Crockett Grabbe - PHD Physics Explains How Explosives Used In 9/11

As of recent fox news and msnbc have been on a journey to destroy the truth that rosie odonell is talking about. After watching the view the past few days, I have to say that the dialog and open discussions they have about real events has more value than all the shows on fox and msnbc combined.

A lot of facts that rosie brings up in her debates on the view are shared by history scholars and documented evidence. What is more obvious to point out is the attack dogs that have been sent out to tell rosie she does not have the right to speak her opinion. And that since people on 9/11 died, no one can discuss that day in detail.

Let us be very clear. Many of the widows of 9/11 do not believe the official story and are still grinding away to get answers to some questions they have been trying to get answered for 5 or more years.

A lot of the attack dogs going after rosie make fun of her for being fat and being a lesbian. What does that have to do with the subject at hand? It is an old trick to not discuss the real issue, instead make personal attacks on someone that are in no way constructive. If people are sitting around trying to talk about the issue, and the only thing they can come up with is that rosie is a fat lesbian, what kind of a debate is that? It is not.

Below are some links to the attack dogs on the main stream media that have no real argument against rosie, other than personal attacks.

Joe Scarboro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pYesEy5GgI

Sean Hannity - This guy would vote for a sheep if it was a republican running for president. Sean hannity really believes that democrats will allow terrorist attacks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggoUmtJERTI

Bill Orielly attack on Rosie -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBEN7zPqJmQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67xRQ1TI8D0

All of these attack dogs need the official 9/11 theory to keep their jobs. If the American people find out how the media has been lying to them this entire time, someone might want to go beat the shit out of them. Do not worry, their time is coming, America the real great giant is beginning to wake up.

Its time for a revolution.

If you think the government would not pull of 9/11, are you still unaware that our government has been involved in starting wars in lands of almost all the third world. All of these illegal secret wars on democratic governments with elected officials. CIA officials in the documentary below describes the history of illegal CIA wars started by the united states in the third world.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3453261789658676035

It has been evident for a number of weeks now that talk show host Rosie O'Donnell has been trying to cover 9/11 truth in the best way she can without being yanked off the air - now her latest blog posting confirms this.

In her latest blog, dated March 15th, O'Donnell dispenses with the small talk and gets to the nub of the matter by stating some of the facts surrounding the demolition of building 7 on 9/11.

Here is the Blog entry in full:

at 5 30 pm
9 11 2001
wtc7 collapsed

for the third time in history
fire brought down a steel building
reducing it to rubble

hold on folks
here we go

• The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.
• Silverstein said to the fire department commander “the smartest thing to do is pull it.”
• Firefighters withdrawing from the area stated the building was going to “blow up”.
• The roof of WTC 7 visibly crumbled and the building collapsed perfectly into its footprint.
• Molten steel and partially evaporated steel members were found in the debris.

[WTC 7] contained offices of the FBI, Department of Defense, IRS (which contained prodigious amounts of corporate tax fraud, including Enron’s), US Secret Service, Securities & Exchange Commission (with more stock fraud records), and Citibank’s Salomon Smith Barney, the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management and many other financial institutions. [Online Journal]

The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [by the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency’s major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. …”Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive,” said Max Berger of New York’s Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. “This is a disaster for these cases.” [New York Lawyer]

Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. [TheStreet]

Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service’s largest field office with more than 200 employees. …”All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building,” according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran. [TechTV]

lets start here
ok…go slow
remember 2 breathe
use google

by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer

To the members of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven:

I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11, and why it is a physically provable fact that some of the damage done to the Pentagon could not have occurred from a Boeing 757 impact, and therefore the 9/11 Commission report is not complete and arguably a cover-up. I will not speculate about what may have been covered up, I will only speak from my professional opinion. But I will explain why I do not believe the Pentagon was hit by a Boeing 757.

I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent many years in Aerospace, including structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

The structural design of a large aircraft like a 757 is based around managing the structural loads of a pressurized vessel, the cabin, to near-atmospheric conditions while at the lower pressure region of cruising altitudes, and to handle the structural and aerodynamic loads of the wings, control surfaces, and the fuel load. It is made as light as possible, and is certainly not made to handle impact loads of any kind.

If a 757 were to strike a reinforced concrete wall, the energy from the speed and weight of the aircraft will be transferred, in part into the wall, and to the structural failure of the aircraft. It is not too far of an analogy as if you had an empty aluminum can, traveling at high speed hitting a reinforced concrete wall. The aluminum can would crumple (the proper engineering term is buckle) and, depending on the structural integrity of the wall, crack, crumble or fail completely. The wall failure would not be a neat little hole, as the energy of the impact would be spread throughout the wall by the reinforcing steel.

This is difficult to model accurately, as any high speed, high energy, impact of a complex structure like an aircraft, into a discontinuous wall with windows etc. is difficult. What is known is that nearly all of the energy from this event would be dissipated in the initial impact, and subsequent buckling of the aircraft.

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9 feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly perfectly cut circular hole (see below) in a reinforced concrete wall, with no subsequent damage to the rest of the wall. (If we are to believe that somehow this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this sixth final wall.)
 

EXIT HOLE IN PENTAGON RING-C
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, is alleged to have punched through 6 blast-resistant concrete walls‹a total of nine feet of reinforced concrete‹before exiting through this hole.
 

It is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean cut circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with an explosive shaped charge. An explosive shaped charge, or cutting charge is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is referred to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind the initial shaped charge to enter whatever has been penetrated.

I do not know what happened on 9/11, I do not know how politics works in this country, I can not explain why the mainstream media does not report on the problems with the 9/11 Commission. But I am an engineer, and I know what happens in high speed impacts, and how shaped charges are used to "cut" through materials.

I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757 incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft (which I also feel is impossible), the fact that the two main engines were never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that our government has direct video coverage of the flight path, and impact, from at least a gas station and hotel, which they have refused to release.

You can call me a "tin hat", crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused by a Boeing 757.

Sincerely,
Michael Meyer

It doesnt feel like you are crazy. It seems to be common sense. You do not have to prove every single detail about 9/11 to understand that a lot of the information about 9/11 is not public.

Ok so maybe you don't think 9/11 was an inside job. To set the preface for this entry, persons believing the official version, you would think, would want to protect the women and men who gave all that day to save some lives. Instead those workers from ground zero that suffer greatly from mercury on the brain and different cancers have to jump through hoops to get money to pay for their medical cost.

The video here is an interview with a ground zero responder. Even though this man goes through regular chemo therapy, he still must prove to the New York workers compensation department that he is as sick as he obviously is.

The world trade center towers were loaded with asbestos. Clean up of the asbestos while the building were standing would cost millions of dollars and a lot of time. A slurry mixture of asbestos and cement was sprayed on as fireproofing material. But this practice was banned by the New York City Council in 1971. This halted the spraying, but not before hundreds of tons of the material had been applied.

When the towers were demolished, microscopic fragments of any and everything in those towers was in the air. Even the dumbest of minds could understand that this area is a deadly hazard. I mean they know there was asbestos and computer parts with mercury in them, fragments so small they could be inhaled into peoples lungs and there those particles build up and cause all sorts of health problems. And yet federal officials assured the community that the fires burning at ground zero in the critical weeks after 9/11 were not a health hazard.

Dr. Fred Kilbourne, A high level federal scientist, issued a memo on September 12, 2001 to the Centers for Disease Control against the speedy return to buildings in the area because of possible hazards from various toxic materials.

Associate City Health Commissioner Kelly McKinney on October 6, 2001 said that proper safety protocol for WTC site workers was not being enforced. ^{- Source Juan Gonzalez, "Clearing the Air with Truth," "New York Daily News," September 5, 2001.}

President Bush has been faulted for interfering with the Environmental Protection Agency interpretations and pronouncements regarding air quality.(Source)

Over half a million Iraq's have died, thousands of troops dead, tens of thousands more critically wounded all over a war built on lies and the fear of terrorist. If George Bush is willing to kill troops and Iraq's by the thousands, why is it so hard to imagine that he would kill 3,000 people at ground zero to get approval for two wars that were planned before 9/11.

Both the Afghan war and Iraq war were both planned before 9/11. From a quote in a document written and supported by members of George Bush's administration, Dick Cheney(vice president), Paul Wolfowitz(president of the world bank), Jeb Bush (govenor of florida), Donald Rumsfeld (ex secretary of defense), pg. 51"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings evolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

What this means is that, in order for the United States people to go along with the idea of having a military presence all around the world and military bases stationed throughout, there needs to be an event like Pearl Harbor to shape the American peoples minds into thinking our military needs to police the world and our country to keep us safe from terrorism.

On 9/11 the Project for a new American Century got their wish and their pearl harbor happened. And since they have had public support for two wars and of course the never ending war on terror, or maybe it is a never ending war on American freedoms.

Here is a hint, the Federal Reserve Bank is not a part of the USA government. It is owned by private investors. The constitution of the United States gives the power to our government to print its own money interest free. Instead our government decided not to print its own money and outsource it to the Federal Reserve Bank. So then we the people have to pay interest on the money our government gets printed at the Federal Reserve Bank. The constitution forbids the outsourcing of the printing of money.

The Constitution: Article 1: Section 8:
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

What do others think about a private federal bank?

Thomas Jefferson was adamantly opposed to the idea of a privately owned federal bank and said " I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies".

Andrew Jackson also said, when speaking to the bankers: "You are a den of vipers and thieves.  I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God I will rout you out."

Henry Ford once said "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning".

The first two videos released from Pentagon surveillance cameras was released because of a freedom of information act against the government by a group of people called Judicial Watch. Judicial Watch is not a group of people I care much for. Main point being that they have stopped trying to get the other 80 some videos still in the possession of the government that are related to the so called flight 77 impact at the pentagon.

Recently a video was released by the government that got little debate on national television and for many reasons. One being the group or person who got this video released was not a part of the Judicial Watch group. It was an individual suing on his own behalf and the behalf of every American who wants the government to show some proof of their conspiracy theory that 19 men flew 4 planes around the US air space unchallenged.

For more information on how this video was released and documents the govern met had written to block the release of videos related to 9/11 at this website www.flight77.info. The story of 9/11 starts here.

As a CNN reported took 15 seconds to talk about the newly released video, he made mention, just like many others who have seen the video, that no plane can be seen from the camera.

Rudolph W. Giuliani should spend time in jail and never come close to a seat at the white house. The only thing Giuliani can run for president on, is his role in the September 11 attacks in 2001. What a lot of people fail to realize in this country is that Giuliani is the reason why there was no proper investigation into the wreckage of the twin towers and building 7.

In any case of a criminal event, such as 9/11, all evidence should be looked over to find out what the details of the cause of the failures were.  Doing this helps the planning for future buildings and existing buildings that could fall under the same attack. However, when it came to 9/11, most things that should have been done, were not done, and they were done illegally.

It is against the law to remove evidence from a crime scene and then have that evidence destroyed overseas. That is exactly what Giuliani did. New York authorities authorized all but 150 pieces of the wreckage to be sold and shipped over seas to be recycled and not to be examined for investigation.

But why? Why would hundreds of thousands of pieces of steel be shipped away before it can be analyzed?

But New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg insisted there are better ways to study the tragedy of September 11.

"If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do," said Bloomberg, a former engineering major. "Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything."

To end this thought, lets think about the statement, "Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything."

If you look at the photos of the steel beams, you will see that by looking at the steel you can see massive steal columns cut in angles that match the angles used by demolition cutter charges.

By simply looking at these steel columns, you can see that no fire could cut steel in such a way and no damage from a plane could cause this type of damage.

For an official to make these types of statements and then have the steel removed and shipped off without analysis is criminal.

Dr. Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D, is professor emeritus at Texas A&M University and former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX. He served as chief economist for the United States Department of Labor during 2001--2002, George W. Bush's first term. In 2005, he gained public attention as the first prominent government official to publicly claim that 9/11 was an "inside job," and is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. This interview footage was recorded in June 2006 at the Chicago 9/11 Truth conference.