This week, we open with some news updates about the Army's exoskeleton program, BEATLES, and State Department collusion in bringing the Chinese Communists to power.
Then we feature an extended discussion with Dire Wolf From the Bunker concerning the use of directed-energy and other exotic weaponry on 9/11.
So, Sir Rudy installed an important new emergency radio system; but then made sure that it wasn't being used on 9/11. Was this radio system instead used to help disintegrate the Twin Towers? Stay tuned to total911.info our [b]real[/b]investigation continues.
"In the midst of his presidential candidacy, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani now faces a looming government investigation into his handling of the radios used by firefighters on 9/11.
The investigation, which will examine how the FDNY ended up using faulty equipment during the terrorist attacks and why Giuliani gave a no-bid contract to Motorola for that equipment, has been endorsed by New York City Councilman Eric Gioia, chair of the city's oversight and investigations committee.
"I will do everything in my power to get answers, to get the truth," said Gioia, a Democrat. "These families deserve answers and really the entire city and our country deserve answers."
Calls for an investigation were first proposed by filmmaker Robert Greenwald who has documented Giuliani's handling of 9/11 in a series of shorts for Brave New Films. In The Real Rudy: Radios, Greenwald documents how radios used by the FDNY on 9/11 were the same ones that malfunctioned during the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers. When - eight years later - Giuliani finally purchased new communications equipment for $14 million from Motorola, it was never field-tested. A week later, the equipment was recalled after a firefighter's mayday went un-heard. Giuliani reissued the old batch of radios. And on 9/11 when a police helicopter warned that the North Tower could collapse, more than 120 firefighters remained inside.
[...]"Brave New Films is thrilled with Councilman Gioia's response to our petition for a City Council investigation into Giuliani's failure to equip firefighters with the radios they needed on 9/11," Greenwald told the Huffington Post. "The groundswell of support for our petition shows the depth of Americans' desire for accountability."
On Monday's edition, attorney Jerry Leaphart joined us to discuss the role of Applied Research Associates in writing the National Institutes for Standards and Technology's report on the World Trade Center "collapse." ARA is heavily involved in the exotic weapons business, including directed-energy weapons.
Tonight attorney Jerry Leaphart joins us to discuss the role of Applied Research Associates in writing the National Institutes for Standards and Technology's report on the World Trade Center "collapse." ARA is heavily involved in the exotic weapons business, including directed-energy weapons.
Thanks to CheckTheEvidence.com for archiving Revere Radio Network's live coverage of the "Science of 9/11" conference held this past weekend in Madison, Wisconsin:
Sen. John Kerry (D-The Tomb) was recently asked about the controlled demolition of World Trade Center building 7. Bonesman Kerry gave a rambling disjointed answer, as is his wont, finally remarking that "the wall" was unstable and had to be taken down in a "controlled manner."
Kerry seemed to be confusing WTC7, which WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein said was "pulled" on a PBS special called Rebuilding America. That program also discussed the "pulling" of the WTC6 building a few days after 9/11. WTC6 was little more than four walls after the destruction wrought on 9/11, the bulk of the building's center having been "disappeared" by what appears to be a directed-energy beam weapon deployed from above.
Recent research reveals the WTC "controlled demolition" debate has been a constructed Hegelian dialectic since no later than 9/12 2001. For it was on that day that one Van Romero, of New Mexico Tech, announced in the local Albuquerque Journal that the Twin Towers were obviously taken out by a conventional controlled demolition. Romero quickly and quietly retracted his claim and disappeared from the scene. What was not revealed until now however, is that Romero is a major player in directed-energy weaponry, and a long time member of the Directed-Energy Professional Society (See 911researchers.com).
By planting the "controlled demolition" meme, Romero took eyes away from exotic and specifically directed-energy weapons' role in the destruction of the World Trade Center Complex.
How serendipitious, then, that Romero should also resurface this very weekend on the Discovery Channel of all places. Romero received special thanks for, and his Department presided over, something called "Conspiracy Test" -- an examination of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
As OKBOMB is increasingly understood as 9/11 writ small, cursory reexamination yields the telltale signs of directed-energy weapons there too -- the powderized concrete, cylindrical cut-out patterned damage, and even scorch marks left on the roof by the earlier prototype of the weapon. Romero's constructed dialectic eschewed such anomalies however, restricting the acceptable frame of debate to truck-bomb vs column-bomb.
