It Wasn't Muslims, page 1

check out the following excellent article....

www.takeourworldback.com...

which includes an unlimited supply of links to each and every referenced point therein...

The mainstream media’s conspicuous silence over the collapse of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory has clearly exposed them as "the dogs that didn’t bark".

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Starting A New Thread

Mod Note (This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page):
Please make sure every post matters.
Refrain from 1-line or very-minimal responses.
Edit-down your quoted posts to the important part.
Don't use "txting" shorthand in posts.
Use snippets and links for external content.
Provide meaningful comments for links, pictures, and videos.


[edit on 2/9/2010 by Mirthful Me]

I agree it wasn't Muslims.

I have for a while since watching the video at:

www.911missinglinks.com...

The video is long but was worth the information to me. It shows all the high ranking Government officials who have dual citizenship, Israel and USA, and I am inclined to believe their Allegiance would be to Israel.

Only one Israeli killed 9-11, 4,000 Israelis didnt show up that day, the dancing Israelis whose mission it was to 'document the event'. The arrest of the Israelis who were held for 71 days then 'quietly' released.

The infiltration of Israelis into the American Government.

It was the Mossad--- but they might have hired Muslim extremists-- yet those pictures of the highjackers were certainly available, at the ready, off the bat....and some alive?

The 'search' for Osama bin Laden when he was apparently killed in Dec 2001.

There are many vile, corrupt people behind all this.

reply to post by mcrom901

---

Wow! I had no idea muslims were being framed for everything except the attack on the USS Cole(didnt see it mentioned there) Please evaluate the following link as it may be relevant to your topic www.thereligionofpeace.com

reply to post by canadiansenior70

---

yup, If christians new of this, they would be seriously some unease tensions that is for sure. They are supposed to be our allies to.

reply to post by type0civ

---

thanks.... but we are talking about 9/11.... what has your link got anything to do with alexander the great...

Originally posted by dereks
Actually it is a very poor article, the paper mentioning thermite was NOT peer reviewed, and it was published in a pay to publish vanity journal....

i'm afraid you're quite mistaken there....

Open access journals are scholarly journals that are available online to the reader "without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself."[1][2] Some are subsidized, and some require payment on behalf of the author. Subsidized journals are financed by an academic institution or a government information center; those requiring payment are typically financed by money made available to researchers for the purpose from a public or private funding agency, as part of a research grant.

en.wikipedia.org...

moreover....

All manuscripts submitted for publication will be immediately subjected to peer-reviewing, usually in consultation with the members of the Editorial Advisory Board and a number of external referees.

www.bentham.org...

capiche?

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by dereks
Actually it is a very poor article, the paper mentioning thermite was NOT peer reviewed, and it was published in a pay to publish vanity journal....

i'm afraid you're quite mistaken there....

Maybe not click here

reply to post by type0civ

---

and what does that prove?

Keywords: JScanning electron microscopy, X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy, Differential scanning calorimetry, DSC analysis, World Trade Center, WTC dust, 9/11, Iron-rich microspheres, Thermite, Super-thermite, Energetic nanocomposites, Nano-thermite

Affiliation: Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DK-2100, Denmark.

that the above university did not review said results? or hoaxed it prior submission for peer review?

“It surprises me, of course, and it is regrettable, if it discredits our work. But her departure doesn’t change our conclusions, for it is a purely personnel related thing she his angry about. I still believe that we have carried out chemical physics, and if there is something wrong with our study, she is welcome to criticize us for it,” says Niels Harrit, Associate Professor at the Institute of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen.

from your link....

"I can not accept that the issue is put in my journal. The article is not about physical chemistry or chemical physics, and I could well believe that there is a political point of view behind the publication. If anyone had asked me, I would say that the article should never have been published in this journal. Sentence, "notes the former chief.

i suspect her resignation had more to do with rather being politically motivated....

"They have printed the article without my authorization else, so when you wrote to me, I did not mean that the article was published. I can not accept, and I have written to Bentham, that I withdraw myself from all activities with them, "says Marie-Paule Pileni, which daily is a professor specializing in nanomaterials at the prestigious Université Pierre et Marie Curie in France.

and what was she doing all along being an editor?

sitting on her contractual understanding....

"your role as the Editor-in-Chief will not be an onerous one. You will not be expected to process any submitted manuscripts to the journal nor referee them (unless you choose to do so). "

in any case.... the submitted manuscripts were handled by an editor.... as it had been already reviewed three times during the eight months of processing prior publication...

Each journal has an a different editorial board, as far as I can see. So an error by someone on ONE of 200-plus journals has very close to zero bearing on what is published in the other 200 journals. The problem was not in the Open Chemical Physics Journal.

Further, our paper was reviewed prior to publication by the Physics dept. chair at BYU -- and he approved it for publication. His peer-review was NOT under the auspices of Bentham. (This peer-review was done because two of the authors are from this dept. at BYU... and Dr. Farrer requested the review.)

I think debunkers will look for any way to criticize the Active Thermitic Material paper without actually dealing with doing experiments or papers themselves. Our results are based on experiment, not on who published the results.

www.911blogger.com...


[edit on 3/9/10 by mcrom901]

Originally posted by mcrom901
moreover....

All manuscripts submitted for publication will be immediately subjected to peer-reviewing, usually in consultation with the members of the Editorial Advisory Board and a number of external referees.

www.bentham.org...

capiche?

So name the people who peer reviewed it - are you aware the previous chief editor of the magazine. Professor Marie-Paule Pileni resigned as she never even knew the article was published....

reply to post by dereks

---

i guess you must familiarize yourself with issues concerning the anonymity of peer reviewers in general....

Anonymous peer review, also called blind review, is a system of prepublication peer review of scientific articles or papers for journals or academic conferences by reviewers who are known to the journal editor or conference organizer but whose names are not given to the article's author. The reviewers do not know the author's identity, as any identifying information is stripped from the document before review.

en.wikipedia.org...


in regards to the publication in question.....

A peer-reviewed journal is also called a "refereed" journal. Peer-reviewers are almost always anonymous for scientific publications like this -- that is standard in the scientific world. While authors commonly recommend potential peer-reviewers, editors choose the referees and usually pick at least one or two reviewers that the authors did NOT mention -- and that is almost certainly the case with this paper (based on commentary we received from the reviewers). In the end, all the reviewers -- who were selected by the editor(s) -- approved publication. Thus, the paper was subjected to peer review by the editor or editors, and it passed the peer-review process.

911debunkers.blogspot.com...


different journals treat the situation in various manners.... examples...

As a default, we will pass a reviewer's name on to the authors along with the comments. However, if reviewers do not wish to have their name revealed, we will honor that request. We discourage any attempt on the part of authors to discover the identity of any reviewer or to contact this person directly.

www.plosmedicine.org...

Different journals use different models of peer review.

All full-length research articles published in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review in the normal manner: by initial editorial screening and by at least two anonymous referees, for whom the author also remains anonymous³.

journalauthors.tandf.co.uk...

9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 15 days ago with 14 member flags

9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 8 days ago with 13 member flags

An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
  Posted 17 days ago with 12 member flags

Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 15 days ago with 6 member flags

new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags

Final Decision: Court sanctions lawyers behind September 11 conspiracy case
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags

Remains of 9/11 victim identified
  Posted 1 days ago with 5 member flags

you must try this youre self ????
  Posted 15 days ago with 4 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: