Thursday, 20 December 2007

Government's Evasiveness about 9/11 is Proof of Guilt

What NIST is saying is that -- when the airplanes hit -- the Towers oscillated for a short time, and then the movement quieted down, so that NIST didn't have to account for the movement in its analysis.

But that's not the question that 9/11 victim's family members, scientists, engineers, architects, military leaders and lawyers are asking. When 9/11 activists talk about "conservation of momentum" or "conservation of energy", they're not talking about the oscillation from the plane impacts.

What they're referring to is:

(1) The speed of the collapses of WTC 1, 2 and 7 should have been slowed much more than actually observed by the still-intact portion of the buildings below the collapse zones; and

(2) Once the upper 30-story block of the South Tower started toppling over sideways, it should have continued to fall sideways well away from the base of the South Tower.


What the people at the National Institute of Standards and Technology are doing is deliberately refusing to answer a simple and direct question, thereby using their position of authority to aid in the cover-up of a crime (the mass murder of 3000 people).

This occurs since the evidence in question (in regard to the conservation of energy & momentum exhibited in the collapses) challenges the official account which holds Bin Laden's hijackers responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Centre buildings. The evidence NIST refuses to address contradicts this situation since pre-planted explosive devices would be NECESSARY to cause the effects we saw in the collapses we witnessed on 911.

By avoiding the question and deflecting blame away from the position that the WTC collapses were the work of people on the "inside," they are acting as accessories to the crime (after the fact), which is a crime. They are protecting the real suspects by adhering to an unscientifically supportable position that defies logic. One can only do this if one were utterly incompetent or deliberately deceitful- in the latter case aiding and abetting the real killers.

(Further scientific PROOF of the inside job can be found here.)

No comments: