Archive for Just Cycling
  Forum Index -> The Coffee Lounge

Jesse Ventura (9/11) Conspiracy Theory

A post by Jesse Ventura has been removed from the Huffington Post for violating a policy against spreading conspiracy theories.

Considering that the post identifies Ventura as the author of a book called Conspiracy Theories, you'd think HuffPo would have known what to expect from the former Minnesota governor.

Apparently not:

Editor's Note: The Huffington Post's editorial policy, laid out in our blogger guidelines, prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories -- including those about 9/11. As such, we have removed this post.

This is not the guy to go to if you don't like conspiracy theories.
​What did Ventura say that was so controversial that it warranted being banned from a site that celebrates the "nip slip"? Nothing he hasn't said before, both here and elsewhere.

by Jesse Ventura

You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11.

That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible -- or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the Twin Towers and Building 7.

Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, put it like this: "The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction." He's especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 47 stories came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon -- even though it was never hit by an aircraft.

This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows:

Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour.

Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal, in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here's what the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7:

"Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel."

Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable."


Is there anything in this?

i was the first to say that..911 was george bush shalcking his own people for easy oil.. he thought a building with 5000 jews did you know that not one jewish person was hurt... i wonder why..  oh well

There are a lot of anomalies with the whole terrorist attack scenario eg huge bldg simply collapsing when such things dont just happen. However, the explanation that the government or other 'parties' planned to blow up its own people is just too difficult to comprehend. There was a previous attempt to blow up the same bldg ten years before.
cardinal guzman

Your big mistake there Geraint, is assuming that the people who had the buildings razed are on the same side as the poor rubes that didn't get told not to go to work that day.

To people guilty of megadeath crimes, a few more dead cattle is fuck all.

* I use the term cattle to try and emphasise the contempt in which the likes of you and I are held. Some people will do anything for money = power.

When you say 'the jews' TT, do you mean mrs Cohen who lives down our street? Casual racism and rampant nationalism is what enables these proto-humans to do what they do.

I think the Conspiracy Theorists show a lot of faith in the authories' capacity to plan and implement something on this scale and then keep everything under wraps.

The Bush administration is widely held to have been incapable of walking and talking at the same time, so masterminding a plot to blow up the TTs to coincide with the plane crashes does take some believing...
cardinal guzman

As opposed to some Arabs managing to keep it under wraps?

Here's how easy it is to fool all the people all the time....

Everyone thinks Patriot missiles are great. Despite not a single Scud missile being intercepted and an entire nation (Israel) being witness to every single scud hitting it's target unintercepted. Menezez in Britain - despite the enquiry, everyone still believes he jumped a barrier and ran. In Baghdad - the SAS are caught by police  whilst they are impersonating muslim extremists with a load of IEDs (roadside bombs) in their car. They are busted out of jail with a tank and the British public instantly forget it happened.

No-one wants to think they are the baddies, so believing a lie is the easy way out.


I don't think the "authorities" are necessarily the goodies, I just struggle with the thought that they could organise and implement such a plot given who was in charge at the time, and then keep it all quiet.

Nothing's impossible though, but whilst we're on the subject, do you believe the planes were actually hijacked and crashed into the Twin Towers? (Or is the simulation of this all part of the conspiracy?)

If you do, then why would there need to be further efforts to blow up the TTs? I don't think it was their collapse that generate outrage so much as the fact the hijacks and crashes happened at all.

mr no different than any other jew..a tax is a tax.. remember 1948 was the year of trouble at large .. we are seeing it now.. 60 years later..

cardinal guzman

There is no plausible way to explain the three towers coming down into their own footprint because of the remaining steel skeleton below the impact point, though this is a moot point as almost all the aviation fuel went up in the big fireball and what was left certainly wasn't hot enough to melt or weaken the steel sufficiently.

So yes, I believe that the towers were demolished. Rigging demo charges incognito is a piece of piss that looks exactly like laying backbone network cable.

I believe the steel that was removed from this crime scene with no-one allowed to forensically inspect it - not even the FBI, was done so to hide the demo charge traces and now it's gone - no way to ever find out definitively - not so funny that.

As to who is responsible - I think George W Bush has plausible deniability all over his cretinous face - he knew and knows nothing. The list of possibles is endless - The owners, The Carlyle group, The Pentagon, Big Oil, Mossad, combinations of these etc etc . Muslim extremists would be low down on my list, not least because the individuals accused of this suicide attack keep turning up alive - amazing. If I was a Muslim extremist I can't think of a better way to turn the world against me and my religion - If I am sophisticated enough to dream up and carry out the official conspiracy theory, then I am sophisticated enough to realise what a terrible move it would be. Instead I would blow up an oil refinery or an oil or gas pipeline - hit the fuckers that are hitting me.

The towers were operating at a staggering loss but were too expensive and toxic to demolish - good job for mr Silverstein that there was a list of people willing to do it for free. The planes were to add theatre and shock and awe and outrage and hatred.

Who had most to gain? Who gained the most? Follow the money and there are your perps.

Wow! Who'd have thought that?
cardinal guzman

SlowRower wrote:
Wow! Who'd have thought that?

Don't take my word for it - that's just the view from here. It has fewer holes than the official theory though.

Don't worry, Cardinal. I'm not selling up and moving to the compound in Wyoming just yet. Smile

There was a Rolling Stone interview with one of Bin Laden's sons. He said Bin Laden did it to get America to attack Afghanistan. so that they would be dragged into a futile war, like the Soviets had previously. If you look at it that way, it seems to be working quite well. Americans will only be there another year or so before they will have to retreat, then the extremists will come back.

Another question is why the so-called conspirators would also attack the Pentagon and White House at the same time? Just as a distraction from the real target?

Secret Government 9/11 unit
cardinal guzman

What's that proverb about having the grace to accept what you cannot change....

As my sister says, if worried or in doubt, boogie till yer tits fall off. Forum Index -> The Coffee Lounge
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum