cduck19802002's 9/11 clipmarks

Newest Clips
see Newest Clips
  • See all clipmarks by cduck19802002
  • See all public 9/11 clipmarks
  •    
     
     
     
       
     
    top scroll end
    1
    POPS
    9/11 2007? Follow the Money
    cduck19802002
    by cduck19802002  8-29-2007   
     No Remarks
    44
    POPS
    FISK: "Even I question the 'truth' about 9/11"
    righthand
    by righthand  8-25-2007    40
     ....– whose melting point is supposed to be about 1,480C – would snap through at the same time? (They collapsed in 8.1 and 10 seconds.) What about the third tower – the so-called World Trade Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) – which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at 5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American National Institute of Standards and Technology was instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC 7. Two prominent American professors of mechanical engineering – very definitely not in the "raver" bracket – are now legally challenging the terms of reference of this final report on the grounds that it could be "fraudulent or deceptive". Journalistically, there were many odd things about 9/11. Initial reports of reporters that they heard "explosions" in the towers – which could well have been the beams cracking – are easy to
    — end of the list —

    cduck19802002 9/11

    loading clips...
    Filter
    rss tools
    Clipmarks
    About   Clippers   Privacy   EULA   Copyright   Site Map

    OK