September 05, 2011

Armed SWAT Raids Imply 9/11 Criminal Hearings Necessary

Fresh evidence regarding the attacks of September 11, 2001 will be presented at the International Hearings on 9/11 in Toronto Canada. But before I address that specifically, I'd like you to consider the implications of the armed SWAT raids that have been occurring. Many of these important stories have been avoided by the mainstream news. One example includes the organic farmers being raided around the U.S. and who are being forced out of business. Rawesome Foods has been raided for the second time. In the first raid, 5 SWAT commandos entered with guns locked and loaded ready to fire. In this second raid on August 3, 2011, two directors were arrested on $123,000 and $121,000 bail. What were some of the violations? Crimes included selling unpasteurized milk and keeping eggs at an improper temperature.[1] A small-time Amish farmer was raided twice and told he violated interstate laws. According to a bizarre FDA definition of interstate commerce, you can violate interstate laws by growing your own food and selling it to your neighbor.[2] These abuses are a result of the open-ended bill from 2010, S510, also known as the Patriot Act for Food. But this is just the beginning.

Locked and loaded, but for whom?
The management of Gibson Guitars is still waiting for the actual criminal charges from the first government raid that occurred approximately 2 years earlier. But that didn't stop another government raid from happening on August 24, 2011. The Gibson CEO stated "They're not accountable for this action and we have not been charged as of today with any specific violation."[3] These types of armed SWAT raids aren't warranted, but criminal hearings regarding the events of 9/11/01 are both warranted and necessary. When the so-called Patriot Act was introduced, the U.S. Federal Government basically severed itself from accountability and the powers that be haven't taken a glance back since. This isn't to say there aren't many sincere and good people working in the Federal Government, but simply to say that the abuses of authority have been increasing. These increasing raids are a confirmation that something is awry at a foundational level.

On the 10th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 catastrophe, the U.S. establishment media will be airing eloquent speeches from New York City about how justice has been served because Osama bin Laden is dead. Meanwhile, The International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001 will offer hard facts and evidence for the public record. The purpose of the hearings in Toronto is "To submit a record and a summary of the Hearings, together with signed Statutory Declarations by witnesses, to relevant governments, groups and international agencies with the request that a full and impartial investigation be launched into the events of September 11, 2001, which have been used to initiate military invasions and to restrict the rights of citizens."[4]

I agree with the premises of the International 9/11 Hearings in Toronto and believe anyone interested in stemming the tide of civil rights abuses over the past ten years should learn the hard facts about 9/11 and help to spread the truth. US mainstream news basically isn't reporting on the Toronto hearings because anyone who questions the events of 9/11 has been labelled a kook or a wacko in order to avoid looking seriously at the facts. Instead of a balanced review, you have the slick National Geographic TV presentations stating they debunk the conspiracy theories. But later I'll show how licensed engineer, Jonathan Cole P.E, completely demolishes all their arguments against thermite.

I've summarized the most critical scientific and forensic evidence proving that explosives were used and I'll contrast that with the main, up-to-date rebuttals of National Geographic and Popular Mechanics that support the official government account. If you have any doubt about these facts, write a note in the comments or send me an email. I'd be happy to elaborate on any points or debate the subject if that seems necessary.

Three Scientific Proofs that the WTC Buildings were Brought Down Through a Controlled Demolition

I. Thermite and Iron Microspheres at the WTC

Yes, it's documented and undeniable.
Five days after the 9/11/01 attack, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) used infrared equipment and detected extremely hot temperatures on the surface of the rubble of the collapsed WTC buildings. The two hottest locations found were the footprints of WTC 2 and WTC 7. The temperatures were 801°F / 427°C  at WTC2  and 1341°F / 727°C at WTC7, as shown in the chart on the right.[5] Keep in mind, these were only the surface temperatures. The temperatures of the molten iron buried deep below the surface were much hotter than on the surface. Also, the temperatures 5 days prior would have been even hotter. Nevertheless, even with the USGS 5% error factor, these temperature are much higher than the burning temperature of jet fuel. Jet fuel burns at an uncontrolled open air temperature of 260-315 °C (500-599 °F).[6] The National Institute for Standards and Testing (NIST) estimated the office fire temperature was 560°F but these temperatures are nowhere close to the temperatures found.

