I don't know what you mean by 'this land', but if you mean southern Arizona, we bought it fair and square. If a crooked Mexican president pocketed the money, well that isn't our fault.
But, let's for a moment imagine taking a vote - should the Gadsden purchase be given back to Mexico? I doubt it would pass. And just to make things interesting let's let only people of Mexican descent vote. Let's be even MORE restrictive, let's only let ILLEGAL Mexicans vote. What are the odds it would even get ONE vote?
One article in a pay to publish sham journal? Not very impressive. It's almost as if there's no evidence for you conjecture. No Pulitzer Prize for you.
I want to express my thoughts on Santa Meurte visually through two piece’s of digital art I did. The first on is titled “Santa Muerte Online Altar” http://cainandtoddbenson.com/2011/07/13/sa….
The second one is titled “Santa Muere”. http://cainandtoddbenson.com/2011/07/12/sa…
Isn't it hilarious how when a troll gets proven wrong 18 ways to Sunday they try resetting the goalposts. Gene simmons claims there were no peer-reviewed papers published on the subject, somebody posts a link and suddenly it's not good enough. Who's being purposely deceitful now? Simmons, you wouldn't know a fact if one bit you.
"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."
Bentham is a pay to publish sham journal, the editor resigned after that ridiculous "thermite" paper was published. It's humorous that people seeking the "truth" about September 11th. don't know these basic facts. It's almost as if they are purposefully being deceitful. Also, no KISS bass playing for me, different fellow.
No, Mike Johnson, what's crazy is that there's still people like yourself who believe the pack of lies used to sell 9/11 as the justification for war and the destruction of our civil rights. There's more evidence supporting climate change than there is to prop up the story of 19 Arabs magically defeating the most technologically-advanced military systems in the world with boxcutters, led by a 9th-century madman from a laptop while attached to a dialysis machine in a cave in Afghanistan.
And you, Gene Simmons, need to stick to hawking cheap KISS gimcracks and recovering from your latest honeymoon/chemical peel. Here is a link to an established, peer-reviewed technical source, the Open Civil Engineering Journal, which published just such a paper in 2008. Interested parties may download the pdf at: http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tociej/…
This would have been a fresh, original piece in 2005.
This has been de-bunked to death. You have to do large amounts of drugs and only read far left websites in order to still be a 9/11 truther. It's crazy that there's still people who believe in manmade climate change. It's even crazier that there's still 9/11 truthers.
Read my comment again. There's not been a technical paper in any engineering journal in any language, in any COUNTRY, even ones that are hostile to the United States, I.E. North Korea, Iran, Russia, China etc. They would love to prove that the U.S. attacked itself. The evidence all points to 19 mostly Saudi Arabian men who hijacked 4 planes and crashed them into 3 buildings and one field in PA. It's interesting when a writer has trouble reading for comprehension.
I do share your concern and we've addressed it: At address below you will find more than 30 articles written by AE911Truth Petitioners and associates. Some are self-published and some are peer-reviewed journal articles (contrary to your claim). In the spirit of the scientific method, all are strongly encouraged perform their own experiments and analyses and publish their own results just like these working engineers and scientists have done.
I do take offense at the suggestion that some of the 1,600 Architects and Engineers who have put their names on a Petiton for a new investigaion are "hostile to the U.S." That is a baseless ad hominem. What evidence do you have of this "hostility" from any of these 1,600 architects or engineers?
Would you consider these two people hostile to the U.S., too? (Hint: I am a relative of the first one.)
** Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean, Former Governor of New Jersey
"FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue...We, to this day, don't know why NORAD told us what they told us...It was just so far from the truth."
** Vice Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Homeland Security Advisory Council
"We got started late; we had a very short time frame...we did not have enough money...We had a lot of people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access to documents and to people. ... So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail"
Controlled demolitions collapse buildings from the BOTTOM UP. Look at any video of one. The WTC buildings collapsed from the TOP DOWN.
"Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues?"
"NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel."
NIST Responses to FAQs, August 2006
"NIST spokesperson Michael E. Neuman was challenged by Hartford Advocate reporter Jennifer Abel on this glaring omission in the WTC report
ABEL: what about that letter where NIST said it didn't look for evidence of explosives?
NEUMAN: Right, because there was no evidence of that.
ABEL: But how can you know there's no evidence if you don't look for it first?
NEUMAN: If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wasting your time."
Think about who is pushing the merits of this approach.
The demolitions of the three buildings are not a scientifically controversial subject.
The following three conditions cannot be explained without explosives:
1. Molten iron in the basements of all three buildings.
2. The complete annihilation of all three buildings and their contents.
3. The rate of which all three buildings collapse while they are being destroyed.
It has been demonstrated time and again that the establishment has nowhere to go with this. Presenting these three basic items is the equivalent of placing your hands onto the neck of the establishment and squeezing. They are stuck. As you see in this exchange, the more they dispute it, the worse it gets for them. It has NIST lying about conditions 1 and 3 and every politician using Popular Mechanics and the 9/11 Commission report as their excuse for willful ignorance. It has the Royal Institute of British Architects screaming "anti-Semitism" when Architect Richard Gage makes no mention of Judaism in his presentation.
The fact that these 1600 professionals have not produced a single technical paper in any engineering journal, in any language, in any country, Even ones that are hostile to the U.S., is very telling. Maybe ten years isn't quite long enough. Maybe they don't really have any evidence. If they had real evidence they'd win a Pulitzer Prize, but it seems their fraud leader would rather tour the world on gullible people's money. I'm sure the author of this article shares my concern.
Thanks, everybody, for all the comments, pro and con. A spirited debate is a healthy thing.
One observation: Ever notice how the "truthers", as we have been labeled, usually stick to simple, direct, rational arguments based on specific facts and evidence, while the "anti-truthers" (for lack of a better term), usually come at this from a highly emotional level, complete with personal attacks and palpable anger that comes across as more than a little unhinged? And yet it is the "truthers" who get dismissed as wackos. Strange.
LMAO!!! @ "Natural Law Proof". You morons have no idea what science is or how it works. The fact is that AE9111Truth and the parade of loons and liars following Steven Jones around have repeatedly hid from academic scrutiny and continue to hide in fake journals & youtube. 0 of Jones's claims of thermite have been corroborated or demonstrated in any academic forum. The fact is that truthers are dazzled by buzz words like "path of least resistance", eutectic, Newton's Laws, "iron-rich", etc. If truthers knew what any of that meant they would know Gage and Jones are FoS.
AE911Truth.org has never once said "the big bad government" was "responsible for planning 9/11" All we and many others have done is show, using science, that explosive materials were used at WTC. That has been proven beyond doubt by natural law proof, multiple independent analyses of physical evidence, literally tons of it, and the testimony of over 100 FDNY eyewitnesses (fire fighters & EMTs: see NYT Oral History archive). Who put it there? I don't know, but I'd like to find out and so would the families of victims.
You say there is"no science" at AE911Truth.org's website: if you go to the Evidence page you'll find lots of "science." your Regarding your "vacuum of space" comment: WTC is at sea level, there is no "vacuum of space" at sea level, and, no, thermite is not found in children's sparklers. We cannot be nearly so careless about science, the victims deserve much more.
Request for correction;
"...National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the author of the official collapse story."
to be more precise;
"...National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the author of the official just poised to collapse;actual global collapse after this point was inevitable and we don't need to look at that part of the collapse story."
Do you have a real explanation of the red/gray chips?
Can you account for the 5-6% iron-based microspheres found in the WTC dust?
What about the steel recovered and analyzed by Worchester Poly Institute which CONCLUSIVELY showed the steel had melted by means of a eutectic reaction?
Until you can explain ALL of these phenomena, you and all the apologists of the official theory are left with childish tactics (like calling "truthers" losers).
There is a lot of disagreement among those who question the official theory, HOWEVER, as others have mentioned, we are UNITED in the fact that we have been (and continue to be) lied to. That doesn't necessarily mean Cheney planted the charges in the WTC towers, but when they refuse to testify under oath, refuse to have a real investigation and ridicule anyone who questions the official story, it gives all the more weight to the notion that they are hiding something that would make them look bad.
Doesn't take a genius to see they and their defense/intelligence network of businesses benefitted immensely. Dynasties were created from the money spent on "fighting terrorism" or whatever we were supposed to be doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And there are still morons who believe Saddam Hussein had anything whatsoever to do with 9/11. Those are the real suckers holding the rest of us down.
"Why not start with a real investigation of the events of Sept. 11?"
Why not start by providing evidence that the "big bad government" was responsible for planning 9/11 first?
"I think we owe the victims of this massive crime nothing less."
No, what you owe them is to stop accusing them of being "in on it".
"Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group devoted to the scientific study"
There's no science to be found any where on their website. Go figure!
"If you want to talk conspiracy theories, the official explanation for the collapsing towers is a whopper."
Would you like evidence with your whooper? Stop making excuses and get with the program.
"A straight-down, nearly free-fall collapse means that the structures met virtually no resistance on the way down."
Guess you never knew about the vaccum of space?
"Subsequent testing of WTC dust samples established the presence of thermite, a high-powered incendiary that cuts through a steel beam like a lightning bolt through a stick of butter."
And yet this thermite is common among sparklers with children hold at events. It must be some kind of "magic" that that small thin steel wire it's coated on doesn't melt. OOPS!
"I remember network news anchor Peter Jennings, mesmerized by video of the collapse, observing, "Almost like a controlled demolition."
And just like Dylan Avery you don't know what a simile is.
Another thing I forgot to mention.
Truthers are so despite for the truth that they got a petition going at:
Just look at how many people signed it. Kind of pathetic!
Tucson Weekly |
3280 E. Hemisphere Loop, Suite 180, Tucson AZ 85706 |
(520) 294-1200 |
Powered by Foundation