It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Complete 9/11 Timeline ( interactive ).

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:28 PM
Evolution of an interactive "Complete Historical Correct 9/11 Timeline".
(Open-Content project managed by Paul Thompson from the Center for Cooperative Research).

Important. Click to read ALL the intentions of this site.
An interesting exerpt :

The Center for Cooperative Research calls on people to abandon the widely-held assumption that governments can be relied upon to competently monitor the activities of themselves or the entities with which they have close relations. A major goal of this website is to encourage people to play an active role in scrutinizing the activities of all individuals, groups and institutions that wield significant political and economic power. Our position is that the power of oversight should not rest with governments, but with civil society itself.

At the ATS 9/11 forums the darkblue timestamped context links in the offered timelines can be of great help as references which are widely accepted as historically correct by many authors and websites.

It would be a great utility for the many serious 9/11 researchers at ATS when they f.e. want to reference an item like this in their posts :
July 30, 2004: Senator Mark Dayton Says NORAD and FAA Lied About 9/11 Failures
which originates from this descending complete timeline :
Complet e 911 Timeline, Showing 1-100 of 1609 events

Observing for quite some time now, the heated debates from all sides about all the still unanswered questions regarding that tragic day of September 11, 2001 at this informative website, I would like to add first a few of my personal thoughts concerning these debates.
The pro and contra conspiracy posters accuse eachother regularly of a whole range of negative or suspicious reasons why they post here, ranging from "pure stupidity", "ignorant ranter", "liberal leftist", "rightwing nutcase" to "paid disinformant".
As a neutral bystander, up till now, it strikes me that so few posting members seem to understand that exactly this opposition is the main reason they themself keep digging for the true, historical correct facts, and that posting as many facts, and theories, is the main reason this particular site has developed to such a treasure trove of acceptable facts, based on scientifically correct proof or accepted coverage of the news media.
If paid disinformants are really present here, they would serve their masters pretty bad, since it is exactly this opposition they encounter, which keeps all the posters here going out of their way to find proof for their particular opinion, thus digging up more and more proof of at least foreknowledge, but probably involvement too from powerfull individuals.
And every day, I see new material emerge here, formerly unknown to most of the incrowd.
And it originates from both isles of the debate, pro and contra the official explanation.
I for sure am very gratefull to all these posters, they have brightened my days on many occasion.

My personal opinion doesn't matter so much, but an early suspicion is maturing to near certainty, that the greed of a few superwealthy families, their banks and conglomerates have caused all the bloodshed of two worldwars and their aftermaths. Socalled democratic safety nets haven't been able to stop their apparent greed, oscillating with the rise to power of every new generation born in their mansions.
The constant descent to fascism (rule by a few) is obviously caused by allowing far too much wealth in the hands of a few.
And their bought and paid for, democracy championing politicians are specialists in avoiding peer reviewed scientific debates; the most successful of them must have the appearences of tricky stage magicians, to survive the rat race slaughter in the political arena.
Voter influence has become a "science", pointing out to them the psychological trickery needed to let the silent majority follow the predestinied path which benefits themself and more importantly, their cleverly hidden puppeteers.
Western democracies are not run anymore by a few, "for the many", but clearly for themselfs. They have turned into full blown (de)mockeries.

What better proof of an alternative approach to democracy, than the proceedings of sites like ATS and Cooperative Research, allowing everyone to contribute to the historical truth.
That's why the "New World Order" proponents are so afraid of a real free WorldWideWeb. It will be the perfect voting machine.
First form an opinion, then vote. Through the same medium, using OpenSource opiniating and voting software.

Back to the core of this thread.
To be capable of forming a truely historical opinion regarding what events lead to the day of 9/11/2001, and it's implications for the future of our world, we all dearly needed a trustworthy, historical timeline of these events, not tainted by political influence, lies or forgery.
It seems we found one, which inhibits even a chance for everyone, pro or contra conspiracy theories, to change the opinions of its readers :

The Complete 9/11 Timeline ( interactive ).
At this date, it now holds 1609 events, which each hold heaps of links to their sources and lots of photographs.
It covers the period from December 26, 1979 until April 30, 2005.
To be clear, I have no involvement at all with this website, it simply is the best idea I found online for this specific purpose.

Keep in mind, this is some sort of interactive Wikipedia database of the timelines of 9/11/2001.
-Anybody- can suggest changes to existing data, add new data to this website, or compile and submit your own timeline to Paul Thompson, the librarian of this so obvious usefull timeline for truthseeking posters at the ATS forums. That way, you too can influence this constantly expanding historical record, and try to make this record the most trustworthy on the internet, concerning your own interest.
In my humble opinion, there is a wealth of solid information gathered by contributors at ATS, needed to be included in this Timelines project. -- Nobody is stopping you to do exactly that, so, submit your most valuable posts to them --.

Snapshots taken on 20 July 2005 of the compilated data of the tragic day of 11 Sept 2001 gives the following 4 linked webpages and the filtering options used to narrow search :
View mode (info): Expanded.
Ordering (info): Date ascending.
Time period (info): 1:00 am - 11:30 pm on Sept 11 2001.


The rest of the event-data preceeding 1:00 am Sept 11 2001 and following 11:30 pm Sept 11 2001 can be found by changing the entries for "Time-period(info)", or click "Menu, Timelines", or use the sites "Search" function.
There's also a Forum to aid visiting researchers.
It's index is here.)

While having researched since 4 years already as much as could be discovered of the preceding, actual and following events of that day, I found in this Complete 9/11 Timeline quite a lot of events, still unknown to me.
Events and their resulting policies, which are (or appear) historicly correct, definitely need to be brought to the attention of voters (present and possibly future victims) worldwide, so all of them can evaluate in all sincerity the obviously brutal, egoistic and greedy policies causing and following that tragic day of 11 September 2001.

An example of little or unknown facts of 9/11 is the following time-period entry :
(After 9:59 a.m.): WTC Building 7 Appears Damaged

In all these years I had not been able to find this picture of the south side of building WTC7 on the conspiracy sites which pay attention to the strange collaps of this building. I had already found the New York Firefighter website, where several firefighters on the scene explained that WTC7 was damaged more severely than most conspiracy supporters seemed to be aware of.
They all posted solely videos or pictures of the north side of WTC7 taken that day. And all stated that WTC7 was barely damaged and had just a few fires visible, and did not mention the conflicting reports from that NYFirefighters website.
It was quite simple to find those conflicting reports, quite early in 2002 already in my quest for knowledge, so I wondered why these conspiracy sites did not mention those facts. If you want to present the truth, you should never hide unwelcome facts.

You can also browse timelines by "Project", "Topic" or "Date Added".

Projects :
US Plans to use military force against Iran.
US Military.
Bush administration's treatment of US troops.
Investigation into the 2004 US Election.
Environmental impact of 911 attacks.
The Bush administration's environmental record.
Prisoner abuse in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.
2004 Ousting of Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
Complete 911 Timeline.
Inquiry into the decision to invade Iraq.
History of US Interventions.

A bit of googling around with creative search terms found in these projects will let you discover a wealth of facts, unknown to the public domain, which have never been addressed at the ATS forums.

Just one of the many examples of cause and result of greedy politics :

History of US Interventions -->
Indonesia -->
November 12, 1991.

Witnessing the massacre are two American journalists, Amy Goodman of WBAI / Pacifica radio and Allan Nairn, a reporter for New Yorker magazine. Nairn will later recount in his February 27, 1992 testimony to Congress: “... as we stood there watching as the soldiers marched into our face, the inconceivable thing began to happen. The soldiers rounded the corner, never breaking stride, raised their rifles and fired in unison into the crowd. Timorese were backpedaling, gasping, trying to flee, but in seconds they were cut down by the hail of fire. People fell, stunned and shivering, bleeding in the road, and the Indonesian soldiers kept on shooting. I saw the soldiers aiming and shooting people in the back, leaping bodies to hunt down those who were still standing. They executed schoolgirls, young men, old Timorese, the street was wet with blood and the bodies were everywhere.” [US Congress, 2/27/1992 Sources: Amy Goodman, Allan Nairn] In 1992, an investigation performed by the Portuguese solidarity group, A Paz e Possivel em Timor-Leste, will report the casualties: 271 killed, 278 Wounded, 103 Hospitalized, and 270 “disappeared.” [East Timor Action Network, n.d.] After the massacre, the US will continue to provide aid to the Indonesian military under a covert program codenamed “Iron Balance”. The training is in military expertise that can “only be used internally against civilians, such as urban guerrilla warfare, surveillance, counter-intelligence, sniper marksmanship and ‘psychological operations.’ ” [Observer, 9/19/1999 Sources: Pentagon documents]

As a last remark, many contributors still have to understand and to accept the fact that it is not solely the policies of the USA which muddy the waters of global politics, but the same detoriated "patriotic values" influence the impact of many other governments policies regarding our precious planet. The endeffect is always caused by greed from a few insiders.

Feel free to use this thread to discuss possible updates and additions for these historical important timelines, and to briefly address fresh facts surfacing, next address them in new threads you start and concentrate on them in there.

-Notes to admins/mods- :
(1) I appologize for the lengthy first post, however I trust you to consider the obvious value of this thread for the more scientificly oriented contributors in the 9/11 forum threads.
(2) I also took notice of your note on "advertising" other websites or forums here, sorry again, please consider note (1).
(3) The seemingly excessive linking will facilitate easier responding to this thread, contributors don't need to hop vice versa from site to site.
(4) Feel free to remove these notes after reviewing them.

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:49 PM

You have voted LaBTop for the Way Above Top Secret award.

Excellent post

This is definitely one I'm going to have to come back to to read through in more detail when I have a bit more time. If nothing else, tracking down that picture of WTC7 is great IMO; that's definitely one I've never seen.

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:59 PM
Good stuff

I'm sure that will come in handy for many people on ATS.

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 11:36 PM
An example of how a new line of thoughts can develop while reading through these timelines :

Environmental impact of 911 attacks brought me to September 20, 2001, where I read this :

Within hours, the results from the various tests indicate the presence of asbestos and an “alphabet soup of heavy metals.”

This brought back a memory of an intrigueing remark I encountered lately while flipping through the websites of Jimmy Walter:
Were the Twin Towers brought down by an underground nuclear blast?

Three pieces of evidence:

1. The seismic footprint - classic for an underground nuclear blast

2. Chemical analysis of the dust carried out by the USGS - ridiculously high concentrations of barium and strontium plus many other radioactive decay products. Concentration of Ba and Sr varying in lockstep - main two first fission products of uranium. You simply do not get them anywhere else but in nuclear explosions with the concentrations directly proportional to each other in different sample locations. Sr is only used in fireworks commercially; Ba as a getter in vacuum tubes and some paints. Where did it all come from - a secret fireworks and vacuum tube factory that miraculously created directly proportional concentrations of the two elements at all sample locations?

3. Pyroclastic flow of the building and its total pulverisation from top to bottom - classic of an underground nuclear explosion. Shock wave travelled up the building, reflected off the top and pulverised it back down.

Reg. 1. I will address this later.

Reg. 2. The use of supposed "mini-nukes", as said to be already developped in the Israeli underground labs at Dimona; in the "developping stages" at Berkeley, Los Alamos, Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab and the University of California; and "existing" in the Russian arsenal is not totally out of the question.
The wrong people will do anything to cling to power or defend their life (styles).
The Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1995, for example, with a yield of 0.002 kiloton which set the stage for a police state;
and the (former Israeli) Egyptian Taba Resort hotel bombing at the Gulf of Akkaba last year which, as reported by some, conveniently killed a group (of jewish descent) of former CEO's of the russian oil giant Yukos;
left a few questions to answer. Huge craters in both buildings hint at excessive (solely upward) explosive forces.
And don't forget the explosion and resulting huge crater covering nearly the whole footprint of WTC6 on 9/11....before the WTC towers came down and after the whole building was evacuated.
Mr William Tahil could be right in his assumption that especially Strontium is a telltaling find in one of the samples, sample 16, but one has to find a pre-9/11 scientificly sound report regarding natural occuring trace elemental radiation levels in Lower Manhattan and compare the known Ba and Sr isotopes levels to the data of the latest USGS report.

Found only in page 4 the earliest (16/17 Sept 2001) handpicked 37 WTC dust samples chart from the very first online USGS (pdf) file :

The mean concentrations of some heavy metals in the WTC dust samples (such as antimony, molybdenum, zinc, copper, lead, chromium, manganese, nickel, and barium) are relatively high compared to their mean concentrations in natural soils from the eastern United States.

I will upload a picture of this interesting chart, when I have found out why my mCenter does not allow me that on the moment.

6) Fission Products- All of the radioactive materials which escape from an atomic bomb when it explodes, are basically the broken bits of uranium atoms. These are new radioactive materials, called "fission products", which are created by the splitting of uranium atoms. There are hundreds of them. They all have different names, and different chemical and biologically properties. Most of them did not exist in nature before the advent of nuclear technology.
These radioactive materials, which are called fission products -- the ones in the bomb fallout and in nuclear reactors -- should not be confused with the other radioactive materials, which are the decay products of uranium. The decay products of uranium are due to radioactive disintegration. They are about two dozen in number, and they occur in nature because uranium does. When you talk about fission products, however, you are dealing with completely different substances. They are created only inside nuclear weapons or nuclear reactors. They are the leftover pieces of uranium atoms which have been violently broken apart by the fission process. There are over 300 of them altogether, when you consider that -- being radioactive -- each of the fission products also has its own decay products!

Wikipedia: Suitcase bombs.

Only a nation with an extremely advanced nuclear program could manufacture warheads small enough to fit into a suitcase. Both the USA and the USSR manufactured nuclear weapons small enough to fit into large backpacks during the Cold War, but neither have ever made public the existence or development of weapons small enough to fit into a suitcase. The smallest nuclear warhead manufactured by the USA was the W-54, used for the Davy Crockett warhead which could be fired from a 120 mm recoilless rifle, and a backpack version called the Mk-54 SADM (Small Atomic Demolition Munition). While this warhead, with a weight of only 51 lb (23 kg), could potentially fit into a large suitcase, it would be a very tight fit. While the explosive power of the W-54 — up to an equivalent of 1 kiloton of TNT — is not much by the normal standards of a nuclear weapon (the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II were around 13 to 15 kilotons each), it could still do tremendous physical damage to a structure (it would be many, many times more powerful than the explosive attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1995, for example, with a yield of 0.002 kiloton).

SADM, Special atomic demolition munition.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the United States developed several different types of lightweight nuclear devices. The main one was the Mk-54, a cylinder 40 by 60 centimetes that weighed 68 kilograms (the warhead was a variation of one developed for the Davy Crockett nuclear recoilless rifle). It was fired by a mechanical timer and had a variable yield ("dial-a-yield") between 10 and 250 tons. 300 SADMs were assembled and remained in the US arsenal until 1989.

See also , and look for the "Davy Crocket", smallest nuclear weapon developed by the USA.

A comparison of delayed radiobiological effects of depleted–uranium munitions versus fourth–generation nuclear weapons.

Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons. The Physical Principles Of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, And The Quest For Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons.

The first chapter is a primer on thermonuclear weapons based on a scientific understanding of the physical principles of existing nuclear weapons and on the results of ISRINEX, a simple thermonuclear explosion simulation program specially developed for independent disarmament experts. Using this insight, it is shown that the construction of hydrogen bombs is in fact much less difficult than is generally assumed. Using present-day nuclear and computer technology, almost any modern industrial country could, in principle, build such a weapon. Similarly, it is shown that "boosting," i.e., the technique of using a small amount of tritium to enhance the performance of a fission bomb, is also much easier than generally assumed. In particular, using this technique, building highly efficient and reliable atomic weapons using reactor-grade plutonium is straightforward. Moreover, independently of the type of fissile material used, the construction of "simple" and "deliverable" tritium-boosted nuclear weapons can be easier than the construction of primitive Hiroshima or Nagasaki type atomic bombs.

The second chapter is a technical and legal analysis of the nuclear tests which are allowed by the CTBT: microexplosions and subcritical experiments. It is found that this treaty explicitly forbids only nuclear explosions in which a divergent fission chain reaction takes place. Therefore, it is possible to develop new types of fission explosives in which subcritical fission-burn is the yield generation mechanism. Similarly, new kinds of fusion explosives, in which the trigger is no longer a fission explosive, are legal under the CTBT. %\smallskip

The third chapter is devoted to the military applications of inertial confinement fusion (ICF) and other pulsed-power technologies. The capabilities of modern laboratory simulation techniques for weapons physics research are shown to significantly overlap with those of underground nuclear testing. Moreover, these technologies are found to enable the study of a number of physical processes --- especially electromagnetic energy cumulation techniques and advanced nuclear processes that are not restricted by existing arms control treaties --- which are useful in refining existing nuclear weapons and essential in developing fourth generation nuclear weapons. %\smallskip

The fourth chapter is devoted to fourth generation nuclear weapons. These new fission or fusion explosives could have yields in the range of 1 to 100 ton equivalents of TNT, i.e., in the gap which today separates conventional weapons from nuclear weapons. These relatively low-yield nuclear explosives would not qualify as weapons of \emph[mass] destruction. Seven physical processes which could be used to make such low-yield nuclear weapons, or to make compact non-fission triggers for large scale thermonuclear explosions, are investigated in detail: subcritical fission-burn, magnetic compression, superheavy elements, antimatter, nuclear isomers, metallic hydrogen and superlasers (i.e., ultrapowerful lasers with intensities higher than 1019 W/cm2).

The conclusion stresses that considerable research is underway in all five nuclear-weapon States (as well as in several other major industrialized States such as Germany and Japan) on ICF and on many physical processes that provide the scientific basis necessary to develop fourth generation nuclear weapons. Substantial progress has been made in the past few years on all these processes, and the construction of large ICF microexplosion facilities in both nuclear-weapon and non-nuclear-weapon States is giving the arms race a fresh boost. The world runs the risk that certain countries will equip themselves directly with fourth generation nuclear weapons, bypassing the acquisition of previous generations of nuclear weapons.

In this context, the invention of the superlaser, which enabled a factor of one million increase in the instantaneous power of tabletop lasers, is possibly the most significant advance in military technology of the past ten years. This increase is of the same magnitude as the factor of one million difference in energy density between chemical and nuclear energy.

A major arms control problem of fourth generation nuclear weapons is that their development is very closely related to pure scientific research. The chief purpose of the CTBT is to freeze the technology of nuclear weapons as a first step toward general and complete nuclear disarmament. In order to achieve that, it is necessary to implement effective measures of preventive arms control, such as international legally binding restrictions in all relevant areas of research and development, whether they are claimed to be for military or civilian purposes.

Reg. 3. The top of the 2 towers consisted of a few reinforced floors where a lot of heavy equipment was situated. Those floors could reflect a supposed shockwave from an unknown device (with some obvious small losses to the atmosphere).

1. Why were no samples taken by the USGS from the actual WTC site, only from the perimeter?
2. Why were a lot of samples not represented as bars on the charts? There was ample space on the sides of the maps.
3. Why were just 2 persons send on the evenings of 16 and 17 Sept 2001 to take just 37 samples on groundlevel, to calibrate the airplane sampling ? They say they were in such a hurry to provide the NY citizens with solid data about what exactly the dust and dustcloud contained. Then why did they not send much more personnel afterwards to take extensive extra samples?
4. Why is the barchart of the first publicized (pdf) USGS report different compared to the last html version? The first one has a convenient addition, the mean concentrations data in natural soils from the eastern United States. Btw, both are online and can be found on their website. The scientists of the USGS seem to me dedicated and openminded individuals, but were restricted in their research goals by the White House. Why?

posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 09:51 PM

TITLE: High-Voltage, Compact, Pulsed-Power Technologies

The Air Force requested the removal of topic AF03-132 due to
changed requirements within the Air Force. For further information
relative to this topic, contact Steve Guilfoos at 937-656-9021.

posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 10:19 PM
"It also includes work in hypervelocity penetrator effectiveness and electrothermal chemical (ETC) technology that will greatly increase antiarmor

posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 10:35 PM
"Scientists have conceived of a number of approaches to harness fusion"

"For the five nuclear weapons states, the CTBT creates substantial barriers to the development of new nuclear weapons, whether these be weapons with substantially different yields or weights, enhanced radiation, or directed energy."

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 12:18 AM
Just a quick sidestep,
Sono-fusion, promise for a new tomorrow. Look at the patents for sonofusion energy devices (nuclear fusion reactors) at the bottom of the page.
However, does anyone really believe the oil boys will allow it, before they have squashed out the last remaining profit of their huge investments?

Back to the conspiracy community.
I'm still contemplating those thermal hotspots deep under the WTC rubble, lasting for several weeks, and the pools of molten and again coagulated metal found at WTC 1, 2 and 7 (said by 3 quite solid sources to be molten steel, they didn't mention molten aluminium. You can't be mistaken if you ever saw both metals in the coagulated form).
And the huge crater in WTC 6.

When I observe the statement made on the website of Jimmy Walters, I think you have to read between the lines as follows :

If some political-minded criminals needed to bring down several high rise buildings to serve an agenda of immens political and economical advance, what better way than first fly some jetliners into the two biggest ones, and subsequently detonate some directed energy mini nuclear-devices in the bedrock underneath those structures, in the kiloton range, which pulsed directed shockwaves travelled up and reflected down from the two reinforced top floors. The pulse intensity of the devices is preset to increase logarithmically, thus travelling up in the lower Mhz range, followed by increasingly higher pulses, ranging to Ghz ranges in a few miliseconds time.
The nuclear device needed to be constructed in such a way, that it will only melt a relatively small cavern in the bedrock, and leaves mostly alpha and beta radiation, and minute amounts of gamma radiation in that cavern, and definitely would not escape to the surface. The last Ghz pulses would pulverise all concrete and drywall construction material, and breaking all bolts and welds from the core steel structure beams.
Eventually a layer of lead could have been placed above the detonation points in advance, to mask radiation against aerial reconnaissance afterwards. The alpha and beta radiation would faint away in a few days to weeks, and the lead would cover most of the remaining gamma radiation.
Remember, they only needed a small earthquake, directed mostly upwards.
The military has also other means to create mini-earthquakes, without telltaling radiation

During this period Tetra has developed its pulsed power technology to provide the pulse of current to create the EH shock wave in water to crush rock.
Tetra Corporation has developed a number of pulsed power technologies for defense and industrial applications.
Main page : Tetra is now applying key proprietary technology gained over nearly 20 years of R & D to the mining and rock crushing industry.

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 08:07 AM
Ever watched how "primitive" natives make carbon from wood?
They make a round hole, fill it with woodchips and cover those with clay. Only one small hole to let air in is left at the base of the dome, and a small hole at the top. Then the wood inside is lit, and the slow oxidation process sets in, fueled by the chimney effect. It can take days to weeks, before all wood is converted to carbon coals.
Now think about the way a blacksmith forges and sometimes melts iron or steel.
He heats carbon coals by blowing in air, and keep the iron bar in that very hot fire untill it's red to white hot.

So, if there was a lot of burning carbon down there under a dome of compressed rubble at the WTC site, and there was a chimney effect from air sucked in from the subway tubes underneath the towers, or any other tubes or piping, that process could melt parts of iron beams.

But there was no pure carbon?
Or was it, placed there deep under the towers to shield eventual radiation?

If there definitely were pools of molten STEEL observed at the WTC crash site, that's your smoking gun.

And if some firefighters, scientists or rescue workers collected some pieces of that molten steel, that would have been the contacts to search for by unbelievers of the official explanation. And do some radiation tests on that molten steel.
I still remember some mysterious deaths of known unbelievers.
They came too close to the truth perhaps?

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 07:47 PM
Don't think nobody ever thought about detonating nuclear devices in underground cavities :
"The PACER project, carried out at Los Alamos National Laboratory in the mid-1970s, explored the possibility of a fusion power system that would involve exploding small H-bombs inside an underground cavity."

Please notice the small details in the description of the ORION project.

"Orion reacted small directional nuclear explosives against a large steel pusher plate"
"Efficient directional explosives maximized the momentum transfer"

"A number of engineering problems were found and solved over the course of the project, notably related to crew shielding (good) and pusher-plate lifetime (which was unlimited). The system appeared to be entirely workable when the project was shut down in 1965, the main reason being given that the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space, and Under Water made it illegal. There were also ethical issues with launching such a vehicle within the Earth's magnetosphere. Calculations showed that between 1 and 10 people would die from each takeoff from fallout. Enthusiasts want to launch outside the magnetosphere, or use clean fusion explosives, which are technically, but not politically feasible.

One useful mission for this near-term technology would be to deflect an asteroid that could collide with the earth. The extremely high performance would permit even a late launch to succeed, and the vehicle could effectively transfer a large amount of kinetic energy to the asteroid by simple impact. Also, an automated mission would eliminate the most problematic issues of the design: the shock absorbers.

Orion's technology is also one of very few known interstellar space drives that could be constructed with known technology.

Some authorities say that President Kennedy initiated the Apollo program to buy off the technical enthusiasts backing the Orion program. The recent book by George Dyson says that one design proposal presented to Kennedy was a space-going nuclear battleship, which so offended him that he decided to end the program."

" Whereas the "normal" critical mass for plutonium is about 11.8 kilograms, with antimatter catalyzed reactions this could be well under one gram."

"and others using fission-fusion (effectively a very small version of Orion's bombs)".

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 08:43 PM
Antimatter does exist already. In minimal amounts however.

"Antimatter is routinely produced at CERN (more than 10 million particles per second.)
The World-wide Web was invented at CERN. The world's largest magnet, weighing more than the Eiffel tower, is at CERN. CERN's biggest accelerator is 27 kilometers around, and particles travelling near the speed of light lap it over 11,000 times each second."

"PRESS RELEASE 1996. CERN specialists say the next step is to develop techniques to store antimatter for seconds, minutes or weeks. They could then compare anti-hydrogen atoms with ordinary hydrogen atoms.

Because antimatter technology is changing so rapidly, links provided here would become outdated almost overnight. For the most recent information on this topic, enter "antimatter" into your favorite search engine."

"Start-up of CERN's newAntimatter Factory.

"The current antimatter production rate is between 1 and 10 nanograms per year, and this is expected to increase dramatically with new facilities at CERN and Fermilab."

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 09:28 PM
Btw, :

Fatal error: Call to undefined function: simplepage() in /home/abovetopsecret/black/rpg/register.php on line 56

You want me to miss all the fun?

posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 02:38 AM
Great data mining there man, looking forwards to digging through this post in more detail, am addnig a short reply to subscribe to the thread.

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 11:11 AM
Scroll to : Myth Of US Invincibility Floats In The Persian Gulf (04-16-2005)

Some excerpts :
During the summer of 2002, in the run-up to President Bush's invasion of Iraq, the US military staged the most elaborate and expensive war games ever conceived. Operation Millennium Challenge, as it was called, cost some $250 million, (read the rest of the article, it's eyeopening, it was in fact an immens disaster, caused by the cunning plans of a former Marines lt.general.)

Later, at the conclusion of the games, Gen. Kernan insisted that the new concepts had been proved effective. At which point, JOINTFOR drafted recommendations to Gen. Richard Myers (LT: that's a familiar name, the same person who blundered at 9/11, he let the airforce standdown for more than 1.5 hours, enough to let those planes roam the US sky freely, without interception), the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, based on the experiment's satisfactory results in such areas as doctrine, training and procurement.

But not everyone shared Gen. Kernan's rosy assessment. It was sharply criticized by the straight-talking Marine commander who had been brought out of retirement to lead Force Red. His name was Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, and he had played the role of the crazed but cunning leader of the hypothetical rogue state. Gen. Van Riper dismissed the new military concepts as empty sloganeering, and he had reason to be skeptical. In the first days of the "war," Van Riper's Force Red sent most of the US fleet to the bottom of the Persian Gulf.

Not all of the details about how Force Red accomplished this have been revealed. The Pentagon managed to keep much of the story out of the press. But a thoroughly disgruntled Van Riper himself leaked enough to the Army Times that it's possible to get at a sense of how a much weaker force outfoxed and defeated the world's lone remaining Superpower.
The Worst US Naval Disaster Since Pearl Harbor.
( LT: Read the rest, in the link provided: how to throw your tax dollars overboard, the never ending story.)

The GAO report warned that the next generation of anti-ship missiles that will begin to appear by 2007 will be faster and stealthier, and will also be equipped with advanced target-seekers, i.e., advanced guidance systems. In fact, one of these advanced anti-ship cruise missiles is already available: the Russian-made Yakhonts missile. It flies at close to Mach 3 (three times the speed of sound), can hit a squirrel in the eye, and has a range of 185 miles: enough range to target the entire Persian Gulf (from Iran), shredding Gen. Kernan's glib remark that in a real war the US expeditionary force will stand-off in safety "over the horizon" while mounting an amphibious attack. Nonsense. Henceforth, in a real Gulf war situation there will be no standing off in safety. The Yakhonts missile has already erased the concept of the horizon, at least, within the Persian Gulf, and it has done so without ever having been fired in combat---yet.

Gen. Kernan should have known also that, according to Jane's Defense Weekly and other sources, Iranian government officials were in Moscow the previous year (2001), shopping for the latest Russian anti-ship missile technology.(7) By their own admission the Russians developed the Yakhonts missile for export. No doubt, it was high on Iran's shopping list.

But the GAO saved its most sobering conclusion for last: It so happens that the most vulnerable ship in the US fleet is none other than the flagship itself, the big Nimitz-class carriers.

The Yakhonts missile's NATO nickname is Sunburn missile.
(See the -passed away- Joe Vialls website,despite him being a rabient anti-Zionist campaigner, I always was stunned by his inside knowledge. Everytime I thought "he went over the cliff this time", whenever checking upon his musings, I found proof for his allegations from multiple sources (he nearly ever mentioned them, which is concidered widely as very bad web-behavior).
Much of his military oriented musings were based on Jane's Defense Weekly, and a now defunct russian website, which always had the latest news on events during the Gulf wars, hours or minutes before any western news source broke the news on these events.
It was widely known in intelligence circles, that this was a front store for the russian intelligence agencies.

The rest of this link is also very interesting , f.e. ;

Another account of underground blasts.

Construction worker Phillip Morelli describes being thrown to the ground by two explosions while in the fourth subbasement of the North Tower. The first, which threw him to the ground and seemed to coincide with the plane crash, was followed by a larger blast that again threw him to the ground and this time blew out walls. He then made his way to the South Tower and was in the subbasement there when the second plane hit, again associated with a powerful underground blast. This is one of a series of interviews with WTC survivors done by NY1 News:

When you visit that page at, you will not find anything mentioned of this text in the printed material about Morelli.
However, there's a Real video link at the bottom of Morelli's story, which I can't open, btw, I can't open any of their video links, so it will be subject to subscribing to their services, which I can't find. I reinstalled Real software, changed all settings, without result.
Anyone being able to open that video link, please report in this thread if Morelli really explains the events as above quoted.

There's also an article regarding seismic spikes on 9/11 :

Seismic Data: Two Huge Energy Bursts Under WTC Towers.
New Seismic Data Refutes Official Explanation Of Collapses. 12-13-2004

However, I prefer more scientific data :

Let's view the seismic data provided in the next post.

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 12:47 PM
This is the Google html version of the file :
Just copy and paste the second part of this link after the first in an address bar of your browser:

Four seismogram traces showing the two hours of seismogram recorded at Palisades, New York.
Each trace is 30 minutes long. Note that the first impact resulted in the second collapse, and the second impact resulted in the first collapse.

I'll make it easier to understand:

....................Magnitude.............Time(EDT)....Dominant Period...........Signal Duration

1-impact :..........0.9...................08:46:26............0.8 sec.........................12 sec.

2-Collaps:..........2.3...................10:28:31............0.9 sec.........................8 sec.

2-impact :..........0.7...................09:02:54............0.6 sec.........................6 sec.

1-Collaps:..........2.1...................09:59:04............0.8 sec.........................10 sec.

I did not have a look at the PDF file, since that one also doesn't want to open for me, so I'll have to do some repairs first, but just looking at these data, what conclusions can already be drawn, when taking in account all you already know from the television videos?

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 07:34 PM
While contemplating on the seismic table, take your time to read the full following article, it offers common sense.
A primer on understanding conspiracies

November 14, 2001—Those of us who spend any amount of time searching for information on the Internet have noticed that the number of conspiracy theories involving US government actions, in a wide variety of areas, have exploded off the charts. This is particularly true in matters evolving from September 11, 2001.

While conspiracy theories surrounding watershed events are not unusual, I believe that the extreme number of theories that we are currently experiencing derive from the fact that we are being provided with so little information from within our national borders that we have a need to answer our own questions. The mainstream press, trying to imbue a frat boy Napoleon with God-like virtue by selling all the stories that Karl Rove wants sold, and giving the press' civic responsibility as government watchdogs a pass, are failing to provide even enough lies to sustain us against the few facts that are able to leak out.. The "Fourth Estate," still apparently hampered by a few remaining ethics, has failed to become the efficient propaganda machine necessary to provide the bastard child with royal legitimacy.

I think that these conspiracy theories are a good thing, whether or not they are true. One or two of them may make so much sense, in the face of available information, that they may take hold of popular thought and require the government to disprove them. As such, they become the questions the press refuses to ask.

As a politically neutral onlooker on many issues, it rings a few bells with me. Hope it does the same to you, the readers.

On my remark about suspicious deaths, read the middle section of this f.ex. :
Texas to Florida: White House-linked clandestine operation paid for "vote switching" software.
and this tribute to Hunter S. Thompson, the author of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" :

He'd been working on a story about the World Trade Center attacks and had stumbled across what he felt was hard evidence showing the towers had been brought down not by the airplanes that flew into them but by explosive charges set off in their foundations. Now he thought someone was out to stop him publishing it: "They're gonna make it look like suicide," he said. "I know how these bastards think . . ."

On general Richard Myers, who got promoted instead of sacked for his majestic failures on 9/11, read this :
Liar Myers, pants on fire.

Well, there's an awfull lot of interesting articles here :

On possible other than nuclear devices used on 9/11 :
The fabled a-neutronic bomb :

"Riconosciuto's talents were much in demand. He had created the a-neutronic bomb (or "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device"), which sank the ground level of the Nevada test site by 30 feet when a prototype was tested. Samuel Cohen, the inventor of the neutron bomb, said of Riconosciuto: "I've spoken to Michael Riconosciuto (the inventor of the a-neutronic bomb) and he's an extraordinarily bright guy. I also have a hunch, which I can't prove, that they both (Riconosciuto and Lavos, his partner) indirectly work for the CIA."

Riconosciuto's bomb made suitcase nukes obsolete, because it achieved near-atomic explosive yields, but could be more easily minaturized. You could have a suitcase a-neutronic bomb, or a briefcase a-neutronic bomb, or simply a lady's purse a-neutronic bomb. Or just pull out your wallet for identification and... The Meridian Arms Corporation, as well as the Universities of California and Chicago owned a piece of the technology."

posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 10:42 AM
Seismic Waves Generated by Aircraft Impacts and Building Collapses at World Trade Center, New York City.
The grafics shown at this site are very compressed, showing no detail at all from the actual collapses.
It however is presented by many official sources as the holy grail of scientific reporting.

How come, f.ex. a much better filtered and detailed graph of the second collaps is to be found here at the BBC.

BBC : The south tower goes just before 1430 GMT

The properties of the picture at BBC state it came from LDEO, which is the source of the above mentioned PDF report from Colombia university's dr. Kim.
The BBC article is still dated Thursday, 20 September, 2001, 14:47 GMT 15:47 UK.
That means this graph originated from LDEO on that date, or before, imhop.
Why can it not be found at LDEO anymore? Or did I miss it somewhere in their whole website?

BBC-bug : Note that impact 1 and collapse 2 relate to the North tower (WTC-1), and impact 2 and collapse 1 apply to the South tower (=WTC-2).
Note that WTC-7 is situated north of the North tower (=WTC-1).
So this graph's description is wrong, since the second tower collaps was at 09:28:02 EST, which was the NORTH tower.
That's quite a mistake from BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse. It was made in the disturbing days after 9/11, so it's understandable, but not that it still stands there in the BBC archives after 4 long years.

There are obviously two different events to observe in this graph, what caused the first one, and what the second one?
Is the first one the event which caused the camera (see below) to shake for a second?
Quite a few indices of explosions before the towers came down. Especially the video shot with a camera on a tripod which shakes for a second, ten seconds before the collaps, is worth investigating.
Did the cameraman or another person hit the tripod, or not? There's only one person you can ask. Where's this cameraman?

This is a quite big Real Player video of WTC-7 collapsing, filmed by NBC from West Broadway, at the end NBC blends in: Greenwich Street.

[edit on 1/8/05 by LaBTop]

posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 01:24 PM
As you can see above, the color-tag doesn't work after a Preview Post and then an Edit. Smilies also don't show in Preview Post.

Work to do for some Admin.

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 01:17 AM
Well, I have to appologize to LDEO, they still have the graphs online, but hell, they don't make them easy to find, and that for the most shocking seismic graphs in american history and from american soil.
First the last page didn't want to open , hours later, it did.
You have to follow this complicated page route if you have no exact file name to search for : (homepage LDEO, then Outreach) (then Web Sites, Earthquake Information) (then Recent Earthquakes, Archive (If event is not listed check here) (then World Trade Center Attack, Waveforms from PAL)
then at last you find the graphs page, Record of the Day:
Pffffffff....must be a musician who named that page.

Seismograms recorded by LCSN Station PAL (Palisades, NY).

1. Seismic record of the first plane impact at the North Tower (WTC-1) at 08:46:26 (EDT).

2. Second plane Impact at the South Tower (WTC-2) at 09:02:54 (EDT).

3. First Collapse of the South Tower (WTC-2) at 09:59:04 (EDT) Note: sensibility of graph 10x lower.

4. Second Collapse of the North Tower (WTC-1) at 10:28:31 (EDT) Note: sensibility of graph 10x lower.

5. Building 7 Collapse: 17:20:33 (EDT)

Nr 1. Looks like a harmonic, strong, short steep rise, followed by a slowing harmonic descend of oscillating core beams, caused by the plane which hit straight on at the center core beams of the North Tower.
Nr 2. Looks like a harmonic, far less stronger, shorter steep rise, followed by a much shorter slowing harmonic descend of less oscillating core beams, caused by the plane which hit more diagonally, to the right of the core of the South Tower, in fact most of the plane mass must have missed the core beams.
Nr 3. This graph is set 10x less sensible as the first two, probably to create equity in viewing all graphs.
You can easily observe a centre mass of oscillation peaks in the form of an arrow pointing to the right. (use a plastic ruler to draw a line touching the most peaks of the oscillations, both above and under the 0.0sec centre line. Then you will see 4 exessive peaks above, and 1 exessive peak under that triangle which points to the right.
It baffles me that nobody asks what those 5 major anomalies indicate.
Nr 4. This graph is also set 10x less sensible as the first two.
Here the arrow is less obvious, but if you take the same ruler, and find out how to draw a line above and under the 0.0sec centre line, touching the most peaks of the oscillations (both 3), you will see about the same shape of an arrow form as in nr 3, just as big, and observe 1 smaller and 1 exessive peak above, and 1 exessive and 1 smaller peak under the sides of that triangle, which points to the right.
What do these 4 anomalies indicate?
Note on nrs 3 and 4 : Both have an exessive dip in the middle, where the amplitude of the oscillations suddenly falls back to about 1/3 of the preceeding and following peaks. What on earth does that mean, and why lasts nr 3 about 1 sec, and nr 4 about 2 sec? God/Allah took a deep breath, before continuing his punishment?
Nr 5. I see eather some 5 arrow shapes, with numerous exeptions peaking out, or one long stretched one, about 20 sec long, with a dip of 5 seconds.
Again, what indicates that dip?

I would love to find some seismic records of controlled demolishions of that Loiseaux firm, the professionel demolishers, to compare to these graphs.
Will try to find at least one.

Why are there so many differences in the given graph event time stamps, and the remarked starting times on the graphs?
Nr 1. 4 seconds later.
Nr 2. 1 second later.
Nr 3. 3 seconds later.
Nr 4. 1 second earlier.
Nr 5. 7 seconds later.

posted on Aug, 7 2005 @ 11:57 AM
Let's have a closer look at this socalled a-neutronic bomb or "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device" theory.

The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics has the following to say about it :
Electrohydrodynamic Atomization For MEMS Combustion Engines

T. Gemci and N. Chigier, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, Jan. 6-9, 2003

"generating monosized droplets in the diameter range
of 1-10 mu for the commercially available liquid
hydrocarbons fuels (gasoline, kerosene, and diesel)
using the electrospray technique through an 100 mu
ID stainless steel capillary."

Chapter 1. The Mannilicher-Carcanno Bomb. comes from this book :
The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror.
These are exerpts of a book written by David Hoffman, about the Murrah Building explosion(s) in Oklahoma City. The book is littered with extensive references, which can be found in the Endnotes section, which by itself is obligatory reading for conspiracy proponents, many of these notes give a chilling insight into machinations of a government running completely out of control, blanketing anything remotely indicative of government mistrust with one single frase : "National Security".

Now read some more indept remarks on the Oklahoma City bombing regarding eventual use of high-tech explosives from Chapter 1.

Yet some critics of the government's story have gone beyond the relatively ordinary explanations of Partin, Gronning and others to suggest that the Federal Building was destroyed by a device called an "A-Neutronic Bomb." These advocates cite as evidence the nature of the spalling (the disintegration of the concrete into tiny pieces) on the top of the building, and the extent of the damage to surrounding buildings that even men like General Partin claim would be impossible for an ANFO bomb.

Larens Imanyuel, a Berkeley assistant physics professor who has studied the bombing :
There was some very sophisticated bomb that was capable of causing a tremendous blast atmospheric pressure wave that blew out windows in so many of the surrounding buildings. This had to be some sort of very high-tech dust explosive-like bomb — one that creates a widely dispersed explosive mixture in the very air and then detonates it with a secondary charge. This last spectacular high-tech bomb served the purpose of convincing the general public that the alleged solitary truck-bomb was powerful and "devastating" enough that it could wipe out and collapse a nearby building. (Endnote 36)Larens Imanyuel, interview with author.

The range of this blast has really impressed me — the extent of the damage and the distance out." A mile away, window frames had been pushed back two feet.....The lack of damage to the frames, despite the massive light-structural damage showed that the shock waves were of short duration. This was consistent with a many-point explosion, but not with a single-point explosion large enough to knock out the four heavy columns that had collapsed in the Murrah Building. (37) Engineering News, May 1, 1995, page 10-11

The A-Neutronic bomb, or "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device," was reportedly developed by the young scientist-prodigy Michael Riconosciuto in the early 1980s while he was working for Hercules Manufacturing in Silicon Valley, CA. The first bomb test at the Pentagon's super-secret Area 51 in Nevada apparently resulted in the death of a technician and injured several others due to their underestimation of its power. The project was reportedly compartmentalized and classified under a "Nuclear Weapons" category by President Reagan. [For a description of the device, see Appendix]
(LT: the Appendix states now : This page is not identical to that of the printed version. It contains selected image files from it.)
Only in the printed version you can find a description of the a-neutronic bomb device. Anybody has that book and willing to put that description up here?

What does Samuel Cohen (inventor of the Neutron bomb) have to say about the A-Neutronic bomb? "Well, I'm not expert enough to really vouch for his statements, but I've got a hunch that it's technically well-based. I've spoken to Michael Riconosciuto (the inventor of the A-Neutronic Bomb) and he's an extraordinarily bright guy. I also have a hunch, which I can't prove, that they both (Riconosciuto and Lavos, his partner) indirectly work for the CIA."

According to Imanyuel, a member of a public watch-dog group that monitors military and nuclear procurement activities, "The design would be particularly suitable for use as a cruise missile warhead, where a non-nuclear charge is required that can reliably destroy a hardened target despite a several-meters targeting error. Such weapons are designed as part of the Advanced Technology Warhead Program of Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos National Laboratories."

Ted Gundersen, who has independently investigated the bombing, included numerous letters and memos in his report which pointed to the existence of such a device. He reported that the government contract number for the bomb was DAAA-21-90-C-0045, and was manufactured by Dyno-Nobel, Inc., in Salt Lake City. Dyno-Nobel was previously connected with Hercules Manufacturing, where Riconosciuto worked. The Department of the Army denies that contract DAAA-21-90-C-0045 exists. Dyno-Nobel refused to respond to inquiries from Gundersen or the author. (38)The Gundersen Report on the Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Building, Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995, 11/1/96, copy in author's possession.

Curiously, the bomb specialist the government called as its expert witness during the Federal Grand Jury testimony was Robert Hopler. Hopler recently retired from Dyno-Nobel.

Sherrow raised the issue of the Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device in his Soldier of Fortune article. According to Imanyuel, "Gundersen's bomb model was clearly unworkable as presented in Soldier of Fortune, but contained the essential information that the bomb generated an electrostatically charged cloud." [39]Larens Imanyuel,"The Bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building: Was a Cruise Missile Warhead Design Used?" Veritas, 12/18/95.

One victim in the HUD office in the Murrah Building described in a National Public Radio interview on May 23, 1995 how she felt a heat wave and a static electricity charge immediately before the windows blew in.

Daina Bradley, who lost her mother and two children in the bombing, said she felt electricity running through her body right before the bomb went off. [40]Timothy McVeigh's Petition for Writ of Mandamus, 3/25/97, p. 35.

Another victim, Ramona McDonald, who was driving about block away, remembers seeing a brilliant flash and described the feeling of static electricity. "It made a real loud static electricity sound. It sounded like big swarm of bees — you could actually hear it. The next thing was a real sharp clap, like thunder.…" McDonald also described both gold and blue flashes of light. Interestingly, Riconiscuto has called his device "Blue Death." [41]Ramona McDonald, interview with author.

Another survivor of the blast was quoted on CNN as saying, "It was just like an atomic bomb went off. "The ceiling went in and all the windows came in and there was a deafening roar…" [42]"The Worst Terrorist Attack on U.S. Soil: April 19, 1995," CNN, 12/20/95.

Proponents of the A-Neutronic Bomb conclude that these are all signatures of such a device.[43]Other people who were working in office buildings at the time reported that sparks flew out from their computers just before the blast. The manager of the Journal Record parking garage, two blocks from the Murrah Building, reported that the electronic computers in at least half a dozen cars had malfunctioned as a result of the blast.

While both Gundersen and Riconosciuto have received ridicule for suggesting that a super-secret pineapple-sized device may have destroyed the Murrah Building, Cohen cautions: "Look, when I first came up with that concept (the Neutron Bomb, developed in the 1970s), the ridicule I took from the scientific community was something awful. And this included scientists at the Nobel Prize level." "Regarding Riconosciuto," adds Cohen, "the guy's a madman… but technically, there's no doubt in my mind that he's brilliant." [44]Samuel Cohen, interview with author.

A few minutes before 9:00 a.m. on April 19, a young Arabic man carrying a backpack was seen in the Murrah Building hurriedly pushing the elevator button as if trying to get off. A few minutes after he exited the building, the bomb(s) went off. The elevator doors, which were on the opposite side of the building from the truck-bomb, had their doors blown outward

Another former military source agreed that a device similar to the fuel-air explosive exists. "It's called a Special Atomic Demolition Munitions or SADM," said Craig Roberts, a Lt. Colonel in Army Reserve [Intelligence]. According to Roberts and Charles T. Harrison, a researcher for the Department of Energy and the Pentagon, this munition has been deployed with artillery units in Europe. The SADM can also be carried in a backpack.

Another source who has monitored top-secret weapons projects confirmed this information:

I do not know a lot about SADM's, but I have friends — ex British SAS and RAF — who were trained in their use a few years ago for behind-the-lines sabotage in the event of a Russian breakthrough in Europe. They believe from their still-serving military contacts that the earlier football sized back pack weapons that they were trained on have been significantly microed such that a device would now easily fit in a grapefruit and deliver five to ten tons TNT equivalent — or less [i.e: down to one ton TNT]. These things easily fit into a 105mm howitzer shell or a briefcase. ...

Exactly what components are utilized in these weapons is difficult to get as the still serving British officers are reluctant to talk about them in detail. One can assume that a mixture of Plutonium 239 (highly refined hence relatively low radioactivity emission on detonation), Lithium 6 Deuteride Tritide, Tritium, and possibly Beryllium and Uranium 238 (NOT 235) would be involved as a series of lenses in a Bi-Conical shape. I am endeavoring to get more data but this a very touchy area… [48]Harry M., confidential letter to author.

"A couple of years ago," states Cohen, "disturbing statements on advanced small, very low-yield nuclear warheads, began emanating from Russia.[51]Within the last few years, articles have appeared in the U.S., European, and even Russian media dealing with an exotic new material known as 'Red Mercury' which had been developed by the Russians and allegedly held properties capable of producing far more efficient nuclear fission warheads than the conventional explosives developed thus far."

Cohen adds that these articles "revealed a massive smuggling ring had emerged where the material was being sold around the world to a number of countries, some of which were terrorist nations." [52]Harrison, Op Cit.

British bomb experts, with extensive experience dealing with terrorist truck-bombs, told McVeigh's attorney, Stephen Jones, that the ANFO bomb could not have done all of the damage to the Murrah Building.[54]Edward Zehr, "Turning Point: Resolving The Enigma of Oklahoma City," Washington Weekly, 11/18/96.
Nevertheless, the site was quickly demolished and covered over with concrete; the remains taken to a secure dump and buried. What was the government trying to hide? Nuclear Physicist Galen Winsor, General Ben Partin, and KPOC manager David Hall went to the building and disposal sites with radiation measuring equipment, but were kept away. They managed to gather some fragments anyway, and when they measured them with Winsor's NaI Scintillator detector, they registered radiation levels 50 percent higher than normal.[55]

Then on March 20, 1996,Strategic Investment Newsletter reported that a Pentagon study had been leaked which backed up General Partin's analysis:

A classified report prepared by two independent Pentagon experts has concluded that the destruction of the federal building in Oklahoma City last April was caused by five separate bombs. The two experts reached the same conclusion for the same technical reasons. Sources close to the Pentagon study say Timothy McVeigh did play a role in the bombing but peripherally, as a "useful idiot." The multiple bombings have a Middle Eastern "signature," pointing to either Iraqi or Syrian involvement. [60]"A classified Pentagon study determines Oklahoma bombing was caused by more than one bomb," Strategic Investment Newsletter, 3/20/96.

"Dr. Brian Espe, who was the sole survivor in the Department of Agriculture's fifth floor office, told the author he first "heard a rumbling noise."

According to these individuals' accounts, if the truck-bomb — the alleged sole bomb — had detonated first, how would they have felt a rumbing, had time to think about the situation, then dive under their desks? The resulting blast wave from the truck-bomb would have been immediate and total. Such an account could only be indicative of demolition charges placed inside the building.[65]David Hall, manager of KPOC-TV in Ponca City, who has done considerable investigation into the bombing, told me that two Southwestern Bell employees called him and claimed they had a surveillance tape that showed the Murrah Building shaking before the truck bomb detonated.

"The inside charges — demolition charges," said Cohen, "may have gone off first, and so the columns now started to collapse. Boy, that would produce one hell of a rumble, to put it mildly…." [66]Samuel Cohen, interview with author.

There is still a lot more said about strange facts and eyewitness accounts contrary to the official explanation.

Don't all these statements have a startling resemblence to the various statements recorded from eyewitnesses on 9/11?

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in