Never Forget: FEMA arrived the night before

youtube – encryptedreality0

Tom Kennedy, a spokesman for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) “National Urban Search and Rescue Team” during an interview on national TV with CBS News anchor Dan Rather, Mr. Kennedy let slip a frightening truth: FEMA sent the Urban Search and Rescue Team to New York City the night before the attacks occurred!

Mr. Kennedy tells Dan Rather, “We’re currently one of the first teams that was deployed to support the City of New York in this disaster. We arrived on late Monday night (note: Monday was September 10) and went right into action on Tuesday morning”

Israel and U.S. jointly target Sweden in propaganda blitzkrieg

(WMR) — After the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet published an expose of the Israeli Defense Forces harvesting the organs from young Palestinians killed by its forces in the West Bank, Israel’s propaganda machine, which has its tentacles in the world’s largest media companies and the Pentagon, went to work on demonizing Sweden.

Our sources in Finland report that Finnish television is stating that Israel’s Mossad was behind the hijacking of the Maltese-flagged, Russian-crewed, and Russo-Finnish chartered ”Arctic Sea” in Swedish territorial waters. The charter firm is Solchart Arkhangelsk Ltd. of Helsinki. The Russian Prosecutor General’s Office Investigation Committee says it is cooperating with authorities in Malta, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, and Sweden on the hijacking of the “Arctic Sea.” Israel is noticeably absent from the list of cooperating countries.

The timing of the Israeli piracy operation was to divert attention away from the Swedish media coverage of the organ theft story and get an additional bang out of claiming that the ship, which was carrying Finnish timber from Pietarssari, Finland, to Algeria, was carrying S-300 missiles to Iran. The Mossad-influenced media outlets, including Rupert Murdoch’s Sunday Times of London, and the UK’s Daily Telegraph, are spinning the story that the S-300 missiles were loaded onto the Arctic Sea in Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave on the Baltic Sea, that represents only one of three nations in the Baltic that remain outside of NATO: Russia, Sweden, and Finland. It is no coincidence that the Israeli propaganda machine is accusing Finland of being involved in the missile transfer and Sweden permitting its territorial waters to be used in the ship’s voyage to Algeria.

The Israeli-influenced media are reporting that the “Arctic Sea” consorted with organized crime elements in Kaliningard to effect the transfer of the missiles. However, the Israelis are not commenting on reports that the “Arctic Sea’s” hijackers, ethnic Russians from Russia, Latvia, and Estonia, have been linked to “Mishpucka” (Jewish mafia) circles in Eastern Europe. Israel is obviously concerned that their role in the ship’s hijacking will come out in the Moscow trial of their eight organized crime-linked hijackers and shine a light on the close connections between the Mossad and the Mishpucka in Eastern Europe.

The hijackers have been identified as Estonian nationals and residents Yevgeniy Mironov, Aleksey Buleyev, Dmitriy Bartenev, Igor Borisov, Andrey Lunev and Aleksey Andryushin, and Latvian residents Vitaliy Lepin and Dmitriy Savin.

Sweden and Finland, in addition to having no desire to join NATO, have also voiced sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians. Aftonbladet and Sweden were accused of being “anti-Semitic,” a familiar mantra from the Israelis when their human rights policies are criticized. The Swedish government rejected a demand by Israeli expansionist Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to condemn the Aftonbladet report on organ harveting and trafficking by the Israelis.

Israel’s ambassador in Stockholm, Benny Dagan, when asked by a Swedish reporter why Israel did not investigate the Aftonbladet report on organ harvesting, replied with an unusual answer: “Why don’t we investigate why the Mossad and the Jews were behind the bombing of the twin towers?”

Based on Israel’s past false flag and organized crime syndicate operations, both investigations may have merit.