USGS also examined the WTC dust and found traces of molybdenum that had been melted. This can occur only at temperatures of 2,623°C (4,753°F) or higher.[7] These kinds of temperatures are explainable through the use of thermetic explosives but not from jet fuel or office fires or any combination thereof. Building 7, the second hottest location, was never hit by a plane. This evidence of extremely high temperatures refutes the official NIST report, which states office fires and jet fuel alone were the primary heat sources.

What about the fires in the towers? In order for fire to heat an object, it must transfer its heat energy to that object through either direct contact, or through thermal radiation. The jet fuel burned at a maximum temperature for only a few minutes and, under the most ideal circumstances, the jet fuel could not have raised the temperature of structural members more than 257° C (495° F), as shown by calculations.[8] But even if you use an open-air burn temperature of 315 C and 599 F, it's not enough to explain the molten iron.

NIST never admitted that a wide variety of explosions were heard by credible eyewitnesses. NIST, however, was forced to release its stash of video evidence to the public after a Freedom of Information legal action.[9] A mountain of new video evidence was released to the public in 2010, but the organization who demanded it just doesn't have the man-power to quickly sift through it all. So, little by little, it is being posted on the Internet. And NIST has confirmed there is still more unreleased evidence. Videos so far show undeniable proof that NIST had been covering up the facts. Videos released include on-site news media coverage of the explosions that ended up censored out of the mainstream prime-time presentations. NIST and those above NIST basically helped to keep the public in the dark. These unreleased videos are truly big news, but, of course, it's not suitable for the status-quo MSM prime-time crowd. Nevertheless, here are some surviving samples for your perusal, as shown in video "The Ultimate Con"[10]:

Barry Jennings was trapped in the WTC7 building after the planes struck the towers and he stated he heard multiple explosions in WTC7 before the towers collapsed. He claimed the explosions occurred below floor 6. He claimed he saw that the lobby of WTC7 had been blown apart before he left the building. In an exclusive interview with Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas, Jennings stated “The fire fighter who took us down kept saying, ‘Don’t look down.’ And I said, ‘Why.’ And we were stepping over people– you know, you can feel when you’re stepping over people.” In the interview, Barry Jennings clarified that he heard explosions inside the building and the official explanation didn't make sense: “I’m just confused about one thing, and one thing only– why World Trade Center 7 went down in the first place. I’m very confused about that. I know what I heard– I heard explosions. The explanation I got was it was the fuel-oil tank. I’m an old boiler guy– if it was a fuel-oil tank, it would have been one side of the building.”[11] Barry Jennings' testimony was problematic for the official report for a number of reasons. Jennings was harassed at work because he spoke up about what he saw and heard. Unfortunately, he died under mysterious circumstances August 19, 2008 at the age of 53.

The Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations by the National Fire Protection Association states the protocol for "high-order damage" demands an inquiry into possible use of explosives.  The Guide specifically defines a high-order damage: "High-order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure, producing small, pulverized debris. Walls, roofs, and structural members are splintered or shattered, with the building completely demolished."[12] So, it's clear that NIST went out of its way to avoid testing for explosives. Their gross negligence and breech of protocol has criminal implications.
Thermite was confirmed in WTC dust.

On April 4, 2009, an international team of professional chemists and researchers produced a scientific article that was published in a peer reviewed journal, the Open Chemical Physics Journal. The article is entitled "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" and it has been well received around the world as evidence that thermetic explosives were found at the World Trade Center.[13] The thermite explosives were found in dust collected from various locations of the World Trade Center Site. NIST did not collect any dust for physical testing in its reports because NIST had presumed that explosives were not used and therefore there was no need to perform a test.

Iron microspheres found in WTC dust.
Physical evidence of explosives was found inadvertently by Deutsche Bank who commissioned the RJ Lee Group to test WTC dust for insurance purposes simply to prove the dust on their property was from the WTC collapses. RJ Lee Group stated in its findings: “Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension."[14] The study showed the percentage of iron microsphere particles was 150 times greater than in a normal steel building collapse and the temperature required was 1,749°C (3,180°F). This extremely high temperature cannot be logically explained, other than by the use of thermetic explosives.[15]

A licensed engineer, Jonathan Cole P.E., challenged the National Geographic video presentation on 9/11 thermite and refuted their video presentation with his own video that demonstrated that a small percentage of thermite can in fact cut through thick steel columns and beams in every conceivable manner. He showed how the characteristics of the thermite explosions were identical to the sights and sounds experienced on September 11, 2001. Cole referenced the National Geographic documentary that stated "175 lbs. of thermite didn't harm a small steel column." And "no thermite "of any type" could cut through steel columns." In his demonstration, Cole refuted all the false claims of the National Geographic video.[16]

II. Molten metal at the WTC

Basically top secret.
At least 10 first-hand witnesses reported seeing molten steel during the excavation at the WTC site. There would have likely been lots of photos, but a sign posted at the gate read, "WARNING No cameras or video equipment permitted! VIOLATORS will be prosecuted and equipment seized!" The chief videographer for FEMA, Kurt Sonnenfeld, stated in an interview: "What I saw at certain moments and in certain places ... is very disturbing!" and "I was told it had been agreed that 'the agency had to be protected'..." Sonnenfeld believes his life is unsafe in the U.S. as a whistleblower and lives in Argentina with his family.[17]

The NIST office never acknowledged that molten metal existed, despite all the credible first-hand accounts stating otherwise. William Langewiesche was the only journalist to have unrestricted access to Ground Zero during the cleanup operation. In his book he stated “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.”[18] Paramedic Lee Turner arrived at the World Trade Center site on September 12. While at Ground Zero, he went “down crumpled stairwells to the subway, five levels below ground.” There he reportedly sees, “in the darkness a distant, pinkish glow—molten metal dripping from a beam.”[19] Firefighter Joe O’Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, “was dripping from the molten steel.”[20] Vance Delsignore, an OSHA officer at WTC was interviewed September 11, 2002, "He remembers a fire truck 10 feet below the ground that was still burning two weeks after the towers collapsed, its metal so hot it looked like a vat of molten steel."[21]

A molten "meteorite" from WTC.
Richard Garlock, a structural engineer at Leslie E. Robertson Associates, an engineering firm involved in the design of the towers and the clean up of the site, said, "The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running."[22] Firefighter Philip Ruvolo, speaking of the Twin Towers, said: "You'd get down below and you'd see molten steel, molten steel, running down the channel rails, like you're in a foundry, like lava.[23] Dr. Ronald Burger of the National Center for Environmental Health stated, “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster,”[24] Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc., which was involved in the clean-up, stated, "molten steel was also found at WTC 7"[25] Alison Geyh, PhD. reported "Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense… In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel."[26] Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction, which was involved in the clean-up operation, said that he saw pools of "literally molten steel."[27] Dr. Keith
" you're in a foundry."
Eaton, Chief Executive of the London-based Institution of Structural Engineers, later wrote in The Structural Engineer about what he had seen, namely: “molten metal which was still red-hot weeks after the event.”[28] Water didn't seem to phase the buried fires: "You couldn't even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there," said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, "It was like you were creating a giant lake."[29] It wasn't until December 19, 2001 that the underground fires were officially extinguished. John Gross, one of the chief directors in charge of the NIST reports, denied there were any credible witnesses who saw molten iron, as documented in the following video[30]:

Some ask, "How could the explosives have been planted?" In a video interview, an eyewitness, Scott Forbes, described how the power was shut off for 30 hours at the WTC a week before the 9/11 attacks: “There was a period of probably thirty hours where there was no power. It would have affected camera security and all of the secure systems on doors.”[31] This is a situation we now know about due to an eyewitness interview. It's possible there were more opportunities for planting explosives that we don't know about. A serious, unbiased investigation would help to find out these answers.

III. Scientific fraud in the NIST reports

This is a summary of NIST's final structural theory on how Building Seven Collapsed, as outlined by Popular Mechanics: "After 7 hours of uncontrolled fires, a steel girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to one of the 81 columns supporting the building. Floor 13 collapsed, beginning a cascade of floor failures to Floor 5. Column 79, no longer supported by a girder, buckled, triggering a rapid succession of structural failures that moved from east to west. All 23 central columns, followed by the exterior columns, failed in what's known as a "progressive collapse"--that is, local damage that spreads from one structural element to another, eventually resulting in the collapse of the entire structure."[32] Popular Mechanics supports the official report, and so by refuting the official report, PM is also refuted. In their first reports NIST suggested that diesel fuel fires and damage from falling debris at the North side of WTC7 were instrumental in the collapse of the structure. But in their final report they abandoned these theories. In their 2008 proposal NIST relied heavily on a computer model as support for their theory. However, it is obvious that they changed the information in order to try and make their model work. Chemist and author Kevin Ryan has produced a video documentary outlining many of the engineering data errors, entitled Why The NIST WTC 7 Report is False.

Errors and fraud in the 2008 NIST report are also written down in text form in Ryan's article, "The NIST WTC 7 Report: Bush Science reaches its peak".[33] Key engineering points are listed below.

A typical shear stud.
A. In their report from 2005 NIST stated this: "Most of the beams and girders [in WTC 7] were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs." (NCSTAR 1-1, p 14) But in their 2008 report NIST stated this: "In WTC 7 no studs were installed on the girders." (NCSTAR 1-9, p 346) John Salvarinas, the project manager for Building Seven, noted 30 shear studs on that critical girder in a diagram for an academic paper that Salvarinas wrote in 1986. NISTS change of data is inexplicable and appears to be blatant fraud in an attempt to support their computer model of the office fire theory.[34]

B. NIST claimed over 100 high strength bolts were broken due to thermal expansion. The idea is that the steel expanding due to heat was in sharp contrast to the colder concrete slab. NIST did not test their theory but an Australian research team did actually physically test this theory and found that the bolts did not fail, thus disproving the NIST assumptions. Professor David Proe and Director of research Ian Thomas, both of Victoria University of Melbourne, Australia, described their findings in their 2009 report.[35]

Why are 30 shear studs missing?
C. In order for NIST's progressive-collapse chain reaction to begin, the noted girder would have had to have been pushed at least 5 1/2 inches so as to fall off the girder plate. Thermal expansion was the means by which NIST explained this necessary movement. However, in order to meet the movement requirements, they would need to assume that concrete slabs have no thermal expansion. So this is what they did. But this is not science, it's a fantasy because concrete will heat up and expand slightly. That is why those creased lines are found in concrete sidewalks, so the expansion joints can allow the sidewalk to expand and contract as necessary. When the correct numbers are plugged into NISTS computer model, the maximum movement is only 3.3 inches, not enough to begin the NIST collapse scenario.[36]

D. Another problem is that NIST gives the impression fires were very long and very hot when they were shown to be the opposite. For example, in their previous report, NIST stated "Around 4:45 PM, a photograph showed fires on Floors 7, 8, 9, and 11 near the middle of the north face; Floor 12 was burned out by this time." But, in order to make their new theory work, NIST claims that there were very big, very hot fires covering much of the north face of the 12th floor at 5:00 PM. Only if this is true, is there any possible hope in their model that the building would collapse 21 minutes later. NIST admits that its models did not use "the observed fire activities from photos and videos as model input." This is not a very scientific approach.[37]

Pretty. But we need real answers.
E. The juxtaposition of WT7's proven free-fall versus NISTS "progressive collapse" scenario is problematic. In their first report, NIST denied that building 7 went into free-fall. The obvious free-fall was pointed out to NIST by a high-school physics teacher, David Chandler: "Finally, Chandler wrote a comment to NIST, saying: 'Acknowledgment of and accounting for an extended period of free fall in the collapse of WTC 7 must be a priority if the NIST is to be taken seriously.'"[38] Chandler and many others recognized Building Seven collapsed in a complete free-fall simply by by observing the videos. On page 607 of the 2008 report NIST did finally admit that "Gravitational acceleration" did occur, which is another name for free-fall. But now NIST was in a quandary. As Chandler pointed out, free fall can only be achieved if there is zero resistance to the motion. In other words, all of the columns must fail in order for there to be a complete free-fall. David Ray Griffin made a stunning observation. The initial NIST report denied that free-fall had occurred at WTC7and NIST continuously stated its finding were "consistent with physical principles." But in the final report, when they admitted that free-fall occurred, they didn't use that phrase once, or any phrase like it. Why? Because they had basically proposed that a miracle had happened. NIST agrees a building went into a symmetrical, fast free-fall, as per video evidence. This means there was no resistance to the falling building. None. Nada. Yet, at the same time, NIST proposes a "progressive collapse," an asymmetrical, gradual chain of events. That's illogical.


So there you have it. What do you think? It appears that NIST reports on the WTC are filled with fraud, junk-science and fuzzy logic. If you'd like to challenge any of the facts and assertions I've represented here,  you are welcome to. In my opinion, the evidence is overwhelming regarding thermite explosives, molten metal and the fraudulent engineering of the NIST reports. And since 9/11, things like home raids, farm raids and police brutality have been increasing. It is the average citizen who simply seeks truth and legal justice who is most likely to be accused of being an enemy of the state and a terrorist. When, by all accounts, it seems the most serious terrorists have not yet been investigated. On the 10th anniversary of 9/11 there are tanks on the streets of New York City, according to CBS News, and this militarization of society seems to be a precursor of martial law.

In light of all these facts, those responsible at NIST for ignoring and breaking inspection protocols in order to deceive the public should probably be tried in a court of law. Any superiors implicated likewise need to be tried. Instead of raids on dairy farms today we should be seeing DOJ raids on the NIST offices and files and the indictment of all those implicated in aiding and abetting acts of terrorism.

The public is being insulted from the critical facts through the censorship of U.S. mainstream media, but, thanks to the Internet and open, international forums like the Toronto Hearings, the word is getting out. Those who've looked into the facts and are ready to assimilate the truth will find it difficult and painful considering the amount of trust that has been broken. I reiterate that there are many sincere people in the Federal Government and in media and and I don't want to try and appear as though I am someone who is without sin and perfect. Not at all. My emphasis is simply that basic governmental accountability is necessary in order for society to function. The food fascism and the fact that growing your own organic food may possibly be listed as a crime should raise alarm bells in people's minds. But many seem to be very apathetic.

People who commit acts of terror are willing to die for hatred but we as Christians should have the same type of passion to live for the truth and love of God. The Christians of ancienct Rome were willing to give up their lives for the truth. All they had to do was to say "Hail Ceasar" but they chose execution rather than to deny the truth of their God. This was perhaps the most powerful testimony of the ancient Church. But today there is not a strong desire in the Church to live by one's convictions and to stand for the truth. The Laeodiciean Church was known for its apathy and this type of apathy can affect all of our lives without us being aware of it. Are we "valiant for the truth", as we are encouraged to be in Jeremiah 9.3?

The facts of 9/11 coincide with the prophecies of the End Times outlining a totalitarian government system. Does that mean we should just let it go? I believe that as long as we have some democratic freedoms left, that wouldn't be an appropriate response. Some Christians may say "You don't need to get too involved in political things, just pray as I Timothy 2.1-2 advises." What does that verse really say? "I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone-- for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness." (I Timothy 2.1-2) While I agree, prayer is good and necessary and we can pray always in the Spirit, this verse doesn't mean that prayer is all that we are supposed to do. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't help to inform people of the truth so corruption may be stayed. We cannot live a peaceful life if we do the former and neglect the latter. I had elaborated on this idea in another article in which I quoted Chuck Smith, "The prayer was not used in lieu of responsible actions. Nor should prayer ever be used in lieu of responsible actions."[39] In the very least we should vote for a presidential candidate open to a new 9/11 investigation, such as Ron Paul. And at best we can share the truth with friends until those who've aided and abetted the crimes of September 11, 2001 are brought to justice. The scriptural maxim holds true today: "Innocent blood cries out for justice."[40] If you've found this article helpful, please consider passing it on.


