But ever since PBS in Colorado aired the 911-sceptic film "Explosive Evidence" by the group Architects and Engineers for Truth a few months ago, I've been reading a lot more about 911 from the growing number of sources that question the official narrative.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that the same forces that silence with ridicule those who pose questions such as the obviously plausible question of the validity of the constitutional notion of dual allegiance with regard to a certain POTUS and his one foreign-born parent, are the same that make absolutely any discussion of the events of 911 outside of the Official Narrative verbotin.
Warning: delve into the 911 truther business at your own peril, because it is all-consuming, and every new discovery of flaming, imploding weirdness will freak you out.
Consider for example a few of the official answers provided by NIST to questions they could no longer ignore about the collapse of Larry Silverstein's Building 7, in their amusingly candid, "hey we have nothing to hide" FAQ list (source here) :
8. Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?
The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system (see the answer to Question 9).These guys are just unbelievable. Talk about chutzpah! And there are thirty-four more cheeky answers like this one provided by the government information manipulators at NIST to the list of questions asked by the uncomfortably too-close-to-the-truth busy-body skeptics NIST is trying to deflect in this report.
Consider this gem:
27. Why didn't the investigators look at actual steel samples from WTC 7?Of course they neglect to mention here that 80% of the steel removed from the WTC site was processed by a single scrap dealer, Hugo Neu. Here is a Forbes article about Neu and his operation. (Here, if you can stomach it, is a far more damning analysis of Hugo Neu and his role in destroying the 911 metallurgical evidence: Christopher Bollyn: The Deception That Changed The World, Chapter XV: The Destruction of the Evidence").
Steel samples were removed from the site before the NIST investigation began. In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, debris was removed rapidly from the site to aid in recovery efforts and to facilitate emergency responders' efforts to work around the site. Once it was removed from the scene, the steel from WTC 7 could not be clearly identified. Unlike the pieces of steel from WTC 1 and WTC 2, which were painted red and contained distinguishing markings, WTC 7 steel did not contain such identifying characteristics.
Now, consider NIST's incredibly, almost laughably lame attempt to explain away evidence of thermite residue at the crime scene :
14. Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that it was highly unlikely that it could have been used to sever columns in WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.
Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails. Thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase the compound’s thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature.
To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb. of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column; presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.Lastly, before I become too jaded to keep calm and Le Carré on, a NIST disclaimer / blatant direct lie that is unceremoniously contradicted in the peer reviewed scientific article "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World TradeCenter Catastrophe," like they're not even trying anymore to be convincing, NIST gives us this load of make believe:
15. What about claims that the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found metallic residues that are evidence of thermite in dust and air samples, respectively, taken from the WTC area after Sept. 11, 2001?
There has not been any conclusive evidence presented to indicate that highly reactive pyrotechnic material was present in the debris of WTC 7. The studies that have been conducted to document trace metals, organic compounds, and other materials in the dust and air from the vicinity of the WTC disaster have all suggested common sources for these items.Alright, that's enough whacko-o conspiracy theory reporting for now.
The New York Times: Not The Only Elite Institution That Lies Through Its Rotten Teeth