High explosive nano thermite was found in the pyroclastic cloud of WTC, into which buildings pulverized, imploding with a speed of close to free fall, 10 floors per second.
WTC 7 is a classic controlled demolition.
Who, when and how set the explosives? And, what explosives?

For the sake of the country, for the sake of strategic interests, it is better to understand, to recognize the truth. Because that is the source of strength.

Petr Buben
http://ae911truth.org – http://stj911.org – http://911blogger.com

They came into that meeting with a message that they “support keeping torture-like camp Guantanamo opened and military court processes with terrorists going”.

They do not like Democrats being in the meeting with them.

Interesting turn of events, isn’t it right?
Petr Buben

I really do feel like a new investigation is needed. The point of this article is to show the amount of people calling for a new investigation, which many people don’t know about. I understand you feel differently about the issues and the claims made by people on the other side of this debate, but why not help get a new investigation to prove those theories wrong?

It bothers me that the amount spent on the 9/11 commission is dwarfed by the amount spent on Monica Lewinsky, or Whitewater. I mean, c’mon they put $12 million into fighting “drug paraphanalia”, and spent a large portion of that on putting Tommy Chong behind bars. 9/11 is worth a little more investigation money than these things?

I personally think that people should have to testify under oath, and not in groups. I think a lot more evidence has come out, and not just the frivolous stuff that angers me as well. I don’t like being lumped in with the conspiracy theorists. I’ve been accused since writing this article of yelling “Bush blew up the towers”, and I never said that here, you see that. It’s not fair to sweep anyone who wants a new investigation into the conspiracy theory pit.

It is possible that sane people want an investigation too, right?

“Robert Baer, a former CIA case officer in the Middle East whose See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA’s War on Terrorism became the inspiration for the award winning film Syriana, concurs with Thompson’s view.

“There are enough discrepancies, and unanswered questions in the 9/11 Commission report that under a friendly administration, the 9/11 investigation should be re-opened,” Baer wrote in an email message Tuesday night. ”

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2008/FBI_documents_contradict_Sept._11_Commission_0228.html

And in the last video playlist of my article, Max Cleland who was on the board of the investigation for a year says it wasn’t good enough. I’m not trying to say I know what really happened, but I’m trying to say that we deserve better from our government, and I’m trying in a lawful, respectful way to get that.

“Vocal Minority Insists It Was All Smoke and Mirrors.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/science/space/14hoax.html?_r=1&ref=science

“Ted Goertzel, a professor of sociology at Rutgers University who has studied conspiracy theorists, said “there’s a similar kind of logic behind all of these groups, I think.” For the most part, he explained, “They don’t undertake to prove that their view is true” so much as to “find flaws in what the other side is saying.” And so, he said, argument is a matter of accumulation instead of persuasion. “They feel if they’ve got more facts than the other side, that proves they’re right.”

“Mark Fenster, a professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law who has written extensively on conspiracy theories, said he sees similarities between people who argue that the Moon landings never happened and those who insist that the 9/11 attacks were planned by the government and that President Obama’s birth certificate is fake: at the core, he said, is a polarization so profound that people end up with an unshakable belief that those in power “simply can’t be trusted.”

“The emergence of the Internet as a communications medium, he noted, makes it possible for once-scattered believers to find one another. “It allows the theory to continue to exist, to continue to be available — it’s not just some old dusty books on the half-price shelf.”

“Adam Savage, the co-star of the television show “MythBusters,” spent an episode last year taking apart Moon hoax theories bit by bit, entertainingly and convincingly. The theorists, he noted, never give up. “They’ll say you have to keep an open mind,” he said, “but they reject every single piece of evidence that doesn’t adhere to their thesis.”

“Our mandate was sweeping.The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,” including
those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplomacy,
immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist
organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and
resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the Commission.
In pursuing our mandate, we have reviewed more than 2.5 million pages
of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries.
This included nearly every senior official from the current and previous
administrations who had responsibility for topics covered in our mandate.”

You’ll note that the 9/11 Commission was not charged with re-doing the NIST investigations.

I thank you for illustrating some of the points I made to Jennifer. First and foremost, you illustrate my point that: “One of the terms the 9/11 Truth Movement likes to use – and it is the fundamental basis of their claims – is the term “Official Story.” This is a canard but fundamental to the existence of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

“What does it actually mean? In reality nothing. But for 9/11 Truthers it serves the purpose of defining opposition to THEM as ALL coming from the government – and anybody opposing 9/11 Truthers are “obviously supporters of the “Official Story”, and therefore part of the enemy and “cover up” they are fighting.”

You’ve illustrated all the elements about which I cautioned Jennifer: the -so-called “official story” a term used since soon after 9/11, mis-defined by BeZad, the automatic equating of me with BeZad’s imagined government perpetrators (“or are in the employ of the CIA… just like BJedwards’ boss…”) and never able to artuclate anything except pointing us to one of the nuttier conspiracy sights who BeZad chooses to give his brain.

It’s particularity ironic how these 9/11 Truthers always fall back on the “just asking questions” canard. Just as long as one asks the politically correct Truther questions. If, like me, you ask questions of Truthers and their claims, well, watch out, then “asking questions” is not allowed.

