Tuesday, 21 December 2010

9/11 Incontrovertible Proof the Government is Lying

(thanks to Michael G for the great clip !)

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, December 21st, 2010.]


steven andresen said...


The guy at the beginning, the government apologist, denied the premise that there was any molten steel involved in the debris of the Towers.

This is a lot like denying that there was any evidence that there had to be others involved in the shooting of JFK. The move to deny any evidence exists or is relevant seems more involved in quashing evidence than in examining what arguments or evidence there might be and deciding that as a result of examining that evidence, there is no case for some conspiracy or , as for the Towers, there being molten steel.

I wonder how the government explains the comments made by people talking about what they saw, the hunks of what they claim came from the Towers, including the bent I-beam, and so forth...Do they say that all these people are making these things up? Is there some other explanation for the horse-shoe bent I-beam?


SpookyOne said...


I don't think there is any other reasonable explanation to account for all the heat related phenomena: the iron spheres described by Jones, the melted together beams, the photo of superheated steel being removed, the "swiss cheese" steel, the on site eyewitness reports (including from a structural engineer), the melted concrete, the semi-official scientific studies that documented melting of steel and evaporation of lead (USGS, RJ Lee Group), the flow of superheasted material iron/steel flowing from the South Tower etc

The "debunkers"- the "best" of which appear to be stooges for the government (COINTELPRO assets)- have no explanation to account for such things. Their explanations constitute distortions and outright impossibilities.

The official investigators on the otherhand who, even though they are "top experts", provide NO accounting for what was seen and documented. In stead of even attempting to address the heat issue they deny it even exists. In my mind this sort of behaviour constitutes guilty demeanor. ie they are engaged in a criminal cover-up.

There are no explanations that can account for all the heat phenomena regarding the steel other than if the rubble pile had taken on blast furnace-like conditions OR if there were chemical incendiaries present. There is no evidence for the former postulate but an abundance of evidence for the latter.

After research it seems obvious the government is in denial/cover-up mode.

Spook !

steven andresen said...


It is my understanding of what happened in Dallas that there was evidence showing that there was more than one shooter. For example, there were wounds on JFK's body, supposedly, from the front. There was audio tape evidence showing that there were bullets fired faster than one person with a rifle could have fired. There was also eyewitnesses who said they saw things happening on the "grassy knoll."

It is my understanding that in order to make it seem like Oswald was the only shooter they had to cober up the autopsy evidence, confiscate and alter all the audio and folm evidence, and either undermine the credibility of the eyewitness testimony or kill them.

The continuing debate about JFK's assassination is based not only on the story that there were these pieces of evidence showing more than one shooter, but the suggestion that the autopsy evidence was tampered with, that the government did confiscate audio and film evidence so that tampering was a possibnility, and that the story of the "grassy knoll" was attacked.

The business suggets that there was some planning ahead of time into the doing of the deed and the gettingaway with it.

In the case of the 9-11 murders, they had to not only pull off the murders so to blame the Arabs, but they had to plan on how they were going to get away with it.

The cobering up behaviors seem to be evidence of guilt just as much as any evidence of the doing of the deed itself.