🚀 go-pugleaf

we know that The World Trade Center was intentionally demolished by a
high-energy causal process physically unrelated to plane crashes and
resulting fires

we know that The World Trade Center was intentionally demolished by a
high-energy causal process physically unrelated to plane crashes and
resulting fires

we know that The World Trade Center was intentionally demolished by a
high-energy causal process physically unrelated to plane crashes and
resulting fires

thermate@india.com wrote:
> 911 government account is now PROVABLY FALSE - Why are the BASTARDS
> QUIET ?
>
> We know, the mass murder was done by YANK and ZIONIST Bastards
> together, and blamed on OBL to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Now, they
> are back to square 1, on China's Back after Hainan, to increase the
> currency value. Did anyone see those desperate pictures of Bush in
> INDIA, sucking up to Manmohan Singh? Leaning extra six inches in the
> photos towards Manmohan to FLATTER the Indian people. Certainly, there
> is some BOOT-STRAPPING of Indian Image and economy to scare China after
> having exploited their country for decades as a vast SLAVE LABOR camp
> and then blaming them for running it !!! Remember, how Bush was unhappy
> at the Death of Kalpana Chawala, cherry picked to create the MYTH of
> US-India friendship? But the shuttle blew up - a divine act against the
> ANTI-CHRIST. Now they have cherry picked another Indian girl. Yet
> others are some Zionist Neocon advisors helping specific Indian
> industries to make image making rise, eg Mettal. The idea is to
> purposely sabotage China's global rise and steady progress. The Bush
> and Neocon principle of politics is by deception, spying, scaring and
> myth-making. It has been very successful in the PAST. The creation of
> Israel on the land of Palestine was thru the false myth as the Rabbi's
> of Neturei Karta have explained to us. The free book on the internet,
> Min Ha Mitzer, From the Depths or "Holocaust Victims Accuse" [the
> zionists] is available as a pdf for download. Its written wy Rabbi
> Wasserman who was himself in the Aushwitz. Similarly, 911 was a fake
> myth.Its best described in the words of Philosophy Professor James
> Fetzer.
>
> footnote: Bush's pretense of RELOGISITY is a MYTH. He screwed numerous
> girls in his drinking years.
>
> www.st911.org
>
> he Science of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not
>
> Propaganda by the government and the corporate media would have us
> believe that the 9/11 "inside job" hypothesis is not merely
> controversial but unsupported by proof. That is wrong. Academics,
> experts, and scholars who have examined the physical evidence and
> considered this event within its historical context tend to converge in
> agreement that the inside-job hypothesis is, in fact, strongly
> supported by the available evidence, while the version advanced in The
> 9/11 Commission Report is not only false but provably false and in
> crucial respects physically impossible. That the official account of
> 9/11 is a lie and that 9/11 appears to have been an inside job is no
> longer a matter of serious scientific debate.
>
> Even though the broad outlines of what happened are no longer
> controversial--for example, we know that The World Trade Center was
> intentionally demolished by a high-energy causal process physically
> unrelated to plane crashes and resulting fires--the precise details of
> how the perpetrators carried out the attack remains the subject of
> intense controversy. From a political point of view, this controversy
> may be insignificant. What we know with relative certainty about 9/11
> is already the story of the century: it demands re-thinking our
> history, our politics, perhaps even our way of life. But from a
> scientific rather than political standpoint, controversial questions
> about what may have happened on 9/11 are fascinating and
> challenging--not least of all because they could lead to a better
> understanding of 9/11 with respect to its social and political
> significance.
>
> In an attempt to clarify these matters, Scholars for 9/11 Truth will be
> hosting a conference entitled "The Science of 9/11: What's
> Controversial, What's Not", to be held in mid- to late-July in Madison,
> WI. I think we can all agree that the most important dimension of our
> efforts is explaining why the "official account" that the government
> has advanced cannot be sustained. Since there can be disagreements even
> here about what we should or should not emphasize and what has or has
> not been proven to an extent that is sufficient to emphasize them as
> "refutations" of the government's account, I am inviting Barrie Zwicker
> to organize the opening session, a panel discussion on "disproofs" of
> the government's account.
>
> Following the opening session, there will be a keynote speaker and five
> major sessions devoted to the issues that have tended to divide us. As
> the program chair, I am inviting Steve Jones to organize a panel
> discussion of the use of conventional means for destroying the Twin
> Towers. [Editor's note: I regret to report that Steve Jones has
> declined.] I am inviting Judy Wood to organize a panel discussion on
> non-conventional means, including high-tech directed energy weaponry,
> that might have been used to destroy the World Trade Center. I am
> inviting Morgan Reynolds to organize a panel on planes/no planes at the
> WTC and George Nelson on the Pentagon and Shanksville. Each of these
> sessions would be of 2 1/2 to 3 hours duration. I anticipate there will
> be a registration fee of $100 for the week-end long conference, which
> will include a keynote address on Saturday evening.
>
> While the program is at its tentative and preliminary stage, I am open
> to suggestions for possible participants and additional topics. There
> may be changes in the individuals responsible for some of these panels,
> but my expectation would be that their focus will remain the same.
> Anyone who has ideas they would like to share with me is welcome to
> forward them to me at jfetzer@d.umn.edu at their earliest convenience.
> This conference should provide an opportunity for experts on complex
> and technical scientific questions to explain their research and its
> significance. My hope is that by "agreeing to disagree," and by
> subjecting each others' research to rigorous but collegial criticism,
> the attention-getting controversial aspects of 9/11 research may be
> turned into a benefit, rather than a distraction, in the larger process
> of seeking and exposing the truth about 9/11.
> 
> 
> James H. Fetzer
> Founder
> Scholars for 9/11 Truth