22 votes

9/11 Documented Cover-up (video)

This gentleman explains the cover-up with fact after fact. 47 minutes of education:


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
fireant's picture

That's what you got for the grand jury?

It's how you have to think, if you want a new investigation. I don't think they will be swayed with "a symphony of explosions", and zero corroboration.
And be sure to prepare your paper on why the gash was of little significance to a large span tower. I can't wait to see that.

Undo what Wilson did

Plenty exists for the "Grand Jury"...

and the only way any Grand Jury would find in favor of the 911 commission report is if they weren't allowed to see and hear it all. I'm sure were Barry still alive, he could provide enough testimony to have others look into your "gash" and find explanation for it's existence. Unlike you, I have great faith in reason...polls the world over show its promise when people are presented with facts.

In fact, you are trolling an empty pond here as the facts have already been weighed by the members of the DP and your side has been found wanting...by a vast and crushing margin...and it gets worse for you as time and this medium have allowed for information to be disseminated. Truly, I hope you spend time behind bars for what you do for money. That you point at Bush for covering up what he, his Saudi buddies, and others contrived and then simply ignore the segue is beyond baffling unless it provides some question as to your paid status. It doesn't.

There isn't a soul here who has been, or will be, swayed by your imbecilic efforts.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

fireant's picture

And reason demands corroboration of controlled demolition,

which of course, you do not have, so you avoid it.
The only question is why do you run cover for Bush?

Undo what Wilson did

Avoid it?

On the contrary, I have steered you time and again to best corroboration available...the multiple videos of the incident published and provided the world over. That you can't reach the obvious conclusion from the evidence isn't my problem and hardly a surprise given what you must maintain so that you may eat. That Bush is one of, or at the very least a fully controlled marionette of, the culprits is hardly a question either...

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

fireant's picture

No you haven't

I ask repeatedly for corroboration with STRUCTURAL evidence....nothing

Undo what Wilson did

I have.

I gave you three links in another thread a while back to photos of cut beams PRIOR to clean up, which you immediately poo poo'd as just the angle the photograph was taken. I am posting one of those three links here so others can see and decide for themselves.

Look at the right end of the beam laying almost horizontally just to the left of center at the very bottom of photo.
http://www.slideshare.net/tvawler/amazing-9-11-wtc-ground-ze... (slide #21)

I also have posted information showing you where steel girders were turned into what investigators described as like Swiss cheese by something other than what would occur from building fires.

The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese."...

A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes...

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/ (bold emphasis mine)

Also worthy of note in that link is that they couldn't explain the presence of the sulfur.

But thermite/thermate would.

fireant's picture

Because that's exactly what they are...square ends seemingly

beveled due to angle of view.
Eutectic corrosion is evidence of liquidification, nothing else. Rust reverts to iron at 572f. Did Jones cover that in his paper? You don't think those "Swiss cheese" pieces look a lot like rust corrosion? If thermate were used, there will be cut members in the debris. Find 'em and you have a case. The structural evidence show critical break points did just that; they broke at their connections.

Undo what Wilson did

Those heat corrosion findings I referenced were not from Jones.

FEMA's volunteer investigators did manage to perform "limited metallurgical examination" of some of the steel before it was recycled. Their observations, including numerous micrographs, are recorded in Appendix C of the WTC Building Performance Study. Prior to the release of FEMA's report, a fire protection engineer and two science professors published a brief report in JOM disclosing some of this evidence. http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page and follow the links to the references, you'll see that neither the fire protection engineer nor the two science profesors referred to are Jones.

Fireant, I'ma go out on a limb here and speculate that "Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering" and "materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr." would prolly know what rust corrosion looks like, hence their bewilderment at this "phenomenon". ;)

As to the cut beam, the reason I chose that photo of the three I had previously shown you is precisely because of the particular way the beam is laying. Unlike with the other photos, as much as you seem to want to, this one is not so easy to dismiss as "seemingly beveled due to angle of view".

fireant's picture

No way to tell

It looks like a piece of aluminum cladding, not a beam, but it is cropped off so much it's impossible to assess how it is laying to know what the angles are. The dents in it suggest it is cladding, and it's laying next to other pieces of cladding. I apply the same rigorous standards in all debris research. Simply an apparent angle means little by itself. The member has to be identified by original location in the building, and how it may have contributed to collapse. I do appreciate the fact you are looking.
Yes I know the FEMA report did not refer to Jones. I didn't mean to imply it did. I threw it in because the eutectic corrosion is always part of the iron micro spheres discussion, and Jones did not consider rust or other potential sources of the iron spheres. The FEMA report left it as inconclusive, requiring further study. That means they did not know. FEMA also noted it could have been a process begun prior to 9/11. I continue to insist that if thermate were used to cut the buildings up in order to bring them down, there will be an abundance of structural members cut up in the piles. Here is a fair treatment of the sulfidized steel if you care to look http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OpzRcYqlKQ&list=UUuMnEoprj7s...

Undo what Wilson did

Plenty of structural evidence exits...

As when the structures were being erected, both the camera, and the moving picture camera had been invented. Also blueprints were filed and you can find them on the internets. Steel (and I swear, it was steel as I was there when they were being built and saw it for myself) was assessed by UL prior to being installed. There is in fact, so much structural evidence in existence to prove those buildings were made out of steel, and so much written about the inherent properties of various production runs of steel that it is amazing that you haven't yet been convinced of it.

Just how dumb do you have to pretend to be to get a check cut? (I know I'm helping you with the word count ;-) ) You can thank me in your prayers.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

It isn't ~running cover~ for Bush...

...to point out other evidences besides the Saudi cover up.

It doesn't have to be either/or.

...Just as with the Oklahoma City bombing where evidences of other bombs/explosions were indication of more elaborate orcestration and involvement by others than what the patsies McVeigh and Nichols brought forth with the Ryder truck.

Nope...I fully believe its both...

Just as I see corroboration in very frame of every video taken of three skyscrapers being systematically demolished by explosive agents...and conspiracy in very step of OK City once the cover-up there went into full swing...but never before that. I allowed the box to lead me down someone's path. Now I don't.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?


*high five*

Great Listen, Thank You.

The kind of teleprompter reading that I support.

Oh please. Let me save you some time!

Not a conspiracy theory.

~ First attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor.
~ And None since in the 13 year, bogus "War on Terror".

~ Four Airliners off course no transponders*
~ No jets were scrambled.
~ Never happened before. Never happened since.

It was a conspiracy at the highest levels of government. No other 'enemy' had the where-with-all to pull it off.

~ The above facts are sufficient evidence to hang the actors.
~ Any discussion beyond this is mental masturbation.

*These slow, unmaneuverable planes were then flown for 1 hour and 45 minutes through the most restricted airspace in the world without eliciting a single military intercept. The most sophisticated military in the world, able to strike dime-sized targets from hundreds of miles away with laser-guided missiles, precision radar equipment, and state of the art aircraft capable of flying well over 1,300 mph, could not locate, engage, nor intercept four wandering jumbo jets. A military that has a budget larger than the combined military assets of every other country in the world could not scramble, intercept and engage any of the radically wayward planes. Even Flight 77, which was allowed to fly unimpeded and crash into the Pentagon one full hour after two jets had been flown into the Twin Towers in NYC, failed to elicit the response and intercept from any military jets. Nor, indeed, did flight 93. A plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field 1 hour and 45 minutes after the first plane was confirmed hijacked.

The video details Saudi involvement/connections...

...and the cover up that continues under the Obama administration.

I find the treatment of the Boston Marathon Saudi national suspect witness person of interest even more interesting after hearing all that.

...as if it wasn't interesting enough why people on the terror watch list would be paid a hospital visit by the first lady anyway, and then suddenly wisked out of the country after Obama's unplanned meeting with the Saudi foreign minister.

Stop It! Stop It! You're Confusing Me!

~ First attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor.
~ And None since in the 13 year, bogus "War on Terror".

~ Four Airliners off course no transponders*
~ No jets were scrambled.
~ Never happened before. Never happened since.

fireant's picture

If "It was a conspiracy at the highest levels of government",

that means Bush was involved. Avoiding the information in this video is providing cover for Bush; it's where Bush is most vulnerable.
And like I stated in the title, this is all documented.
We do not know why, but we do know this is where the cover-up is. Extreme effort was made to keep this information hush hush, and frustrate both commissions. Porter Goss is no fluke.

Undo what Wilson did

My brain ain't as powerful as your's fireant

All I know about Bush Jr. is he would only talk to the investigators while holding hands with Dick C., no recording devices, no oath, and no notes.

"Bush and Cheney did not testify before the panel -- they were not under oath and there was to be no recording made of the session nor a stenographer in the room."

fireant's picture

The Bush led cover-up of the Saudi/FBI connection was

extensive and thorough. Far more than what you cite. You don't know this, yet chide me for being naive to the truth? It just blows my mind when it's importance is dismissed out of hand. We have hard evidence of Saudi Royal funding the same people the government says flew the planes, and Bush covering it up!!! What more you want? Let's find out why. Trying to say the buildings were CDed when there is no evidence of such in the piles does nothing but distract from this obvious avenue of finding the truth.

Undo what Wilson did

I don't understand. Every other post you insist

there is no evidence of Demolition in the piles of dust, but what is thermite and thermate if not evidence of prepared charges? What of the 45 degree cut beams before crew arrivals?
Your obstinacy is the mark of a shill, not an investigative DPer. Videos can be used as evidence and they show irrefutably that 9/11 was a Demolition.
What of those squibs I mentioned earlier going up the side of Bldg 7 as said bldg was on its way down?
Pyroclastic dust in every direction for more than 1/2 mile gathering momentum, moving faster just before the collapse is further evidence.
Barry Jennings attested to explosions knocking him back to the 8th floor; fireman said explosion blew him across the lobby; cops and civilians alike all attested to hearing explosions; the Custodian attested that the basement was blown apart well before the Tower collapse. People speaking in sworn testimony is evidence damnit.
This is sickening. To come to the DP and argue Demolition after almost 13 years of cover up. I hope I see justice before I die.

fireant's picture

Post the photos, like I asked.

I'm open to any evidence you have, but if it's those same old clean-up cuts, get with it. Show me the slide marks, then illustrate how they contributed to the collapse of the Towers. And the rest of your claims have been explained for so long now it's like, do some research. As an example. There were no squibs on Building 7:
WTC7 Squibs Composite
WTC7squib Comparison2 Composite
And for the facts about Barry Jennings http://wtc7fact.wordpress.com/2014/01/27/fact-barry-jennings...

Undo what Wilson did


only need to know;
"Bush and Cheney did not testify before the panel -- they were not under oath and there was to be no recording made of the session nor a stenographer in the room."

All the rest is, as you say, well documented in the video you posted.

Just gave you a plus for the first time in my life...

Because you are both right...add to Porter Goss the inside trading at Alex Brown & Sons and the fact that it's CEO Buzzy Kronegard became the Executive Director at the CIA.

OOOps. I gave that plus to the New Fireant too soon...there...I took it back...

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

This referenced testimony is interesting!

Testimony by Deborah Freeman on 01/16/01 in opposition to Ashcroft's appointment to Attorney General: http://archive.is/Fyi9Z

Then there is this. Deborah Freeman worked for Lyndon LaRouche, a political dissident in the intelligence industry. LaRouche was interviewed on 9/11/01. Here is that interview.

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!


No Matter How Crazy Lyndon LaRouche Gets

I will always remember him as a genius, truth teller after hearing this, unscripted, live interview.

This is what ALL Americans Needed to hear on the morning of 9/11.

SteveMT's picture

Bump to watch later.


Good find

Yep, that was an interesting and educational 47 minutes.