19-08-2013, 02:19 AM
(This post was last modified: 19-08-2013, 11:47 AM by Tony Szamboti.)
No matter what anyone wants to think, we do know from firefighters and others inside the buildings that there were explosions that damaged the inside of the buildings well after the aircraft impacts, as the firefighters were saying they were in the buildings getting ready to fight the fires when they heard and felt them and had to run from the interior building damage.
We also know from measurements and calculations that the columns could not have been involved in resisting the collapse during initiation and at least through the first several stories.
Given these two pieces of data, an investigation should surely have been done to determine who could have planted devices in the buildings. That investigation has never been undertaken to this day.
In fact, the video with the firefighters and other workers talking about explosions inside the building has never been seen on mainstream TV as far as I know. One of the only reasons we have seen some of this is attorney James Gourley's successful lawsuit against NIST around 2010, which forced them to release a lot of video that was being suppressed. The information was then put on the Internet.
Kind of sounds like the suppression of the Zapruder film and witnesses who mentioned hearing shots which they believe came from the underpass side of Dealey Plaza to the front of the limousine carrying JFK. One of the most heinous early attempts to keep the Kennedy assassination as being done by one shooter in the TSBD came from Life magazine, who had the Zapruder film. It was due to Parkland doctors calling the frontal throat wound an entrance wound. Life tried to say the Zapruder film showed JFK turning around to see where the first shot came from and that this would have been when he was shot in the front of the throat. Of course, the Z-film was suppressed and the public would not see it for years. It turned out that the Z-film showed nothing like this.
Apparently the cover-up artists need to feel their way for a short time to see where the wind blows and what turns up. In the case of 911 it was apparently settled fairly quickly that they would say there was no evidence for explosives, even though there is certainly evidence and testimony of it. Rudy Giuliani was one of the first to start the no explosives story for 911 that night during one of his press conferences. In spite of the evidence for it, he turned to the now known fraudster but then his trusted police commissioner Bernie Kerik and led him by saying "we believe it was the after effects of the planes hitting the buildings and don't know of additional explosions". See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Epqoa6TJZWI Of course, Bernie nodded in agreement that there wasn't in front of the news media. The video NIST was suppressing through 2010 tells a whole different story and so do the Oral Histories which were also initially suppressed and had to be forced to be released by lawsuits in 2005. I wonder who Bernie was talking to and how he could be so sure so soon.
We also know from measurements and calculations that the columns could not have been involved in resisting the collapse during initiation and at least through the first several stories.
Given these two pieces of data, an investigation should surely have been done to determine who could have planted devices in the buildings. That investigation has never been undertaken to this day.
In fact, the video with the firefighters and other workers talking about explosions inside the building has never been seen on mainstream TV as far as I know. One of the only reasons we have seen some of this is attorney James Gourley's successful lawsuit against NIST around 2010, which forced them to release a lot of video that was being suppressed. The information was then put on the Internet.
Kind of sounds like the suppression of the Zapruder film and witnesses who mentioned hearing shots which they believe came from the underpass side of Dealey Plaza to the front of the limousine carrying JFK. One of the most heinous early attempts to keep the Kennedy assassination as being done by one shooter in the TSBD came from Life magazine, who had the Zapruder film. It was due to Parkland doctors calling the frontal throat wound an entrance wound. Life tried to say the Zapruder film showed JFK turning around to see where the first shot came from and that this would have been when he was shot in the front of the throat. Of course, the Z-film was suppressed and the public would not see it for years. It turned out that the Z-film showed nothing like this.
Apparently the cover-up artists need to feel their way for a short time to see where the wind blows and what turns up. In the case of 911 it was apparently settled fairly quickly that they would say there was no evidence for explosives, even though there is certainly evidence and testimony of it. Rudy Giuliani was one of the first to start the no explosives story for 911 that night during one of his press conferences. In spite of the evidence for it, he turned to the now known fraudster but then his trusted police commissioner Bernie Kerik and led him by saying "we believe it was the after effects of the planes hitting the buildings and don't know of additional explosions". See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Epqoa6TJZWI Of course, Bernie nodded in agreement that there wasn't in front of the news media. The video NIST was suppressing through 2010 tells a whole different story and so do the Oral Histories which were also initially suppressed and had to be forced to be released by lawsuits in 2005. I wonder who Bernie was talking to and how he could be so sure so soon.