Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

How false flag attacks are manufactured by the world's elite.

Archive

Archive for November 15th, 2011

Niels H. Harrit, Center for Molecular Movies,
Copenhagen University
When: Wednesday, November 16 @ 7:15-9:15 p.m.
Where: Morrison Hall 007
Departmental Sponsors: College of Arts and Sciences, American Studies Program
Indiana University, Bloomington

Abstract:
To most people, the image of the World Trade Center (WTC) is confined to the famous twin towers, which dominated the New York skyline until September 11th, 2001, when they collapsed after each one being hit by an airliner. However, the trade center was an assembly of seven buildings around a plaza. The youngest of these, WTC7, was a huge office building, reaching 186 meters and 47 stories into the air. The ground-plan area was little less than a soccer field.

WTC7 was not hit by an airliner. Still, it collapsed seven hours after the twin towers in a totally symmetric movement with free-fall speed. It was the most unexpected collapse in the history of modern building construction.

The talk outlines the factual circumstances around this event. These facts are held up against the official account of the event as it has been presented in a report from National Institute of Standards and Technology. According to this report, WTC7 collapsed due to fire. But never before – or since – in history has a steel-framed high-riser collapsed due to fire.

In the second part of the talk it is proposed that the collapse of WTC was due to controlled demolitions using explosives. In addition, unambiguous evidence points to the use of thermite, which is an energetic material used to cut and weld steel. The newest findings in the dust include still-reactive remains of so-called nano-thermite.

Niels Harrit researches organic photochemistry and photophysics, including the photophysics of nanostructures and the structural dynamics of photochemical processes. He was a predoctoral fellow at The Max-Planck Society and received his Ph.D. degree from the University of Copenhagen. He was Associate Professor of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen from 1976-2010. Dr. Harrit is a member of the University of Copenhagen’s Center for Molecular Movies, which is funded by The Danish National Research Foundation.

Source

By Pepe Escobar
November 11, 2011
Asia Times Online

Get ready for a flurry of fuzzy satellite ”intelligence” of generic warehouses all across Iran frantically described as segments of a nuclear bomb assembly line (Remember a famous ”secret nuclear facility” in Syria not long ago? It was a textile factory.)

Get ready for a flurry of crude diagrams depicting suspect devices, or the containers that hide them, all capable of reaching Europe in 45 minutes.

Get ready for a flurry of ”experts” on Fox, CNN and the BBC endlessly dissecting all this extended black ops dressed up as ”evidence”. For instance, former UN weapons inspector David Albright, now at the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), has already pulled his return of the living dead stunt, displaying his ”bomb Iran” credentials complete with diagrams and satellite intel.

Forget Iraq – it’s sooo 2003. Hit the new groove; hyping overdrive for the war on Iran.

Turning Japanese

First of all, ditch common sense.

If Iran were developing a nuclear weapon, it would be diverting uranium for it. The report released by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) this week – as politicized as it may be – flatly denies it.

If Iran were developing a nuclear weapon, UN inspectors working for the IAEA would have been thrown out of the country.

Iraq did not have a nuclear weapons program in 2002. And yet it was shocked and awed. The same rationale applies to Iran.

What Tehran may have conducted – if the compromised intel used in the IAEA report is to be believed – is a bunch of experiments and computer simulations. Everybody does it – for instance countries which have renounced the bomb, such as Brazil and South Africa.

What the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) – in charge of the civilian nuclear program – certainly wants is a deterrent.

That is, the possibility of building up a nuclear bomb in case they face an unequivocally established threat of regime change, provoked, most likely, by a US attack and invasion.

Doubts swirl about the competence – or the impartiality – of the new IAEA head, the meek Japanese Yukya Amano. The best answer is in this WikiLeaks cable.

As for the origin of most of the IAEA’s self-described ”credible” intel, even the New York Times was forced to report that ”some of that information came from the United States, Israel and Europe.” Gareth Porter offers the definitive debunking of the report.

Moreover, expect major pressure on the CIA to renege the crucial 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), which established – irrefutably – that Tehran had ditched a nuclear weapons program way back in 2003.

All this dovetails with the dogs of war already barking.

Click on link for the rest of the article Do the bomb Iran shuffle

Better Tag Cloud