[1] YouTube, "Rawesome Foods Raided... Again!" (
[2] Natural News, "Feds raid Amish dairy and threaten action over raw milk sales" (
[3] YouTube, America's Nightly Scoreboard, USA Gibson Guitar Company Federal SWAT TEAM / NEWS REPORT (
[4] Toronto Hearings Organization, International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001, February 20, 2011,  (
[5] 911 Research, "Persisting Heat" WTC2 1377 degrees F at surface, WTC7 1341 degrees F at surface per USGS thermal imaging study. Underground temperatures determined to be greater, perhaps twice as much. (
[6] ME Petroleum, "Jet Fuel" (
[7] David Ray Griffin, "The Mysterious Collapse of WTC 7: Why NIST's Final 9/11 Report is Unscientific and False." ( Knowledge of their discovery was obtained only by means of a FOIA request. See The Mysterious Collapse, 44-45.
[9] 911 Blogger, "International Center for 9/11 Studies - NIST Cumulus Video Database Released" (
[10] YouTube "The Ultimate Con - 911"
[11] Infowars, "Key Witness to WTC 7 Explosions Dead at 53" (
[12] National Fire Protection Association, 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, 1998 Edition (, Section 18.3.2.
[13] Open Chemical Physics Journal on April 4, 2009. Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen Pp 7-31 (
[14] History Commons, December 2003-May 2004: Study Indicates Extreme Temperatures Involved in WTC Collapses(
[15] David Ray Griffin, "The Mysterious Collapse of WTC 7: Why NIST's Final 9/11 Report is Unscientific and False." (
)[16] YouTube, Proof that Thermite can Cut a vertical column, Jonathan Cole P.E. (
[17] Templestream, 9 / 11 at Ground Zero Videographer Goes Public, sourced from Voltaire Network.
[18] American Ground: Unbuilding the World Trade Center LANGEWIESCHE, 2002, PP. 32 (
[19] US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT, They came to help at Ground Zero. What they experienced they can't forget, 9/12/2002  (
[20] KNIGHT RIDDER, Recovery worker reflects on months spent at Ground Zero 5/29/2002
[21] Post Gazette, Vance Delsignore: OSHA officer at WTC, Wednesday, September 11, 2002
[22] PBS, America Rebuilds: "The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running."  (
[23] Ruvolo is quoted in the DVD "Collateral Damages" ( For just this segment plus discussion, see Steve Watson, "Firefighter Describes 'Molten Metal' at Ground Zero, Like a 'Foundry'", November 17, 2006 (
[24] Quoted in Francesca Lyman, "Messages in the Dust: What Are the Lessons of the Environmental Health Response to the Terrorist Attacks of September 11?" National Environmental Health Association, September 2003 (
[25] Quoted in Christopher Bollyn, "Professor Says 'Cutter Charges' Brought Down WTC Buildings," American Free, May 1 & 8, 2006 (
[26] "Mobilizing Public Health: Turning Terror's Tide with Science," Magazine of Johns Hopkins Public Health, Late Fall 2001 (
[27] 911 Research, "Molten Metal" (
[28] Quoted from "Dead On Arrival" ( Originally from The Structural Engineer 3, September 2002, #6.
[29] Quoted from "How Did the WTC Fires Burn for Months?" What Really Happened?, December 19, 2001 ( Originally quoted from CBS News.
[30] 9/11: NIST engineer John Gross denies WTC molten steel (extended) (
[31] YouTube, The Elephant In The RoomScott Forbes 9/11 power down: T
[32] Popular Mechanics, "World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest" (
[33] 911 Review, Kevin Ryan, "The NIST WTC 7 Report: Bush Science reaches its peak" (
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid.
[39] Templestream, "Christians are to be Watchmen in the End Times", (
[40] A paraphrase of a principle found in Genesis 4:10


9/11 and Building 7: Truth Comes Before Healing

On 9/11, Gallup Polls Show People Waking Up

The Civil Rights Movement in Reverse: Who's Next?

No comments:

Post a Comment

You are welcome to post on-topic comments but, please, no uncivilized blog abuse or spamming. Thank you!