Israel turned up the heat on Sweden. Aftonbladet’s editor Jan Helin was accused of being a “Nazi.” Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt was disinvited from visiting Israel. The whining from Israel and its echo chambers in the corporate media came amid other shots fired from the Israelis against Ireland’s former President and UN Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson over her being awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Barack Obama, Norway for its policy of disinvesting in Israeli firms, Swedish aid to the Palestinians, and former Finnish President and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari for calling for Hamas to be included in the Middle East peace talks, and Scotland for releasing a Libyan agent convicted of bombing Pan Am 103 to Libya.

Israeli and American Jewish right-wing commentators have hurled contempt on the Celtic and Nordic nations, regardless of their liberal and social democratic traditions, complaining that they are all rife with anti-Semites and support terrorism. The Celtics and Nordics got a taste from the Israelis of what is usually dished out to the Slavics. Sweden came in for the most abuse from the Israeli propaganda circles.

It should come as no surprise that of all the charities operating in the Kabul region, that it was a Swedish charity-run hospital in Shaniz, south of the Afghan capital, that was stormed by U.S. troops on September 6. The Swedish Committee for Afghanistan stated that U.S. forces tied up hospital staff members and the visiting relatives of patients. The Americans smashed doors and searched hospital wards looking for “Taliban.” The incursion violated international laws and agreements on the inviolability of hospitals and medical staff in war zones but exactly mirrors Israeli tactics in Gaza and the West Bank.

There are a number of Pentagon holdovers from the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld neocon clique who “Israelized” U.S. military and security policies in Iraq and Afghanistan and are obviously still calling the shots.

Previously published in the Wayne Madsen Report.

Copyright © 2009 WayneMadenReport.com

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and nationally-distributed columnist. He is the editor and publisher of the Wayne Madsen Report (subscription required).

Still on the fence about 9/11? Watch this short compilation

Top Obama Adviser Is A 9/11 Truther

Meet Van Jones:

President Obama’s “green jobs czar” Van Jones has been targeted again and again by conservatives for his controversial views and now they’ll have another item to use as fodder.

Mr. Jones signed a statement for 911Truth.org in 2004 demanding an investigation into what the Bush Administration may have done that “deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.”

His name is listed with 99 other prominent signatories supporting such an investigation on the 911Truth.org website, including Code Pink co-founders Medea Benjamin and Jodi Evans, comedienne Janeane Garofalo, Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia and others. He’s identified as the executive director for the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights on the statement, which he founded before going to the White House

Here’s the statement:

And, Jones signed the statement as No. 46:

And support for 9/11 Truth Movement isn’t the only thing on Jones’s resume. He’s also said that whites have deliberately steered poison into minority communities because of a lack of “racial justice” and has spoken of a “complete revolution.”

So far, no comment from the White House………

Susan Lindauer Reveals Facts about 9/11 Warning

by Michael Collins
Scoop New Zealand

Former Accused Iraqi Agent Reveals Facts about 9/11 Warning

I first wrote about Susan Lindauer’s struggle against the Bush-Cheney regime in October 2007, “American Cassandra: Susan Lindauer’s Story.” This was initially published in “Scoop” Independent Media (complete series) and carried by a wide variety of concerned Internet news sites and blogs. This interview follows the full dismissal of charges against her just before President Obama’s inauguration on January 20, 2009 . This is the first in depth interview that Lindauer has offered regarding 911. Below is part one of the interview.

I asked Ms. Lindauer to make her own statement about why she’s willing to go into detail now about 911 and the governments handling of pre 911 intelligence.

“For five years, I was the poster child for President Bush’s retaliation against Americans who opposed his War Policy in Iraq. In March, 2004 the Justice Department indicted me for acting as an “unregistered Iraqi Agent” (not espionage), because I delivered a prescient letter to my second cousin, Andy Card, former Chief of Staff to President Bush, warning of the dire consequences of War.

“More dangerously, I had decided to talk. In February, 2004 I approached the senior staff of Senators Trent Lott and John McCain and asked to testify in front of the new blue ribbon Presidential Commission on Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence. Within a month, I was astounded to wake up one morning to hear FBI agents pounding on the door of my house in Maryland with an arrest warrant.

“The indictment called me “Symbol Susan.” It was a bizarre notation unsupported by any evidence or action in the indictment. It did however have one crucial purpose?to communicate a warning that anybody breaking ranks from the Bush White House should expect to be brutally crushed like I was.To speak the truth under President George Bush was the worst crime of all. It was treason.

‘But what exactly was the U.S. government trying to hide?

“The answer is more far reaching than you would expect. In the first article of this series written and edited with the help of Michael Collins, we talk about the 9/11 warning that my team delivered to the Office of Counter-Terrorism at the Justice Department in August, 2001.

“For those who think you’ve heard the whole story of 9/11, you might be surprised.”

Susan Lindauer, March 1, 2009

Interview of Susan Lindauer by Michael Collins

Michael Collins: What confirmation can you provide that you actually warned about 9/11 several months before the attack?

Susan Lindauer: On June 17, 2008 the Court granted the Defense our first and only pre-trial evidentiary hearing in five years, which allowed my attorney to begin confirming that my relationships with my intelligence handlers were fully authentic and involved counter-terrorism.

Dr. Parke Godfrey, an associate professor of computer science at York University in Toronto, testified under oath that starting in the year 2000, and several times in the spring and summer of 2001, I warned him that we expected a major attack on the southern part of Manhattan, and that the attack would encompass the World Trade Center. Dr. Godfrey assured the Court that he had told the FBI about my 9/11 warning during a sit down interview in Toronto in September, 2004, which was jointly attended by a member of the Canadian Royal Mountie Police.

It’s worth noting that Dr. Godfrey is a scientist and a precise, deliberate and methodical thinker, who chooses his words carefully.. In style, he’s been compared to Dr. Spock of Star Trek fame. He does Leonard Nimoy proud. He would make an outstanding witness at any congressional hearing.

Quoting from his testimony in June 2008, he said that I told him, “A massive attack would occur in the southern part of Manhattan that would involve airplanes and possibly a nuclear weapon.”

He testified that I told him “the attack would complete the cycle of the first bombing of the World Trade Center . It would finish what was started in the 1993 ( World Trade Center ) attack.”

Dr. Godfrey testified that I first mentioned the possibility of an attack in the year 2000, which coincided with the Lockerbie Trial. Then throughout the spring and summer of 2001, I described the threat much more specifically as “involving airplanes” and the World Trade Center .

In August 2001, I told him the attack was “imminent.”

He testified that I urged him to stay out of New York City .

Collins: What was your background that made it possible for you to issue this 9/11 warning?

Lindauer: Throughout the 1990s, the U.S. used me as a back-channel to Libyan and Iraqi officials at the United Nations, seeking to leverage my anti-sanctions and anti-war activism to establish contacts within nations under sanctions, in support of anti-terrorism goals.. I established contact with the Libyan Embassy in May, 1995, for the purpose of starting negotiations for the Lockerbie Trial. In that capacity, I met with Libyan diplomats approximately 150 times over the next eight years. I established contacts at the Iraqi Embassy in August, 1996. In addition to providing a back channel for terrorism intelligence from Baghdad , I conducted preliminary talks to resume the weapons inspections with Iraq ‘s Ambassador to the United Nations, Dr. Saeed Hasan, and other senior Iraqi officials. Our purpose was to guarantee that Iraq would agree to rigorous U.S. standards for transparency in the inspections process before the matter went to the U.N. Security Council.

It must be emphasized that all of my work was heavily supervised by handlers from the U.S. Intelligence Community. And most unusually, from our first meetings, Iraqi and Libyan diplomats fully understood my motivations to assist in facilitating an end to sanctions, and that I would function as a back channel to contacts tied to the United States government. We wanted diplomats to use me for that purpose. There was no deceit involved.

Collins: Who was your CIA handler?

Lindauer: Dr. Richard Fuisz (FUZE) is the most fascinating individual I have encountered in my life.

Dr. Fuisz was a major CIA operative in Syria and Lebanon in the 1980s. Dr. Fuisz coordinated the hostage rescue of Terry Anderson et al out of Beirut , Lebanon . His team located their make-shift prisons and called in the Delta Force for a daring raid. He testified before Congress about U.S. corporations that supplied Iraq with weapons systems before the first Gulf War. He got outed as CIA by Damascus after stealing the blueprints for Syria ‘s brand new telecommunications system.

Finally, Dr. Fuisz claims to know the real story of Lockerbie, including the identities of the terrorist masterminds, whom he insisted were not Libyan at all. It was he who suggested that somebody needed to approach Libya about the Lockerbie Trial. An individual who passionately opposed sanctions and recognized possible terrorist scenarios, he thought, would be ideal to start up the talks.

That was me. Despite my ordeal, I am extremely proud of our work together. I remain deeply grateful that Dr. Fuisz invited me to embark on this extraordinary adventure inside the most interesting Middle Eastern embassies at the United Nations. I loved every moment of it.

Collins: What first triggered your concern about a possible attack involving airplanes and the World Trade Center? How did Lockerbie figure into the 9/11 warning?

Lindauer: The Lockerbie Trial in the year 2000 got us thinking of what the next terrorist scenario would look like. The bombings of Pan Am 103 in December, 1988 and UTA (French airlines) in September, 1989 were the last attacks involving airplanes prior to September 11, 2001 . Our team worried openly that the Trial of the two accused Libyans would inspire a sort of “tribute attack” to the success of Lockerbie.

The problem is that while most Americans have refused to accept that Libya ‘s man, Mr. Megraghi was innocent of the crime, it happens to be true. And terrorists groups know that. They know very well who was responsible for planting the bomb on Pan Am 103, and they know that those individuals have never been brought to justice. Indeed, throughout the Trial, when the U.S. made such a poor showing of forensic evidence against the accused Libyans, that U.S. failure was gossip throughout the Middle East . As Dr. Fuisz used to say, terrorist groups thought that for all the mighty resources of U.S. Intelligence, the U.S. was either too stupid to catch them. Or we were afraid because the real terrorists are “too big.”

Either of those beliefs stood to create a huge and irresistible provocation to the younger generation of jihadis. It was an easy step to anticipate that younger terrorists would be inspired to launch a tribute attack to the “heroes” who came before them. On that basis, we drew up an extreme threat scenario that the next major attack would most likely involve airplane hijackings or airplane bombings.

That is exactly what happened by the way. Back in the 1980s, Osama bin Laden called Ahmed Jibril “a hero” and “the greatest fighter against Israel who ever lived.”

Sure enough, my own extensive sources in the Middle East have repeatedly told me that Ahmed Jibril was the true mastermind of Lockerbie. And so we find the 9/11 puzzle fits together exactly.

Collins: When did your concern jump from “hypothetical scenario” to the belief that an attack was actively being planned?

Lindauer: I remember it all vividly. In April, 2001 I received a summons to visit Dr. Fuisz at his office in Virginia . We met almost weekly anyway. On this occasion, he phoned my home and asked me to come right away. He also inquired how quickly I was making my next trip to New York to see the Embassies. He wanted to talk to me before I left, and he wanted me to go soon.

Of course I visited him immediately. Dr. Fuisz demanded that I must warn diplomats at the Iraqi and Libyan Missions that their nations would suffer a major military offensive if it was discovered that either had possessed intelligence about possible airplane attacks, and failed to notify the United States through my back channel.

