Friday, 2 January 2009

911 BREAKTHROUGH INFORMATION: Activist Kevin Ryan on the Prime Suspects in the WTC Mass Murders, Nanothermites, and How The Towers Were Rigged.

Alex Jones talks with Engineer Kevin Ryan about the latest research on the collapse of the WTC buildings showing that highly specialised nanothermites were used- very few people had access to this sort technology.

There is information here about the three way connection between the people with knowledge of these high tech incendiary explosives, those involved in the WTC fireproofing upgrades and those involved in the NIST investigations ... all the same people ... or at least many of the same. The interview reveals some prime suspects to the crime and how they may have carried out the demolition.

I would wager that a couple of highly protected Grand Juries could cause a lot of trouble for the perpetrators with the information aired here.


Part 1 (10:52)


Part 2 (10:56)


Part 3 (10:59)


Part 4 (8:22)

A must see/hear interview !!

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, January 2nd, 2009.]

2 comments:

steven andresen said...

You have argued that the conspiracy here is obvious. The people involved have "fraud" written all over themselves.

You keep pointing to the evidence of explosive residue. You say the buildings could not have come down by just fire.

Yet, your position is still just considered looney in the papers. No one was willing to talk about any of this during the last Presidential and Congressional election.

I'm thinking this is because even with your evidence, and your characterization that the perps are obvious, no one thought your case was safe enough or worthwhile enough to take public.

I understand you think that presentation is everything. But, maybe that's where they have you. Whenever they present you, in any kind of public discussion, it's most often in the context of the other crazies like you, ...the ones who think UFOs and aliens were responsible, or those who have been listening to Elvis for insight on the matter.

I'm listening to this Alex Jones show. Jones brings the guy on from the laboratories and he tells his story. It is good information. But, I'm cringing. It makes me sad.

The guys on KPOJ AM here in Portland, pander to liberals and labor unionists and the lefties who supported Obama. They have an audience because they try to identify with some large group of consumers. Then, during breaks, they have on a five minute cartload of ads for services and products for these people. Oh, youcan't pay your credit cards off. Let us give you advice so all that debt will go away. Oh, you are losing your home, here let me tell you three easy stepps to make a million dollars this week.

No one seems to benefit from digging into this murder at the moment.

There's no constituency for it. And if there's no constituency that will carry your message and run with it, your message will die.

I'm thinking there's another reason having to do with the myth that the world is our friend. People generally think the world works for them. When you tell them that someone who should be looking out for them has actually carried out murder campaigns on them, they can't accept it. This is like saying the government bureaucrats are serial killers. (well, maybe they are in a sense,) But, people take that as overstatement and paranoia.

This mythology is where I think people should be softened up. They won't consider 9-11 was an inside job until they are willing to believe in general that the people on the inside could do something like what you claim.

SpookyPunkos said...

Steven,

Fine that you should think people will get softened up about the government by a broad information campaign, but with 911 forensic evidence I believe we can strike a more emotional cord and get better headway.

You can go about this matter of justice or "societal reform" anyway you see fit. I'll focus on this "crazy" approach which I am sure you will still respect, even tho you think the chances of success are low.

One thing, I do find it odd that you refer to the physical evidence as if you think there is nothing of substance to the material. You use the terms "your evidence", "you say", "your case", "your characterisation" as if what we are dealing with is a matter of mere opinion. This could not be further from the truth (no offense intended!).

You were "cringing" when it came to the Alex Jones interview with "that guy from the laboratories". I think you were put off by the presentation here. This sort of show does appeal to many and I thought the inteview put forth valuable information with regards to suspects and the mechanics of the operation + cover-up.

Although you said he had "good information" your overall comments contexualise this statement within your implied view that it's largely opinion - which also implies that you don't understand what has been presented.

Other "negative" comments you have written makes me think that you have not understood or even looked at the significant material I've summarised at this Blog.

All I can say is that if you disagree with some of the stuff here then fine, but I'm going to keep posting about the scientific evidence and follow the courses of action that come from this position. If you want to follow a different course then that's fine by me, but I think you are being repeditive and overly negative about what we have at hand.

If you think there's no chance anyone will pick up on this material, that we are all seen as "crazies" (put those talking marks in your next reference to that word thanks !) then I accept your position, but why keep making the point over and over ?

I hear you, but my strategy will not change. Like I said, I think there is a much stronger base for getting this message out than you give credit- certainly we have lots of Architects, Engineers and Scientists signing up everyday because of the evidence.