So it should be little surprise then that even as Romero's documentary premiered on Discovery, Discovery cameras were in Austin, Texas to tape a purportedly scientific presentation hewing to a similarly circumscribed 9/11 debate. For, as a result of an elaborate and targeted psychological operation aimed at leaders of the "patriot" community in the Austin area, the leading "scientific" figure speaking at the University of Texas conference came from the same 33o exo-weaponry milieu as Romero.
Thus, any presentation by Discovery will be similarly restricted, between the ridiculous official theory(/ies) and the equally ludicrous "superthermate" theory. Such false opposition keeps activists' heads spinning on an untraceable thermite goose chase rather than agitating for grand-jury investigations of institutions such as Raytheon, Applied Research Associates, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and others whose weaponry can be tied to the utter devastation of World Trade Center.
A possible silver lining over Texas: secrecy-gagged panelist Col. Dr. Bob Bowman valiantly tried to warn on the Austin-based nationally-syndicated Deadline Live radio program Friday that "Star Wars" is offensive weaponry designed to take out targets such as buildings from space-based platforms, sewing confusion in doing so.
Rosie O'Donnell seems curious about the 9/11 anomalies pointing toward the use of exotic classified weaponry. Excerpted from "ask ro" at/and rosie.com April 5-8, 2007:
"THURSDAY(video transcription):
Q: [Have you] seen the Requests For Correction filed agianst the NIST study?
RO: yesss... listen, that's a complicated issue folks -- make no mistake.
SATURDAY:
kate writes:
the biggest 9/11 question i have: why don’t most of the experts address the fact that in both towers, the "core" of steel was virtually obliterated. if the floors fell around the core, where it go?
RO: wtc 7 had a steel core as well disappeared into dust
Did a stray directed-energy beam hit WTC building 7? The evidence below suggests so. This could explain why WTC7 was not pulled under the cover of the destruction of the North Tower at 9:30am.
"The thing that makes it especially interesting is that there has been talk of a '20 storey gash' down the south side of WTC7 for years but only two recorded eyewitnesses and no photos. One of them was Captain Chris Boyle
Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.
As I see it, there have to be more photos somewhere although the smoke does obscure it. The smoke may very well have been a disguise. No. there is no question that NIST did not publish this photo for a reason. They must have known about it.
[...]
1) Does this look like a real hole rather than a shadow? YES
2) Is it consistent with the eyewitness reports of a 20 storey hole? YES
3) is it consistent with NIST's description? YES
4) Could it be debris damage from WTC1? NO
5) Could it be caused by an explosive blast from within? POSSIBLY
6) Are there other photos or videos that show this or anything similar NO -----
Dr. Judy Wood, late of Clemson University, has filed a supplement to her Request for Correction to NIST regarding the federal agency's fraudulent report on the Wrold Trade Center.
Dr. Wood notes that much of NIST's analysis was provided by a firm called Applied Research Associates, a firm engaged in the directed-energy business.
"Your Request for Correction (RFC) now pending with the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) was supplemented with an additional filing with NIST on or about March 29, 2007. I assume that supplement will be posted on your website, along with this memorandum. You filed the supplement in order to call attention to an undisclosed apparent conflict of interest that has a direct bearing upon your assertions that Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) on 11 September 2001.
You have discovered that Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) is not only a major NIST contractor in the clean-up of the WTC site, post 9/11/01, as well as a major contractor for NIST in the preparation of the NCSTAR 1 report series, that your RFCs pertain to, there's more.
ARA is also at the very epicenter of the development of Directed Energy Weapons. DEW may be the very core of ARA’s business, with all other business matters being of secondary importance to ARA.
That information was not disclosed to the public by NIST to our knowledge.
One example serving to illustrate the centrality of ARA to the development of Directed Energy Weapons is the following statement from ARA's website:
"Directed Energy Award: ARA was recently recognized at a directed energy symposium in Washington, D.C. as a Founding Sponsor of the Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS). DEPS was founded in 1999 to foster research and development of directed energy technology for national defense and civil applications through professional communication and education."
The organization that ARA is a founding member of: Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS) appears to be a major hub of the Military-Industrial-Complex. See: http://www.deps.org/index.html
The sponsors of DEPS are listed here and they listed here and they include, in all probability, the main manufacturers, researchers and developers of Directed Energy Weapons: http://www.deps.org/DEPSpages/sponsors.html
This week Total Info Radio welcomes Dr. Judy Wood and attorney Jerry Leaphart to discuss the Request for Correction that Dr. Wood has filed regarding the NIST repoprt concerning the destruction of the World Trade Center complex on September 11, 2001.
"Dr. Judy Wood (with degrees in Civil Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, and Materials Engineering Science), widely acknowledged as the leading proponent of the theory that Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) were used to destroy the World Trade Center (WTC) complex, has filed a Request for Correction under the Data Quality Act with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), located in Gaithersburg, MD.
Dr. Wood is represented in this effort by Attorney Jerry Leaphart, a Connecticut-based trial lawyer, who states that NIST now has 60 days to respond to the RFC. After that, an appeal can be taken and/or other legal action may then follow.
Leaphart further states that Dr. Wood knows that the implications of her theory that DEW were used to destroy the WTC complex shatter certain key beliefs that Americans as a whole cherish and hold dear. Her theory has generated a lot of interest and commentary within the 9/11 Truth Movement that relies primarily upon the Internet as its media source. Mainstream print and broadcast media do not cover the 9/11 Truth Movement, but may need to take heed of this administrative action filed by Dr. Wood, according to Attorney Leaphart.
Leaphart said that to his knowledge, only three RFCs concerning NIST's WTC report have been filed to date. One by Dr. Morgan Reynolds, another by Edward F. Haas and the one filed by Dr. Wood. All three are currently pending.
The 43 page RFC filed by Wood asserts that the basic integrity of NCSTAR 1 is lacking because, by its own admission, it did not investigate the actual destruction of the World Trade Center Towers.
"The focus of the investigation was on the sequence of events from the instance of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the "probable collapse sequence," although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable." [See NCSTAR 1, pgs xxxvii, footnote 2 and/or 82, footnote 13]...
Thus, to this day, Americans have not been given any explanation whatsoever for the destruction of the WTC complex that comports with information and quality standards.
In contrast, Dr. Wood's RFC contains a stunning array of visual evidence confirming highly unusual energy effects seen by all as the twin towers were almost instantaneously destroyed in less time than it would take a billiard ball to hit the ground if dropped from the height of the twin towers.
That fact is assessed on the basis of the two other laws of physics in Wood's RFC, thus confirming its scientific rigor. Wood also points to other compelling evidence that NIST ignored. Wood's RFC shows visual evidence of unusual and unexplained blast effects on vehicles parked blocks away from the complex. Wood also demonstrates unexplained visual damage in the form of perpendicular gouges in WTC 4,5,6 and the near disappearance of WTC 3, all of which remain unexplained by NIST to this day. Wood goes further and points out that the incredible amount of dust resulting from the visible process of steel disintegrating before our very eyes all point to the use of directed energy weapons. One other element of Wood's proof is the almost complete lack of even a rubble pile at the WTC complex. Wood asks: Where did it go?
Added to all of that is the fact that whatever the energy and heat source was, it had no effect upon paper that was seen floating everywhere and not burning very much, if at all.
Dr. Wood's RFC demonstrates all of the above mentioned effects in its 43 pages of text and pictorial proof. The combined effects of gravity, jet fuel (a form of kerosene) and plane damage could not possibly have caused the massive destruction that occurred on September 11, 2001, in New York City, according to Dr. Wood. The wonder of it all is that more engineers and scientists have not come forward to challenge the woeful, scientific inadequacies of the official explanation.
Dr. Wood invites her peers and colleagues to set aside their emotional attachments and to view the evidence objectively. Then and only then can America come to grips with what happened on 9/11/01, according to Dr. Wood. -----
MZA's WaveTrain graphical user interface makes it easy to adjust shooting energy beams through the stratosphere and lower atmosphere. Some version of this software was almost certainly used in the destruction of the World Trade Center:
WaveTrain Atmospheric Path Configuration Guide [...] The WaveTrain Turbulence Distribution Toolbox (turbtool) is a Matlab Graphical User Interface (GUI) that assists the WaveTrain user in constructing turbulence propagation modeling parameters. With turbtool, the user can construct a turbulence specification and store it to a disk file for later input to an WaveTrain run.
The basic function of turbtool is to allow the user to specify the geometry and characteristics of a series of phase screens through which wave-optics propagations are to be performed. The following are some of the capabilities of the turbtool:
turbtool can set up phase screen geometries based on either a spherical-earth or flat-earth model.
turbtool allows the user to specify and/or generate a variety of phase screen parameters including: distance between screens, height of screens, strength of screens, inner and outer scale lengths, and velocities (for modeling wind and relative motion between the platform and target).
turbtool provides a variety of turbulence models including constant turbulence, Clear-1 Night, Clear-2 Night, AMOS Night, AMOS Day, Hufnagel-Valley 5/7, and Maui. The user can also modify these models to weight the turbulence path in an arbitrary fashion.
turbtool provides a variety of wind speed models including constant wind speed, wind speed due to a slew, Osan January, SOR Fall, SOR Spring, SOR Summer, SOR Winter, WSMR, Bufton, and Clear-2. . .
turbtool provides a variety of diagnostics including the computation of r0 and theta0 for a given scenario and the generation of plots of the turbulence distribution and turbulence profiles.
And from the Albuquerque-based MZA Associates' homepage MZA.com:
"MZA Associates Corporation reaches the 15-year mark
MZA was incorporated in October 1991 to meet a need for advanced simulation and analysis of adaptive optics systems at what is now the Air Force Research Laboratory t(AFRL). Because of the ongoing reduction in SDI-related research, the business climate called for a leaner approach to providing such support and created an opportunity for the formation of MZA. In December of 1992, MZA was awarded a four-year, three-million dollar simulation and analysis support contrac (AMASS).
The company has been growing and thriving ever since. In the past 15 years, MZA played a key role in the completion of AFRL's landmark ABLEX and ABLE ACE high-altitude atmospheric characterization experiments. We developed data acquisition and optical systems to help build the ABL-ACT facilities on White Sands Missile Range and provided significant simulation and data analysis for the subsequent experiments. We wrote WaveTrain and distributed it to more than one hundred organizations, significantly increasing the number of scientists that perform wave-optics analysis of advanced optical systems.
For the past six years, MZA has played a major role in the performance prediction and assessment of the Airborne Laser (ABL) for the ABL SPO. Concurrently, we invented, built, and patented the Adaptive Dynamic Range Wave Front Sensor (ADRWFS). We are also proud of the fact that MZA has been named to the New Mexico Technology Flying Forty for these last six years running.
We continue to provide simulation and analysis to AFRL for ABL, tactical, relays, and ground-based optical systems. MZA's ABL WaveTrain-based wave-optics model is currently being used to predict and analyze the performance of the ABL which is currently undergoing early flight tests of its beam control system. In 2005, we established our Dayton, Ohio office and inherited an impressive legacy of scaling codes. We also created a subsidiary, Active Optical Systems (AOS), which manufactures low-cost, compact adaptive optics hardware. On-going projects include R&D in the areas of optical propagation in the marine environment, wave-optics modeling of laser resonators, adaptive reconstructors for the compensation of aero-optical effects, laser weapon lethality, complex synthetic scene generation, relay mirrors, and isomorphic modeling of complex systems. (December 2006) -----
A debate of sorts took place in Arizona on Saturday, Feb. 24. The issue at hand: Did classified directed-energy weapons have a role in pulverizing the World Trade Center?
Taking the "pro" position: Dr. James Fetzer, philosopher of science and Founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.
Taking the "con" position: Dr. Steven E. Jones, former(?) classified weapons developer for Los Alamos National Laboratory.
9/11 scholar Dr. Judy Wood and activist attorney Jerry Leaphart appeared on the Feb. 20 "We Ourselves" program on XM radio. T issue was Dr. Wood's research into the directed-energy weapons used to destroy the World Trade Center complex on 9/11 -- and the implications of that research on the current brinkmanship between Iran and the West. "We Ourselves," hosted by longtime Washington, DC community activist Ambrose Lane, is carried by DC Pacifica affiliate WPFW as well as XM satellite radio.
"I should like here to postulate that were it not for DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONRY theory emerging as a likely source of the destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center, Iran's nuclear facilities likely would have been attacked already.
Mind you, they still might be attacked; but the exposure of the use of directed-energy weapons (DEW) on WTC may well be the single most important reason why no such attack has occurred as yet simply because the aftermath of such an attack would bear too much resemblance to what "Ground Zero" looked like.