I was reluctant to deliver such a harsh message. I have always been an anti-war activist. That’s a major reason for my success in dealing with the Arabs, because they appreciate the consistency of my opposition to violence on both sides. So, on my next trip to New York , I soft pedaled Dr. Fuisz’s warning. I requested that diplomats send messages to Baghdad and Tripoli seeking intelligence on possible airplane attacks. But I made no threats of violent reprisal against them.

When I got home to Washington , I met with Dr. Fuisz, who demanded to know how diplomats had responded to his threat. I had to admit that I had stopped short of actually threatening them. But I assured him that I had requested their cooperation.

At that point, Dr. Fuisz became enraged. As I recall, in all our years together, there was never any other time that he lost his temper and yelled at me. He stormed up and down the room. He demanded that I must return to New York immediately, and I must tell diplomats “the United States will bomb them into the Stone Age, worse than they’ve ever been bombed before, if they don’t help us identify any terrorist conspiracies involving airplanes. They will lose everything. We will destroy them.” He was not pacified until I promised to deliver that message exactly as he had communicated it. He expressed great satisfaction when I promised that I would make sure they understood the warning came from him, not me, backed by forces above him.

Dr. Fuisz was determined the Arabs should know the threat was deadly serious.

Right then I knew terrorists were actively plotting an attack. This was more than checking our trap lines, or putting out inquiries. Something was moving. Dr. Fuisz was firing back to stop cooperation.

Reinforcing that tension, throughout the summer of 2001, Dr. Fuisz continued to prod and push hard for any fragment of intelligence from Iraq or Libya involving airplane hijackings or airplane bombings. He urged me not to filter intelligence or test its accuracy before informing him. During numerous meetings, he tried to explain how urgently he needed to collect even fragments of intelligence, whether it appeared to make sense to me or not. He begged me to hold nothing back.

That’s when I knew that something bigger was going on. Dr. Fuisz was already onto it. Again and again, our talks turned to airplane hijackings and/or airplane bombings in a reprise of the 1993 World Trade Center attack. It sounds uncanny but we all understood exactly what was going to happen.

In turn, I shared those fears and dangers with other friends and family, including Dr. Parke Godfrey.

All of us took the danger very seriously. Our team was strong, proactive and fiercely protective of American security.

Collins: Ultimately, did Libya or Iraq provide any intelligence regarding the attack?

Lindauer: No, they did not. After the attack, it became clear that neither country could have been party to the conspiracy. Gadhaffi and bin Laden hated each other. Back in 1995, Libya was the first country in the world to warn Interpol about Osama, and urge an international warrant for his arrest. Saddam’s government hated him, too. Baghdad considered Osama’s extreme brand of Sunni fundamentalism to pose a serious destabilizing threat to Iraq ‘s moderate Sunni elite. Osama was a wrecking ball to Arab governments. They all despised him.

In fact, we pushed Iraq so hard for intelligence in the months before 9/11 that afterwards Iraqi diplomats aggressively challenged our U.S. claims of ignorance. A couple of diplomats put it to me bluntly: “Obviously you knew it was coming, because you kept telling us about it. So why didn’t you stop it? Why didn’t you do something before this, instead of blaming us now. You should be blaming yourselves.”

No, even before the 9/11 attack, I deduced that Dr. Fuisz’s advance intelligence was derived from an entirely different source. It just happened to be one I had not expected.

Collins: All right. Who did you warn about this attack?

Lindauer: By early August, 2001, our team was gravely concerned that an attack was “imminent.”

When Robert Mueller was nominated to be Director of the FBI, we dallied with going to his confirmation hearings to put a buzz in the ears of congressional staffers about our fears.

Instead, Dr. Fuisz instructed me to telephone U. S. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s office.

In mid-August, I phoned the staff of his private office at the Justice Department, which probably consists of about 20 people. Identifying myself as an asset covering Libya and Iraq , I made a formal request that his private office issue an emergency alert throughout the department for any fragment of intelligence pertaining to possible airplane hijackings or airplane bombings. I explained that we expected a major attack involving that scenario, and we urgently needed cooperation from all other agencies.

