Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax (Super-Mega BARF Alert)

PR Web ^ | 1/30/06 | Unknown

[ChuckShick]

Mon Jan 30, 11:37 AM ET

(PRWEB) - Duluth, MN (PRWEB) January 30, 2006 -- A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

They have joined with others in common cause as members of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (S9/11T), because they are convinced, based on their own research, that the administration has been deceiving the nation about critical events in New York and Washington, D.C.

These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor."

They believe that this White House is incapable of investigating itself and hope the possibility that Congress might hold an unaccountable administration accountable is not merely naive or wishful thinking.

[GovernmentShrinker]

A University of Minnesota professor grabs headlines with his silly theories on 9/11. How is this possible?

It is possible because there are PR services that will put out ANYTHING as a "press release" for a fee. And the whole story is so completely ludicrous that it gets reprinted for its entertainment value. The only people who believe it are the sort who can't figure how to work a butterfly ballot (or can't even locate their polling place).

[jveritas]

Thanks, LOL :)

[danamco]

The "American National Socialist Al-Quada Party"'s = (DNC) Cool-Aid drinkers like the bunch of Jim Jones!!!

[VOA]

How is this possible?

You know the old 1960s slogan about "If you take drugs, bad
things will happen to your children"?

It turns out the bad thing here is that the children of these "experts"
are now having to be embarassed by the public stupidity of their
boomer parent-professors.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I was trying to figure our what PRWEB was...

[feedback doctor]

This guy also believes Bush killed Wellstone. You can safely ignore these guys.

At least they are not smart enough to realize that Rove organized and planned the Wellstone 'Pep-Rally' aftrewards.

[TalonDJ]

In order

*No high rise steel building ever had a fully fueled jet hit it.

*I would not trust BBC to guess my weight

*They did not fail due to just the impact itself. That is a non-argument.

*In a heavily loaded structure you do not have to get to the melting point for the structure to fail. The steel was SUPPOSE to have asbestos around it but they stopped using it above a much lower floor due to new regulations. The design built to meet regulations if it had it.

*Air traffic control radars are not setup to track un identified of low altitude aircraft. In many cases turning off a transponder is enough to not be noticed for a while.

*High jacking is not THAT hard. Knowing what is where in the Pentagon and aiming for it is not that easy. There is some indications that the Pentagon was not that planes primary target.

*What orders about what? Those could have been anything.

*It probably broke up in the air due to a struggle at the controls leading to flight outside of tolerances. Only a square block for a low altitude high speed crash of a mostly fueled plane? I find that hard to believe.

*How is it possible? Well it sounds like you would need a hammer, some big cutters and maybe some small cutters.

*Gee, you think Rice has hear of EVER simulation they have run? No one on earth is that knowledgeable.

I don't know everything and some stuff seems vaguly fishy, but most of those arguments are garbage.

[Cobra64]

One of my favorites. It would be sweet if that pic would be automagically posted when a liberal opens his mouth.

[TalonDJ]

Buildings are not designed to take damage (except in very limited situations) and not designed for them to be repairable. Unlike cars they can't just be bent back and welded up. A few key supports with out of tolerance damage and there is not a lot you can do with something. I have no idea what the damage was but from my engineering background I can envision a number of ways it could have happened. When you are dealing with many tonnes of concrete and steel a little warping here or bending there can make the whole thing untrustworthy

[longtermmemmory]

but these wonks will now be interviewed by EUROnews and the french media. these wacky wonks will recieve paid trips to european universities to give speeches on this absurd views where they will be praised.

Michael moore does not sell most of his books in the USA, moore sells most of his books (and avoids paying the taxes on the profits I speculate) by selling them abroad.

[KarlInOhio]

When a company takes on a controlled demolition it cuts support beams,columns and other things to weaken the structure.This is done while the team jackhammers holes all over the building to place explosives charges in.If this was done before the planes hit the towers it would be impossible for people not to notice.The other thing we would have noticed is the hundreds of explosions that come from the charges in the walls.

And I can't imagine much worse for the explosive control wires than slamming a plane full of jet fuel into the building right at the floors where the "explosives" were placed.

[Tzimisce]

We overlooked crucial facts on 9-11 such as:

1) This is all America's fault
2) We deserved this
3) If we let the UN tax us, this wouldn't have happened
4) If we'd listened to the French this wouldn't have happened
5) If we'd elected Al Gore, this wouldn't have happened
6) The real reason for 9-11 is lack of socialized medicine in the US

[Cobra64]

In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?

These jerks are clueless. There were countless articles describing the engineering structure of the WTC towers. Not to mention the intense heat which causes steel to lose its strength.

[Piefloater]

And what structural damage did building #7 have that caused it to fall? That one has puzzled me from the git-go.

I agree entirely. This massive 47 story steel structure collapsed demolition style on the afternoon of 9/11. It was not hit by an aircraft and had relatively minor fires burning on two floors.

To date I have been unable to locate anything like a satisfactory theory as to how this may have happened. Not saying there isn't one but I would be real interested in finding out how this may have occurred.

[Publius6961]

I think they should go with it! I, for one would be ecstatic.

A repeat of the global warming fiasco, where 3000 "scientists" (including sex and gender studies diplomates) signed a manifesto decrying global warming (it's Bush's fault), which was responded to by 19,000 real scientists in physics, climate, chemistry, weather, oceanography...

[TaxRelief]

The survivors all had similar accounts of one fuel-fed massive explosion and inferno. How is this possible?

[Publius6961]

Wow.

These must be some experts!
I honestly believe that a bright high school senior who has taken chemistry and physics could answer most, if not all of these questions.
I know I could, even half asleep!

[pepperspray]

Fetzer wrote a "Scholarly" book on the Kennedy assasination. It was a joke.

[bmwcyle]

James H. Fetzer