I think Jennifer will see right through that.

Even corporate sellout journalists are not held to the standard you’re trying to hold Jennifer to. You either tried to overdose on blue sleeper pills, or are in the employ of the CIA or some other intelligence organization. Tell your boss that the cat has been let out of the bag, too many are awake.

http://www.infowars.com/nsa-security-running-amok-to-plug-leaks-about-911/

It’s an entire database with journalists questioning the official story and they are getting scared, just like BJedwards’ boss is: scared

She is not alone. This is the problem with most who have first encountered “9/11 Truth.” Jennifer doesn’t write anything thousands of others haven’t written; she’s just repeating the claims – not the evidence or facts – but the claims of 9/11 Truthers and just repeats what she’s taken so far as gospel. “Tthere are questions that haven’t been addressed or answered.” Despite the fact that not only have valid questions been addressed or answered repeatedly for years, and that others are based on faulty claims, “facts” that aren’t true, and from people who have been demonstrated to be unqualified, politically motivated, outright frauds, or just plain nuts.

And Jennifer has found a whole bevy of them: Cynthia McKinney, Richard Gage, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, and so on.

No one is going to convince Jennifer Slattery. It has to come from herself. She is going to have to be willing to question what she now believes and WHY she believes it. She is going to have to ask herself WHY she believes the claims of a group of people who have defined for her what others have said, written, demonstrated rather than what those people ACTUALLY said, wrote, and demonstrated.
She states, “I need to know why those buildings came down the way they did,…” as if she beleives this hasn’t been answered. How do you know Jennifer when it has been repeatedly demonstrated to the satisfaction of the world’s structural engineers, architects, physicists, chemists, and forensic scientists through the largest investigation (of a majority of non-government investigators) with the best minds, tools, and resources available? Why don’t you know that,and why would you accept the claims of Truthers who hold up a minor architect, Richard Gage, with no more than a modest background in building small buildings, as the best authority on the subject. Can you honestly admit to yourself that you have done all your homework?

If Jennifer has a devotion to truth, then she has to question EVERYTHING, not just accept what a group wants her to think with.. She has to, as any rational person does, question those she now believes. Are the claims they make really valid?

One of the terms the 9/11 Truth Movement likes to use – and it is the fundamental basis of their claims – is the term “Official Story.” This is a canard but fundamental to the existence of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

What does it actually mean? In reality nothing. But for 9/11 Truthers it serves the purpose of defining opposition to THEM as ALL coming from the government – and anybody opposing 9/11 Truthers are “obviously supporters of the “Official Story”, and therefore part of the enemy and “cover up” they are fighting. It serves as a wonderful out for 9/11 Truthers; any evidence contrary to Truther claims can and IS dismissed as part of the “Official Story”, made up and a lie. There is no propaganda term better suited for 9/11 Truthers to hide the weaknesses and invalidity of their claims then that one.

Jennifer has to be willing to think critically and question things like that. What exactly is the “Official Story” and why is it a “story?” In fact, no real definition exists because 9/11 Truthers made it up. In reality, there are only hundreds of lines of independent evidence from thousands of different and disconnected sources and people that converge on the conclusion of what actually happened – and that which 9/11 Truthers have not been able to refute. Instead, they insist the have “questions” and claim they “are just asking questions” while claiming that “9/11 was an inside job” and never accepting answers inconvenient to them. 9/11 Truthers have never been able to actually refute the multiple lines of evidence that make up what happened. They can only try to convince people that “something doesn’t add up.”

What have these people accomplished in the almost 8 years since 9/11? Have they actually presented any evidence they claim they have? Are they prevented from doing so? No, accept for those exercising their right to free speech on many forums and in newspapers as they claim they have no right to free speech. Where are the court cases that should have long-since been filed if all of their so-called “evidence” is so strong?

Don’t accept my word for it, Jennifer. You only owe it to yourself to question what you hear and read – all of it. It means thinking logically and critically and that requires time, hard work, reading sources to see what is ACTUALLY said rather than the claims about them you have repeated from truthers, and questionning your own beliefs and assumptions.

The choice is entirely yours.

” On June 16th and June 17th, family members who lost loved ones to terrorist acts were invited by the Obama administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) to voice their concerns and opinions about justice for the victims. Unfortunately, the family members left the meetings feeling frustrated and helpless. NewMajority.com interviewed some of the families who stated that, although the DOJ meant well, their motives and methods were insensitive.

President Obama has spoken in the past about accountability and transparency; yet, those attending were not granted simple requests such as having the meeting recorded, receiving a list of those present, and being able to pass out a military commissions comparison chart. Bob Hemenway, who lost a son at the Pentagon, summarized the feelings of all interviewed by stating the meeting was “a set-up. It was a political ploy. We were pawns. What a waste. We were a show case. It was a farce.”

Please spread the word! Share the link:

http://www.thebravest.com/FDNYNewsArchive/09/0709/9a.htm

This article is simply incredible. You touched on so many important facts while keeping your voice strong and pure. Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for speaking out on this issue. I sincerely appreciate it. All battles against injustice, from gay rights to 9/11 Truth, are all part of the same struggle. We are all allies, but are polarized by society and the media into thinking we are not.

Keep on fighting,
Chris