Ashcroft’s office told me to contact the Office of Counter-Terrorism at the Justice Department, and repeat what I had just told them. I did so immediately.

Collins: What happened after that?

Lindauer: I didn’t stop there. Most Americans would be stunned to know that in mid-August, 2001, our team was so convinced a 9/11 style attack was imminent that I visited my second cousin, Andy Card at his house in Arlington, Virginia, so that we could warn him.

I parked on the street and waited in my car, chain smoking for almost two hours. Occasionally, I could see neighbors peering out of their windows. In my head, I rehearsed what I would tell the police if they showed up to investigate this strange car parked outside the house of the Chief of Staff to the President of the United States .

Unhappily, he did not return home, and I finally left without sharing our fears.

Driving away, I remember feeling that I was making the greatest mistake of my life. Throughout all these years, it is one of my few regrets.

Collins: Who appears to have been Dr. Fuisz’s other source on 9/11?

Lindauer: Dr. Fuisz never formally revealed his source to me. But within about 30 minutes after airplanes struck the Twin Towers , he blurted something to me over the phone.

He told me the Israeli Mossad had advance warning about the attack. As I recall, he said it before the buildings collapsed.

He asked me if I thought it was “an accident that a man and woman happened to be waiting on the sidewalk with a video camera, ready to record the attack.” He was highly agitated. He challenged me “how often a bystander has a camera cued up to record a car accident?”

Then he said, “Those are Israeli agents. It’s not an accident. They knew this attack was coming. And they were waiting for it.”

I was outraged and shocked by the images on the television. I shot back something to the effect of, “You mean, we’ve been looking for an attack all this time! And the Israelis knew about it? And they didn’t tell us?” In retrospect, outside the passion of that particular moment, the Israelis may have told us much more than Richard Fuisz may have known.

Immediately the phone line cut dead between us.

I called him right back. Very calmly, he said, “Susan, we must never talk about that again.”

There’s a couple more details regarding this Mossad team with the video camera. Dr. Fuisz was able to announce their identities before the media publicized who they are. The attack was so new when he said it, that it seemed to me that he already knew about them.

I could be wrong. But I don’t think so.

Collins: Thank you Ms. Lindauer. Part two of this series Susan Lindauer will describe the extraordinary efforts by the Justice Department to deceive U.S. Judge Michael Mukasey in the Southern District of New York of the authenticity of Ms. Lindauer’s 9/11 warning.

Global Research Articles by Michael Collins

Fire Consumes WTC 7-Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, February 9, 2009

Giant flames engulf every floor of 44-story building and it remains standing, yet limited fires across just 8 floors of WTC 7 brought down building within 7 seconds on 9/11. How can NIST’s “new phenomenon” explain this one?

A fierce fire consumed all 44 floors of a skyscraper in Beijing today, shooting 30 foot flames into the air, but unlike the similarly-sized 47-story WTC 7, which suffered limited fires across just eight floors, the building in China did not collapse.

“The fire was burning from the ground floor to the top floor of the large building, the flames reflecting in the glass facade of the main CCTV tower next to the hotel and cultural center,” reports the New York Times.

“The 241-room Mandarin Oriental hotel in the building was due to open this year. Flames were spotted around 7:45 p.m. and within 20 minutes the fire had spread throughout the building, dominating that part of the city.”

“Hundreds of firefighting vehicles and police blocked off all approaches to the building – which was also set to house a luxury hotel due to be opened in 2009 – with flames appearing to leap 20 to 30 feet into the air,” adds The London Times.

Compare images of WTC 7 with those of the skyscraper fire in Beijing. Note that the Beijing skyscraper appears to be leaning due to the unorthodox design of the building – it did not suffer any kind of collapse.

Beijing skyscraper.

WTC 7

Beijing skyscraper.

WTC 7

Beijing skyscraper.

WTC 7

To any sane and rational observer, which of these buildings would have been the most likely to collapse? And yet it was WTC 7 which collapsed within 7 seconds into its own footprint on 9/11. The Beijing skyscraper, though gutted by fire damage, remains standing.

How do the debunkers explain away this one? How come NIST’s newly invented “phenomenon” of “thermal expansion” didn’t put paid to the skyscraper in Beijing? Does fire have different properties in China compared to the U.S.? Does it behave in different ways depending on what country it’s in?

Remember that WTC 7 was structurally reinforced and suffered limited fires across just 8 floors.

The core of NIST’s explanation, that an “extraordinary event” called “thermal expansion” was to blame for the sudden total collapse of WTC 7 is of course on the face of it a fraud when one considers the innumerable number of buildings that have suffered roaring fires across the majority of their floors and remained standing, whereas WTC 7 suffered limited fire damage across a handful of floors.

The Beijing skyscraper fire provides yet more comparable evidence to illustrate the monolithic hoax that fire damage alone can cause buildings to collapse implosion style, adding more weight to the argument that both WTC 7 and the twin towers were destroyed by explosives that were seen and heard by dozens of eyewitnesses who were at ground zero.

Take another example – the Windsor building in Madrid, a 32 story skyscraper which was a raging inferno for no less than 24 hours before fire crews were able to put out the flames. Despite the building being constructed of columns a fraction as thick as those used in the WTC twin towers, as well as a total lack of fireproofing, the building’s top section only partially collapsed while the integrity of the whole structure remained firmly intact.

Compare these images of the Windsor building fire to those of WTC 7 and the twin towers.

The skyscraper fire in Beijing offers another stark and bold reminder that when one eliminates the dodgy, agenda-driven, and incomprehensible delusions of NIST, one fact remains abundantly clear;

Office fires – even the flame shooting towering inferno variety – cannot cause modern buildings to implode in on themselves and collapse. Only deliberately placed explosives can achieve this end. The Windsor fire, the Beijing skyscraper fire and many more yet to come painfully underscore the awful truth that the only way WTC 7 and the twin towers could have collapsed in the manner that they did was by means of controlled demolition.

Nerve agent may be missing

VIA Deseret News
By Lee Davidson
Published: Sunday, Feb. 8, 2009 3:40 a.m. MST

Is the Army missing some nerve gas?

Pentagon auditors concede that is a remote possibility because of discrepancies in records between how much chemical weapons agent was initially stored and how much of it was later destroyed at Utah’s Deseret Chemical Depot and other bases nationwide.

But officials believe all the nerve agent in question was destroyed, according to a partially censored U.S. Army Audit Agency report obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. Auditors list in it several reasons that could have caused apparent-but-unreal variances in those records.

But auditors concluded, “The (Army Chemical Materials) Agency didn’t have complete assurance that amounts recorded in the system were accurate, which increased its chances for heightened levels of program scrutiny by federal, state and international organizations that have a vested interest in the elimination of chemical weapons.”

Such words can cause shivers among Utahns who remember such things as the death of thousands of sheep in Skull Valley in 1968 that were blamed on nerve gas tests that went awry at nearby Dugway Proving Ground, and Skull Valley residents who have blamed mysterious illnesses on exposure to tiny amounts of nerve agent from such tests.

Auditors reviewed Army Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) records of arms destruction at seven bases nationwide, including at the Deseret base near Tooele, “to determine whether the agency accounted for destroyed chemical agents.” A international treaty requires destruction of all such arms by April 2012.

While the Aug. 26 report said a good job was done recording the amounts of most types of chemical munitions destroyed, auditors found discrepancies between how much nerve agent had been recorded as stored in one-ton containers, and how much was actually destroyed.

“They did not have effective procedures in place to ensure amounts destroyed were accurately recorded in the (electronic recording) system. Consequently, CMA didn’t have complete assurance that amounts recorded in the system were accurate,” the report said.

For example, it said a random sample of such records found “20 CODs (certificates of destruction) were overstated by 4,026 pounds.” Also, another “nine CODs were understated by 1,093 pounds.” A drop of some types of nerve agent can cause death.

Auditors wrote, “Key CMA personnel told us they were aware of discrepancies involving ton containers. They also told us they expected variances to occur because of inaccurate initial ton container weights and the hardened heel process” where some nerve agent hardens over time and no longer is in liquid form.

Exactly which bases had such variances was censored from the released version of the report. But some uncensored text shows that the Utah base was one with such problems.

Auditors said officials explained that when the one-ton containers were filled initially years ago, different methods of varying accuracy were used to weigh and record how much agent was in each — and those sometimes inaccurate weights were used when America declared how much it had for treaty purposes.

For example, one site used a scale where “weight could vary by as much as 129 pounds if reweighed on a more accurate scale,” the report said.

So, auditors wrote, “Due to these methodologies it was determined that weights, in some cases, were inaccurate because of the scales used during the time of production,” so it is not surprising they did not match the amounts actually destroyed.

Also, auditors wrote that “some of the chemical agent hardened in the container and remained in this state even after the container was destroyed during the demilitarization process.”

The report added, “At Tooele, the contractor used a waste tracking form to: document the differences; (and) show the approximate amount of agent remaining in the ton container after liquid agent had been destroyed.” Metal parts with hardened agent were then destroyed in a furnace.

The report added, “However, although we found that the tracking forms were signed by the contractor’s custodian, they weren’t signed by a government representative and the differences were reconciled and updated” in the database tracking how much was stored and destroyed.

Auditors also said no reviews into discrepancies — even when some large ones of up to 20 percent for some containers were noticed — were conducted because rules and contracts only required them if records for all ton containers at one site were off by 5 percent after their destruction was completed.

Auditors called for a few changes, including recording the actual amount of agent destroyed in databases and reconciling discrepancies quickly.

In a written response, the Chemical Materials Agency agreed with the report’s conclusions. It said it will determine how often reconciliation should be conducted as one-ton containers and contents are destroyed.

It said, however, it intends to continue listing possibly inaccurate amounts destroyed in its official database because adjusting the weights would require changes to international treaties. Instead of seeking that, it plans to add a report in the data system that “is capable of showing the variances from the declared weight.”

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Elimination of Chemical Weapons also agreed with the conclusions of the report, and accepted the corrective actions proposed by the Chemical Materials Agency.

Thoughts on WTC7, the third building to collapse on 9/11.

WTC7

I challenge any one to refute the assertion that WTC7 was a controlled demolition.

However I ask that you please spare me the empty talking points about Occam’s razor and incompetent government and links to CIA-owned Popular Mechanics feeble debunking articles.

Watch the video of this building collapsing in a symmetrical free-fall, into a neat pile of rubble, at 5:47pm, after not being hit by a plane, low temperature fires, and relatively minor, asymmetrical damage. Its a perfectly executed controlled demolition. Steel frame buildings simply can not lose all structural integrity in this manner without sequenced explosive charges cutting all the internal columns.

In a roaring inferno, sagging and asymmetrical collapse can occur. But never in history have steel skyscrapers collapsed symmetrically due to fire. The evidence continues to pile up. so go ahead and rewrite the laws of physics if it makes you feel better. I refuse to sit here and say 2+2=5. Maybe I don’t watch enough TV. Maybe I forgot to take my prozac. All I know is that was a controlled demolition if I ever saw one.

The scientific evidence is out there. Its already been discussed ad nauseum and proven beyond all reasonable doubt. I’m not going to go thru this mountain of evidence that has been collected, but here are a few links to get you started, if you are so inclined…

Scholars for 911 Truth and Justice

Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

WTC7.net

And of courrse, No WTC7 post would be complete without this little gem: