Connect With Us

18. Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story

Sources:
Deseret Morning News, November 10, 2005
Title: “Y. Professor Thinks Bombs, Not Planes, Toppled WTC”
Author: Elaine Jarvik

Brigham Young University website, Winter 2005
Title: “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?”
Author: Steven E. Jones

Deseret Morning News, January 26, 2006
Title: “BYU professor’s group accuses U.S. officials of lying about 9/11”
Author: Elaine Jarvik

Faculty Evaluator: John Kramer
Student Researchers: David Abbott and Courtney Wilcox

Research into the events of September 11 by Brigham Young University physics professor, Steven E. Jones, concludes that the official explanation for the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings is implausible according to laws of physics. Jones is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation “guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.”

In debunking the official explanation of the collapse of the three WTC buildings, Jones cites the complete, rapid, and symmetrical collapse of the buildings; the horizontal explosions (squibs) evidenced in films of the collapses; the fact that the antenna dropped first in the North Tower, suggesting the use of explosives in the core columns; and the large pools of molten metal observed in the basement areas of both towers.

Jones also investigated the collapse of WTC 7, a forty-seven-story building that was not hit by planes, yet dropped in its own “footprint,” in the same manner as a controlled demolition. WTC 7 housed the U.S. Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council, and the Central Intelligence Agency. Many of the records from the Enron accounting scandal were destroyed when the building came down.

Jones claims that the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) ignored the physics and chemistry of what happened on September 11 and even manipulated its testing in order to get a computer-generated hypothesis that fit the end result of collapse, and did not even attempt to investigate the possibility of controlled demolition. He also questions the investigations conducted by FEMA and the 9/11 Commission.

Among the report’s other findings:

No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns.

WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. “Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?” Jones asks. “That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors—and intact steel support columns—the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass.

How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?” The paradox, he says, “is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses.” These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST, or the 9/11 Commission.

With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattered concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling. “How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing—and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon.”

Steel supports were “partly evaporated,” but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel—and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about twenty minutes in any given location.

Molten metal found in the debris of the WTC may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite. Buildings not felled by explosives “have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal,” Jones says.

Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck.

In January 2006 Jones, along with a group calling themselves “Scholars for 9/11 Truth,” called for an international investigation into the attacks and are going so far as to accuse the U.S. government of a massive cover-up.

“We believe that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on September 11,” the group said in a statement. “We believe these events may have been orchestrated by the administration in order to manipulate the American people into supporting policies at home and abroad.”

The group is headed by Jones and Jim Fetzer, University of Minnesota Duluth distinguished McKnight professor of philosophy, and is made up of fifty academicians and experts including Robert M. Bowman, former director of the U.S. “Star Wars” space defense program, and Morgan Reynolds, former chief economist for the Department of Labor in President George W. Bush’s first term.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf

  • Jim April 29, 2010

    This claim has been thoroughly disproven by every independent, authoritative investigation by experts in demolition, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, physics, aviation and architecture. You can find a lengthy list of the investigations and results on the Popular Mechanics and National Geographic websites.

    Then there’s bin Laden’s TWO televised confessions to 9/11, those pretty well spoil conspiracy theories.

  • Jim April 29, 2010

    You forgot to mention a couple of important factors: Jones was fired from BYU for preaching his conspiracy theory, and the story was removed from the BYU website. Are you censoring facts to make the story more palatable?

    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones

  • John Duddy May 20, 2010

    The co-chairs Keane and Hamilton, write that they considered perjury charges against NORAD and FAA for changing their evidence.
    John Farmer, the Chief Counsel of the 9/11 Commission writes that the US Administration instructed someone to give false evidence to the commission. 60% of the members of the commission now say they were set up to fail. Therefore we need a proper investigation. Search “hunt the boeing” to see clearly that wings and tail-section vanished from the Pentagon crash-site.

  • David Altman May 21, 2010

    I’ve tried twice to leave a comment here, but it does not take.

  • Bill Willers May 21, 2010

    The myriad lies surrounding the official story re 9/11 is the “censored story” beyond which all other pale, as ever more people are understanding. In order to keep its credibility, PROJECT CENSORED needs to realize that and deal with it convincingly.

  • Maani May 21, 2010

    Jim:

    Actually, the Popular Mechnics article and NatGeo documentaries have themselves been definitively debunked by researchers in the 9/11 Truth movement, using evidence from the same disciplines you mention (demolition, mechanical engineering, etc.). As well, you are blatantly wrong about bin Laden: he never once “confessed” to 9/11; rather, he simply made post-9/11 statements in support of the 9/11 “attack.” In fact, the FBI does not even include 9/11 on bin Laden’s “most wanted” poster because, in the words of their own spokesperson, “We have no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

    Re your comments on Dr. Jones, they are ad hominem; rather than provide a single piece of evidence that the science behind his paper is faulty, you simply attack the man. Not exactly good debate etiquette.

    There is ample evidence – including scientific, physical and other – that the “official story” of the attacks is weak, if not entirely hokum. For a good primer on this, try: http://guerrillaunderground.ning.com/profiles/blogs/easing-you-into-911-truth-an

    Indeed, John Duddy notes that the two chairmen of the 9/11 Commission themselves have stated in their book, unequivocally, that the Commission was, in their own words, “set up to fail.” By “fail,” they mean arrive at a clear, supportable, accurate account of 9/11. Add to this the ridiculous number of conflicts of interest on the part of the commissioners themselves – and particularly the Executive Director of the Commission, Philip Zelikow – and you have a recipe for whitewashing.

    Dr. Jones is to be commended for his important contribution to this subject. And he richly deserves his place on this list. Yet his contribution is only one of hundreds – if not thousands – of pieces of either direct or circumstantial evidence to support the “alternative theory” that there was complicity on the part of individuals and agencies in the U.S. government (and probably) military in the “false flag” attacks of 9/11.

  • psikeyhackr August 18, 2010

    Conspiracies and Degrees are irrelevant to physics.

    It is amazing however that so many Americans cannot understand grade school physics for themselves. Why haven’t physicists demanded to know the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of the towers? How do they do physics without data?

    Try finding the total weight of one of those floor assemblies that may or may not have pancaked.

    Why should we listen to physicists talk about Black Holes and Big Bangs if they can’t build a model of the north tower that can collapse?
    .

  • Old Uncle Dave August 31, 2010

    Reinforced concrete turned to dust, not when it hit ground, but ON THE WAY DOWN. To believe the official version of events requires a belief in the supernatural. If Allah changed the laws of physics to benefit terrorists, we’re fucked!

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20039

  • Mike Lamb December 12, 2010

    It’s quit obvious to anyone that can use their brain and think beyond the corporate news media, that this was an inside job. Documents were destroyed and a reason to start another war $$$.
    There is really nothing anyone can do since all authorities are corrupt.
    You are out numbered, they have the man power and superior weaponry to defeat the average citizenry. And lets face it most people find it easier to not believe their government is an evil profiteer. a situation that kills their sons and daughters while engaging in the slaughter of innocent civilians of those countries that are invaded by the USA… Al Queda is a fantasy…

  • Daedalus December 12, 2010

    Well, here are my thoughts. The concussion from both the force of impact, and the fuel exploding likely exposed structural members, temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees caused those structural members to expand, severing many of the connections between those members and potentially warping them as a result of uneven heating. When they gave, they fell down, gravity taking hold as it does brought it more or less straight down, as levels collapse it pushes debris out in the same manner as clapping together chalkboard erasers, the clouds of debris push out from between the levels, which I suspect is what so many people seem to think looks like demolition explosions.

    Truth be told though, I wasn’t in there, and with debris of that magnitude it’s pretty difficult to perform an accurate fire investigation unless all the structural members are marked, those marks survived, and there are records of where they were in the building as well as their orientation. If I recall correctly, there were also unique construction methods used in those buildings in order to produce more floor space that would’ve contributed to a compromise of the structure in this manner.

    Arrange the facts completely and it’ll paint a very clear picture, we don’t have all the facts though, so speculation, while it may have validity in some cases, is often going to detract from the reality of the situation than contribute to it because we’re suiting facts to theories rather than theories to facts.

    • Goldendomer78 June 21, 2012

      Then why did only one other building fall, and not all of the surrounding buildings?

  • shawn December 13, 2010

    Plus nobody discusses human nature…

    So many think that explosives were planted…have you have worked or managed a building let along tried to install explosives. It takes day or weeks to do it and every possible support and management person associated with the building would know. Lastly, humans can simply not keep a secret nor can you fool thousands of people in broad daylight.

    So guess what gang…we went to the moon and two plans brought down the towers.

    • henri April 24, 2013

      the manhatten project involved 120.000 people and was kept secret for almost 4 years

  • Anthony December 13, 2010

    Yes, Shawn, two planes brought down the towers… The most technologically advanced superpower in the history of mankind managed to fail to do its job four times in one day. Do you believe that?

  • Milander December 13, 2010

    @ Anthony: it only takes a monkey to push a button. Besides American history is replete with instances of gross failure and incompetence. Failed to do its job 4 times in one day…. why yes, I can believe that quite easily.

    Bottom line is that whether it was an inside job or not you cannot change what the herd believe so either you suck it up and deal or get out of it. In this day and age change is not effected by demonstrations or “people power” the corporations are just to big. (getting off topic too lol)

    • garrett October 17, 2013

      @Milander. you’re right let’s just give up it’s too hard.I hope you looked in the mirror and wept after typing those words in 2010.

  • Max Verde December 13, 2010

    I would like to say that Milander is the type of idiot that these villians love.They are just too strong ,they have power ,he is nothing,he can do nothing- to hell with such sniveling cowards .They will send you to the gas chambers first. If the Jews had fought back many would have died [like they did in Warsaw].,but isn’t it better to die standing like a human being, instead of being herded into cattle cars sent like animals to the abattoir.Sorry, I’m so wound up , but whiny-ass slackers like you make me want to puke.

  • Roman December 13, 2010

    I agree with Max. People often have a misconception that companies are too big and we can’t do anything about it. While one person may not make a difference, I believe there are still power in numbers. Also historically people have come together to call out the government and get change, so it’s not impossible.

  • Vlad December 15, 2010

    Sorry, you lost me at “Brigham Young University”.

  • Jess December 16, 2010

    It is sad so many people died. Post-9/11 country songs were also quite torturous to all those who had to suffer through their re-plays every where one went.

  • jim sadler December 16, 2010

    Although I can not evaluate the technical materials with the depth required to reach an intelligent decision I would suspect that the current economic horror show just might have been discovered prior to 9/11 and a great deal of evidence destroyed when the Twins Towers were hit. It also diverted the public’s attention from the economy which in itself could be a motive for this tragic crime to have taken place. The cover up of economic wrong doing is more exhaustive than people tend to imagine. Maybe I’m even glad I don’t know all that went on in this sad mess.

  • lolwut December 17, 2010

    Sadler, that’s incredibly far-fetched and stupid.

    Regarding the original topic: oh no, one single physics professor thinks it was a set-up? I suppose that means the world is flat and the earth is the center of the universe, because there are (extremely small) minorities in academia who believe those things, as well.

  • argh December 21, 2010

    @lolwut It’s not one person. It’s a lot of people.

    We’re not being asked to believe that 2 planes brought down 2 buildings. We’re asked to believe that 2 planes brought down THREE buildings. I don’t know why people forget, but they do. If you don’t know it’s 3 buildings that fell that day, go look up building 7. The two towers fell, and then a 3rd building fell later. So, fine, I’ll conveniently concede to you the towers – but how did the 3rd building fall?

  • mikwillson December 22, 2010

    Your article’s resource box should help to persuade your readers. No matter how amazing your article is if it’s not succeeding in driving traffic to your website

  • Hallotruth December 27, 2010

    Um. Regarding the “debunking” by Pop Mechanics and Nat Geo. Has anyone looked up who owns those fine rags? The Hearst Corp and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. Curious.

  • prosegoes December 28, 2010

    @ lolwut :

    Completely off base and clearly haven’t researched the topic to realize it isn’t only one person. Plus “a movement to investigate a 9/11 cover-up, possibly backed by scientific theory” will not be the heading to any article or news story you’ll come across in an major media form.

    Also please tell me who these (legitimate) “members of academia” are, whom which you claim to believe the Earth is flat and/or at the center of the universe. I commend you for ruining any credibilty with one insanely absurd comment.

  • Leik January 21, 2011

    this is so good, thanks for usefull article, i like this…

  • Denis February 10, 2011

    So there is a plane(flight 93) that didn’t make it to a tower because the people on board fought and overtook the hijackers. Then the WTC 7 collapses due to fire on the same day?!?!?! How stupid can you get? Wake up and smell the coffee people. Little Bow Peep has a large flock of sheep.

  • Keneth Bellino February 15, 2011

    I’m not sure why but this site is loading incredibly slow for me. Is anyone else having this problem or is it a issue on my end? I’ll check back later and see if the problem still exists.

  • Tom91775 July 22, 2011

    I will posit a few things to consider. One is that I find it incredibly hard to believe that any democratically elected government would purposefully do this, particularly highly developed democracies like the US. I acknowledge that my disbelief in such a government conspiracy does not mean it’s impossible, but the basic facts we know about who the hijackers were and how they overtook the planes (not to mention scientific evidence collected by other scientists that the official story is believable) adds weight to the official story being basically true. That said, I will say that I do believe there could be important facts that we have not been told.

    One thing that seems especially problematic about the arguments of most truthers is that they start with a belief in a pre-meditated conspiracy by the government and then use evidence to support that.  Let’s say hypothetically that I believe their evidence as is.  This evidence only says  that explosives were used. You can’t jump to the conclusion that because explosives were used, therefore the government planned this massive attack. What about the possibility that the hijackings happened the way we’ve been told, but let’s say that after the fact there were steps taken to demolish the buildings in fear of them tipping over and doing a lot more damage?  Or for some other reason?  I will again say as an aside I don’t believe that our government committed genocide against its own people.  Further, even if one believes in gov’t conspiracy, I see no reason to demolish the buildings at this point with people inside.  The point would already be made.  Why do you need to demolish the buildings to get your policy agenda to work at this point?  After the  planes hit the buildings, you’ve done all you need to do.

    I would find the arguments by truthers to be more compelling, basically, if they were more modest and precise with their claims. They are starting with the motive (they distrust the gov’t and therefore, suspicious evidence means there must have been a gov’t conspiracy).  But what they should be doing, if they want to be more credible, is to simply say that there is suspicious evidence and we would feel more confidence in our government if further investigation was undertaken.  Don’t assume a pre-meditated motive — it just gives more weight to the criticism that they’re evaluating the evidence with a bias.  Present the inconsistencies and ask that they be investigated further.  If you do this, you’d be a lot more likely to get your investigation.

    • Rfw888 July 23, 2011

      if the elections really did mean anything , you might have a point, but the US gov’t hasn’t really changed hands due to an election since before WW1,  both political parties are basically identical, their differences are cosmetic only. what never changes is the puppet show they use to distract the sheeple… i have no problems at all believing that the US gov’t premeditated and carried out the demolition, probably in concert with agents from the Mossad…  they wanted a war, so they manufactured the reasons for one, it happens all through history…

      • Brandon Gonzalez71 April 20, 2012

        True man both parties are just differnt wings on the same bird as far as 911 wouldnt be the first plan to make it look as if foriegn countries were responsible look up operation northwood and what about the ids of two of the  “hijackers” were magicly found out all the rubble of the buildings and how is it possible that they would survie when its plastic and everything on the plane was completely gone its ridiculous they should start putting that material on the U.S troops.
        and how can you not believe the goverment would do somthing like this there all creepy ocult members watch bohemian grove our leaders of this country and some of the world gather for strange luciferian practices not only is this a violation of the constitution but very creepy.

    • Matt July 31, 2012

      On this day new York had f.e.m.a. “practicing” drills for just an event. building 7 was announced collapsed on a British news show 20 minutes before it actually fell. Also the towers were nearly empty compared to its normal capacity. Also airlines and military were running “exercises” against hijacking. Coincidence? More like a false flag to jumpstart a war for oil. There are videos and interviews all over YouTube. Not to mention the bush family was friends and business partners with the bin ladens. Open your eyes. The “war on terror” has no enemy, just an idea to put fear into the people so we are more easily controlled or influenced.

  • uncledude January 25, 2012

    truthers: let it go.  

  • Anonymous January 25, 2012

    One day the USA is going to realize that it all was planed.  Then shame and later anger.

  • Anonymous January 25, 2012

    One day the USA is going to realize that it all was planed.  Then shame and later anger.

  • Jason L May 3, 2012

    No. Fire did not bring down the WTC. A giant plane taking out support columns did. The remaining support columns could not hold the top of the building up. You don’t need a physicist. The architect who built the building gave his own testimony. Buildings aren’t meant to take airplane crashes. Why do they have to keep rehashing the worst moment in American history just to make names for themselves? Conspiracy nuts are just that. Nuts. They believe they alone posses a truth and that knowledge makes them special in a world where they feel utterly useless. It’s like thinking you can read minds, talk to the dead, or see into the future. It makes you special. Its sad this had to be rehashed and even more so for the survivors and family. Once again, giant plane takes out support columns and weakens then structure, whats up top must come down. Why does this guy feel his science is right and all of his peers are wrong? Cause he wants to be special. 

    • Mofo May 25, 2012

      Actually if you read the architects testimony it was that the towers were designed to take multiple plane hits. There would be resistance as each floor hit the floor below it , they could not have fallen at near free fall speed as they did if it happened as you claim. Actually this man is far from the only scientist who claims this. Go to architects and engineers for 9-11 truth. I do not claim to know what happened, but the science says we are not being told the truth. Before claiming how sad it is for the survivors you should do your research, many of the survivors and firefighters have formed and participated in these groups calling for a new investigation. What is sad for the survivors is that to this date most of their questions remain unanswered.

      • Quimby82 July 7, 2012

        Is this
        the same architects who designed the building that collaspe in on themselves?
        Or should we talk about the construction companies that use inferior materials’.
        Or building inspectors who over look something or for that matter even know
        what they are looking at. Sometimes the situation is just a fluke nature.

    • Youwillneverknow June 8, 2012

      If a plane took out the buildings, why did they take more than a few minutes to collapse? The Official Story is that the structures, weakened by plane impacts and subsequent fires, collapsed. Even a building which was not hit by a plane collapsed (WTC 7).

      Until you are able to remove the strong emotional (nationalistic / “patriotic”) ties you have swaying your mind, you are incapable of making rational arguments. Please refrain from breathing.

    • Andrew Eternity Foster July 29, 2012

      Go color.

  • Jim May 14, 2012

    What absolute BS. I was there, working as a firefighter. Jet fuel burns at a very high temp and weakens structure, the tanks were full when they crashed. The collapse of the buildings caused a near 4.0 level ground quake and took out 8 stories of structure underground. I don’t trust lots of things but this is simple physics and this “professor” should be shipped out to the “We Teach Bible Studies instead of evolution university.” Or is that Brigham Young?

    • Floraridge May 23, 2012

      Your a firefighter and don’t know that jet fuel is a carbon based fire and isn’t going to burn any hotter than 1700 degrees and it takes better than 2500 degrees to weaken steel? Do your homework before you shoot off your mouth!

  • Dbakeca Italia May 15, 2012

    Good article.

  • James Meredith May 21, 2012

    there are a few things that didnt add up. there are 50 camera around the pentagon….and no footage of a plane impact. people inside reported a bomb went off. where did it go off? the room that held the financial records for missing billions of dollars that was announced the day before.  poof all records that could track down whole stole several billion dollars is gone. 

  • Jam0ke23 August 7, 2012

    What you all are forgetting is that NONE of any of us know what happened. However, I do know if we accept the stories fed to us without doing research off our own, we are controlled. Also, is it not entirely convenient for anyone to call a conspiracy theorist a “nut”? Anything and everything they say is now completely marginalized. Now do conspiracy theorist try to discredit mainstream believers with simplistic arguments like calling their opposition a “nut” or “crazy”? No, they only argue with a combination of speculation and accepted fact and science. Even a little history will tell you there have been COUNTLESS false flag attacks successfully completed by many governments, why rule out such a complex operation by one of the top economical and technological nations in the world?

  • thinkonit September 17, 2012

    Well…. the guys who high jacked the plane were confirmed as terrorists with links to al quida in the middle east. Even innocent passengers on the plane confirmed this… So… what? Bush called up Osama and said, “Hey I wanna go to war with you. I’ll let ya high jack some planes and crash them into buildings so I have an excuse to go to war with you.” Yes, Osama is a psycho, be even he was smart enough to know you dont go to war with the US. For this to be a gov conspiracy, Bush would have literally have to have made an agreement with Osama, which again, is dumb because why in the hell would Osama ever agree to this.

    • Call Me Ishmael April 19, 2013

      You are misunderstanding the definition of a false flag operation.

  • Donna Sayles-Corbin November 20, 2012

    I personally think the Bush administration KNEW this was going to happen and let it happen in order to go to war. I would like to know why in the Pentagon there is a ROUND hole where the plane supposedly hit. The ground in front of this hole is not touched. The wall where the hole is is intact. The government KNOWS exactly what happened and are not telling, it’s that simple. Look at the film of Bush at the school. He is told the first plane hit the tower. Look at his face. He is WAITING for something else to happen BEFORE he reacts and leaves. HE KNEW AND LET IT HAPPEN!

  • utohbret December 2, 2012

    omg this is the stupidest think i have ever read. especially since they keep insisting explosives were used like somebody said they werent. there were explosives on the fucking plane you idiots. thats why the steel beams “melted”,

    • Call Me Ishmael April 19, 2013

      Explosives on the planes, which hit the upper levels of towers 1 and 2, would not have caused the LOWER levels to collapse. That’s not to mention that WTC 7 wasn’t even hit by a plane (explosives or not) and it fell at free fall speeds. Research and come back.

      • Jack Frost July 16, 2014

        It wasn’t free fall speed or “near free fall” speed. This is a common truther lie. Research and come back.

  • tops ecret February 9, 2013

    if the fact that a month before the attack the buildings were insured for ridiculous money against terrorist attacks doesnt explain everything you need to know then my friend you are a fool..money rules america

  • Nathaniel Rothschild March 9, 2013

    It was an Inside Job, period! The International Bankers financed it just like they have been behind every war since the Civil War, including the Civil War.

    • Jacob Rothschild October 14, 2013

      Nat is just joking everyone. There is no way us harmless rich folk could have come together to pull the strings on this. And we totally don’t expect Americans to find out and unite against us forcing us to declare martial law and take everyones rights away.

    • Jack Frost July 16, 2014

      No it wasn’t, period. What “bankers”? What motive? They’re powerful enough and rich enough to pull off the greatest conspiracy in history and keep it quiet because they don’t have enough money and power? Is that your theory? Was the goal to abolish the second amendment? Didn’t happen. Was the goal martial law, a police state, fema camps? Didn’t happen. One world government? Didn’t happen. What else ya got?

  • callizo240 March 27, 2013

    all reason for war, we should have stopped pearl harbor too, but fear had to be instilled in americans for america to become involved.. history repeats itself, open your eyes

  • israeltucker October 13, 2013

    Like Frozen Pizza? Try baking your favorite Frozen Pizza at 180 degrees for only 2 minutes. You need to bake it at 400-450 for over 18-24 minutes. Same with the physics involved in the controlled demolitions of the World Trade Centers, especially Tower 7. That steel won’t even begin to melt until 2800 and will melt at 3200. Thermite hits 4500. And the “Official Story” admits fires at 1800 and that the Jet Fuel burned out in minutes.
    .

  • Michael Lykke October 24, 2013

    This was entertaining – but totally idiotic in essence.

  • Roy Batty March 28, 2014

    Duh !!!

Project Censored 2014
Receive a Free Project Censored "Top 25 Censored Stories" Book For Being a Member
Become a $5 monthly subscriber to Project Censored and as long as you are a member, every year we will send you the newest Project Censored Top 25 Most Censored Stories of the Year book. You can choose paperback or e-book, you can cancel your monthly support at any time, and your support is tax deductible. 

Book, button, 3@2x