Showing posts with label Something. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Something. Show all posts

Friday, September 28, 2012

9/11 Something Fishy Happened That Day

As I saw the videos of the planes impacting the world trade center's twin towers, I was beside myself with disbelief. It was too much to process mentally. It seemed like a movie. There is no doubt that the events of September 11, 2001 are known by every human on the planet, and has affected the world deeply.

The "official" story, which was not properly investigated, is that the world trade center buildings came down because Islamic terrorists flew planes into the buildings. But, what about world trade center building no.7? No planes crashed into that building, and yet it came down, allegedly due to an office fire. That's something which makes one go, "Hmmmmm!" Can a normal office fire actually bring down a building? 1560 architects and engineers, under the collective name, "Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth", are taking this issue to court in America. They say that there is NO WAY a simple office fire could get hot enough to melt steel-reinforced concrete columns. I personally have seen people's homes completely burned out with no structural damage to the concrete structure whatsoever. Thusly, I had found myself taken in by conspiracy theories regarding the fallen world trade center buildings. However, new information has come to light, which sets the record straight. Let me say that there has come forth a Ph.D. scientist who has debunked all the previous explanations about how the world trade center buildings actually came down. Her name is Dr. Judy Wood.

Dr. Judy Wood is a scientist, and she collects evidence, not theories. She has written a book with her findings, entitled: "Where Did the Towers Go?" Herein below, I shall elucidate some of her findings, evidence only; and, you decide where the towers went. Okay?

1. From scientific observation of the collapse of the world trade center towers, Dr. Wood found that the buildings fell, or actually were pulverized, faster than the laws of physics would allow. If in a free fall, as from a controlled demolition, it should have taken 9 seconds for the towers to fall. In fact, it took only 8 seconds for the buildings to be mostly pulverized and the remainder to hit the ground.

2. As alluded to above, the buildings, for the most part, didn't fall, but were pulverized mid-air.

3. The twin towers were destroyed from the top-down, not from the bottom-up.

4. The upper 80% of the twin towers was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the ground. Many of the cleanup crew were surprised at the lack of rubble.

5. The upper 90% of world trade center no.7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the ground.

6. Remaining steel beams that were found were not melted, but rather had a "swiss-cheese" appearance. That is to say, they were full of holes.

7. According to eye-witness accounts, some things did spontaneously combust, without the existence of high heat, while other things did not. In fact, some of the "first responders" said that the dust cloud felt cool.

8. There was no evidence of any burnt human bodies.

9. The windows of surrounding buildings had odd-shaped holes "cut" out of them.

10. The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared.

And for me, here are the clinchers:

11. The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings.

12. The WTC7 rubble pile was too small for the total mass of the building and consisted of a lot of mud.

I don't know where the towers went, but Dr. Wood suggests that they went into dust. They were mostly pulverized, disintegrated, separated into in nano-particles. What could do something like that? An airplane? No. Jet fuel? No. What? Do we even have the technology on this planet to do something like that? I don't know. Do you?

In any case, Dr. Wood's data conclusively proves that the buildings did not come down by controlled demolition as many conspiracy theorists are suggesting. However, to their credit, it does look somewhat like a controlled demolition. The elements of thermite, an ingredient in bombs which consists of aluminum and oxidised iron, were found in the rubble. But, Dr. Woods says that those ingredients could be found if steel and aluminum were pulverized into their base elements.

So, my dear conspiracy theorists, I love you, but we were wrong. There is no way on God's green earth that controlled demolition could account for 80 to 90% of the world trade center buildings just disintegrating. 9-11 wasn't an inside job; it was something far more nefarious than our minds can even comprehend. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around it.

At the beginning of this article, I posed the question: "Where did the towers go?" I think that Dr. Wood has sufficiently answered that question. The question that remains is: "How did they go?" This article, being an opinion piece, I'm allowed to speculate and give my opinion. But, I have no opinion to answer that question. I do not have the necessary knowledge to explain how a building can be pulverized mid-air by some unseen force. However, I can give you my opinion as to why the world trade center was targeted for destruction. And I shall.

The world trade center buildings weren't just any buildings. They were icons of democracy and a free-market economy. Clearly, to me, those buildings were targeted to cripple the free-market system. In addition, the destruction of those buildings was to instill terror in the hearts of humankind. On both accounts, it worked. There is no doubt that the events of 9-11 set in motion a series of event that has led to our current market failures; and, there is no doubt that people have been terrorized by the events of 9-11. My next question is who would want to do such a thing? Who stood to gain by such a heinous deed? I don't know. Do you?


View the original article here

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Global Media - Gee Whiz, Something is Terribly Amiss

In many regards it seems sometimes the media mettles too much into US politics. Often, they end up favoring a certain politician over another, and more often than not, it just happens to be the one which is spending the most money on advertising with that newspaper, their online version, or buying ads for the newspaper's website - convenient I'd say? Okay so, no revelation there, and as we grow older and watch the repeats of past history go around in circles every decade it tends to jade us and make us a tad bit cynical - but hey, that's politics and it's a messy business, as has been said.

Still, we do rely on our media to keep the politicians honest, and generally they love to stir up controversy which makes it a double-edged sword too. Freedom of the press therefore helps promote freedom and liberty, so that's a good thing, as long as those things I mentioned above don't get too far out of hand. Let's talk about this for a moment shall we?

The New York Times had an interesting article on April 4, 2012 titled; "In China Press, Best Coverage Cash Can Buy," by David Barboza which stated;

"China is notorious for censoring politically delicate news, but willing to print flattering news about businesses; if the price is right. Want a profile of your chief executive to appear in the Chinese version of Esquire? That will be about $20,000 a page, or get on a news program by state-run China Central Television? Pay $4,000 a minute, says a network consultant who arranges such appearances. A flattering piece in Workers' Daily, the Communist Party's propaganda paper $1 per Chinese character."

That same day there was another reminded of the cellular telephone scandal in the UK from one of their major newspapers. Couple that without our own challenges here at home and how our media seems to have become our fourth branch of government, often more powerful than the other three as it dictates policy and legislates from the pages. Where does all this go from here? Well, if we let it, that entire train could roll out of the high-speed station and leave us all behind, so, I'd say, let's not go there.

Still, how can we stop such things when the media has so much power, and the power brokers find ways to buy their way to political propaganda? That's a real catch-22 my friends, and with newspapers in the US hurting as bad as they are, they'd be more likely to take the money and confirm a little "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine," at the expense of our nation's future, and our future liberty and freedom. Beware the industrial media complex. See my point? Please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on 2012 Global Politics. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/


View the original article here

Friday, April 20, 2012

You Are a Terrible Person Because Someone Took Something You Said Out of Context - Huh?

The other day, I was looking at a media poll, it was on one of the left-leaning news stations, and I was alarmed at their reasoning. You see, they had taken something at of context that one of the GOP candidates had said on the road. Then they played it over and over again critiquing his words. Now mind you it was definitely out of context, nevertheless at the end of the programming they did a little survey and asked people to Twitter, or text message the answer to their survey.

Next, they put the survey on TV showing that 67% of the people disapproved of what was said, and thought that the politician in question should not be president. Okay so, let's talk about this for second shall we?

It seems to me this is mass mind manipulation and brainwashing. Basically the media company is leading the answer to the viewers, and then posting the results of how many people they were able to snooker who called in to participate in a survey. This shows me of their ability to brainwash, and has very little to do with the individual who said something, that perhaps they should've said, because they should've known that the leftist media would've taken it out of context, which they did.

Apparently, our media has the ability to slander and berate someone as a terrible person, after they take something they said out of context. That's interesting isn't it? But isn't that really just office gossip gone wild? Isn't the media in this case just pandering to the inherent behavioral challenges of humans in mass mobs? Is that really all the better we are, is that all the better we can do in America? Is that the level of intelligence that we've come to expect? How is it that America has been so dummied down that they fall for this garbage hook, line, and sinker like a school of fish?

You are not a terrible person because someone said you were, you can only be a terrible person if you are a terrible person. Slandering someone's good name just because they are a politician is exactly why we don't have very many good people running for office. Because as soon as someone who is decent runs for office, this is what the media does to them, and our society follows. They build them up just to burn down, and the reality is they just don't care. Of course, a politician can run for office without saying anything, but as soon as they say something, someone blows it out of proportion, takes it out of context, and sends it viral across the Internet.

It's time for America to grow up. It's time for the media to catch a clue. If they have to use these types of innuendos, and create this type of sound and fury just to get people to tune in, then there's no wonder why they are going out of business. And if that were not for election seasons, they'd already have gone bankrupt. Maybe they are no longer needed, maybe their future demise is their own fault? Please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on the Internet and Media. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/


View the original article here

Sunday, April 8, 2012

Global Media - Gee Whiz, Something is Terribly Amiss

In many regards it seems sometimes the media mettles too much into US politics. Often, they end up favoring a certain politician over another, and more often than not, it just happens to be the one which is spending the most money on advertising with that newspaper, their online version, or buying ads for the newspaper's website - convenient I'd say? Okay so, no revelation there, and as we grow older and watch the repeats of past history go around in circles every decade it tends to jade us and make us a tad bit cynical - but hey, that's politics and it's a messy business, as has been said.

Still, we do rely on our media to keep the politicians honest, and generally they love to stir up controversy which makes it a double-edged sword too. Freedom of the press therefore helps promote freedom and liberty, so that's a good thing, as long as those things I mentioned above don't get too far out of hand. Let's talk about this for a moment shall we?

The New York Times had an interesting article on April 4, 2012 titled; "In China Press, Best Coverage Cash Can Buy," by David Barboza which stated;

"China is notorious for censoring politically delicate news, but willing to print flattering news about businesses; if the price is right. Want a profile of your chief executive to appear in the Chinese version of Esquire? That will be about $20,000 a page, or get on a news program by state-run China Central Television? Pay $4,000 a minute, says a network consultant who arranges such appearances. A flattering piece in Workers' Daily, the Communist Party's propaganda paper $1 per Chinese character."

That same day there was another reminded of the cellular telephone scandal in the UK from one of their major newspapers. Couple that without our own challenges here at home and how our media seems to have become our fourth branch of government, often more powerful than the other three as it dictates policy and legislates from the pages. Where does all this go from here? Well, if we let it, that entire train could roll out of the high-speed station and leave us all behind, so, I'd say, let's not go there.

Still, how can we stop such things when the media has so much power, and the power brokers find ways to buy their way to political propaganda? That's a real catch-22 my friends, and with newspapers in the US hurting as bad as they are, they'd be more likely to take the money and confirm a little "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine," at the expense of our nation's future, and our future liberty and freedom. Beware the industrial media complex. See my point? Please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on 2012 Global Politics. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/


View the original article here