor. This is a caricature of itself. I kept looking to see if it was Scrappleface.
It was the Joooooooooooooooooooooooos!!!
ping!
You had to go and say "bombings", didn't you? ("See! See! This guy worked there for ten years and admits that planes weren't responsible!")
Seriously though, it does seem that the more absurd beliefs require a near-total absence of familiarity with the area. It's like they watched the whole thing on a 10-inch TV and concluded that the collapses weren't that violent or even very messy.
"Fires, what fires? That's just some smoke. The jet fuel would have burned off immediately, I read where some professor said that. And #7, why, it survived the controlled demolitions of the towers and came out practically unscathed. Just look at this picture here of a tiny section of the back of #7, you can clearly see a few floors of it sticking up over the buildings behind it, and those few floors look perfectly fine to me!"
/idiocy
Now ArlKay OveRay and the elders of 'you know who' are going to take away by Jewish Banking conspiracy membership/ATM card.
Thanks, I did not know that.
In August of 2001, I went to a convention at the World Trade Center Marriott. I lived in the city, so I took the train down, but most of the attendees were from out of town and stayed at either that hotel, or at the World Financial Center Marriott down the street.
At some point during the evening of 9/11, I thought to check in with the email group for that convention, since I'd ended up meeting several of them. On the website, I saw a lot of messages like "I wonder if the Marriot is still standing" and "gee, I hope so" and I thought, are they kidding? They were all right there for an entire weekend not three weeks ago, did they NOT notice how close the hotel was to both towers?
So I typed a response to the effect of Sorry, there is absolutely NO chance that the Marriott survived, it was too close, in all likelihood it's been squashed flat (turns out I was pretty accurate), and if you're going to hope for anything, just hope that the staff and guests got out before the building was destroyed (unfortunately not all of them did).
One person replied "But it looked like the towers fell straight down", and I responded "Yes, they did fall straight down, straight down on top of the hotel and every other building around them, and they weren't made out of feathers", and some other person chimed in with "well, I know it's a slim chance, but it looked like all that stuff was just billowing down in a cascade, isn't it possible that it could all just pile up in the spaces between the buildings, and the buildings themselves will be in fairly good shape when it's all cleared away?" At that point, #7 had already come down, the local news was saying two or three others appeared likely to do the same, and I gave up trying to explain why they shouldn't go ahead and reserve the Marriott for the next year.
I gave up on the group altogether in October of that year, when it turned out that quite a few of them were (much to my surprise) peaceniks who didn't want us to do anything militarily in response. Life's too short to slum with some folks, even if you share other common interests...
LOL ... If my memory serves...wasn't the hotel actually connected to the south tower? I can only recall ever entering the place through WTC lobby. If so that would mean that there was no space between the buildings.
You're better off without dealing with that kind of nonsense. Good story though.
I know it was connected to the South tower by a little walkway, and I do mean a little one. I don't think it took 30 seconds to cover it at a Midwesterner's pace. There may have been access to the North tower as well, I don't remember it in the lobby, though. I just remember the bar. :D
But you went outdoors on the plaza side of the hotel and looked up, you'd think "Damn, we're wedged right in here between those two mammoth towers that I can't even see the tops of..."
Who could argue with that? ;D
Number of people in that group who have practical experience with doing anything other than pulling their puds: ZERO
He's a research physicist alright. Nuclear fusion. No background in structural engineering. He's also a crank looking to make a name for himself. Evidenced by the fact that he submitted his papers for peer review - to a committee of "peers" that he hand-picked from within his own 9/11 conspiracy organization-. He knows damn well he'd be a laughing stock if he ever submitted anything to an *actual engineering journal* for peer review.
A small matter of importance to conspiracy theorists. All they really care about is propagating the next Big Lie.
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_062907.html
Well, I guess we’re still waiting. However I did find the phrase ‘hypothetical blast’ and the context in which it was used in the above quite interesting.
Well, Professor, if the powers that be within the U.S. Government actually killed 3,000 fellow Americans, wouldn't it be logical for them to kill an additional 75 academics to keep the atrocity quiet?
Sleep tight ..... or with the fishes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.