Picture this, an overhead view of one of Iran's nuclear sites. If DEW were used there, the likely outcome would be a subsequent photograph that contained what? DUSTIFICATION, HOLES, TOASTED CARS and little damage to any nearby non-targeted structures. In other words, it would look like the remnants of the attack on WTC:
Because Dr. Judy Wood has focused our attention on what ground zero actually looked like and what the attack actually looked like as it was taking place, and coupled that with DEW, any plans to use DEW on IRAN or elsewhere might well have been set back.
Judy has brought to the forefront of 9/11 Truth consciousness the effects of a DEW attack. If any such attack on Iran were to occur, the fact that Americans were killed by the same process might well filter down to the level of public awareness.
What then?
The inability to answer that last question might be the single most important reason why use of DEW is being postponed.
Needless to say, with that kind of consideration out in the open, we can see why, for good reason, the effort to discredit Judy Wood has reached fever pitch. And the effort will fail; all the moreso if we start using the information available to us a little more openly. -----
Independent 9/11 scholar Dr. Judy Wood has annotated H. Michael Sweeney's "25 rules of disinformation" (as featured by 911truth.org) in light of the debate over the directed-energy weapons used to destroy the World Trade Center. Some excerpts:
"3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact. [e.g.: Use the derogatory terms 'space beams' and 'rabid no-planers', then associate these with the terms 'wild accusations' and 'ad hominem attacks'. (JW, 2007)]
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues. [e.g.: 'But space beams don't explain the presence of sulfur', (JW, 2007)]
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues. [e.g.: Use names like 'rabid no-planers', 'space beams', 'space beamers'. (JW, 2007)]
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect. [e.g.: "I haven't seen any evidence of pulverization on Judy Wood's web site." (JW, 2007)]
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues. [e.g.: 'Thermite is available on ebay and it is untracable, so I guess we'll never know who did it." (JW, 2007)]
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely. [e.g.: 'Exactly how much energy would be required to pulverize the WTC Towers?' The authors of the DEW paper are asked this on a regular basis as if there is a question as to whether or not the WTC was destroyed. But, those with other theories who ask this question feel no need to answer the same question themselves. (JW, 2007)]
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue. [e.g.: We are frequently reminded to pine for the evidence we don't have (the missing steel) instead of looking at the evidence we do have (photos). (JW, 2007)]
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance. [e.g.: Thermite cannot explain the cylindrical holes in WTC6 and the toasted cars, so that data must be ignored. (JW, 2007)]
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications. [e.g.:'We have new data (from mysterious and secret samples and test methods) that show strong evidence of possible ___'. (JW, 2007)]
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively. [e.g.: 'If not able to take over 'Scholars for 9/11 Truth,' then start a new group, 'Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice' and establish a new "truth." (But, isn't truth its own defense?)]
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes. [e.g.: Why would a group of folks want to destroy the organization, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and drag it out for many months with multiple emails a day proposing endless negotiations with no intention of following through on any of them? (JW, 2007)]
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of theircharacter by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health. [e.g.: Murder the student of a prominent 9/11 researcher. (JW, 2007)] -----
On the January 30 edition of "We Ourselves" for XM satellite radio (the program also runs on WPFW, the Washington, DC Pacifica station), host Ambrose Lane and his three guests discuss gaining control of the orbital beam apparatus for constructive as opposed to destructive use. Guests include:
Daphne Wysham, Institute for Policy Studies, establishes how bad global warming has become.
Dr. Judy Wood, late of Clemson University, offers evidence that an extremely high energy "Star Wars" beam weapon destroyed the World Trade Towers on 9/11/01.
Dr. John Bloomer explains how the same beam weapon can reverse Global Warming.
"ANOMALIES OF THE WTC COLLAPSE The twin towers did not simply collapse as a result of gravity; they were violently pulverized in mid-air in an explosive process which hurled debris hundreds of meters in all directions – they were vaporized by an explosive force. Anomalies abound. The North Tower was hit first ... the South Tower's fires were less severe – but the South Tower fell first. WTC 7 was never hit by anything, and had fires only on two floors (there are no photos of WTC 7 enveloped in flames and smoke) – but WTC 7 fell anyway. WTC 6 witnessed an explosion and fire which has never been explained or even addressed.
Finally, we have the embarrassing fact that steel frame skyscrapers are virtually indestructible by fire. The official version of events argues that, at least as far as the towers are concerned, it was the combined effect of crash impact plus fire which caused the collapses. But even the South Tower collapsed well after most of the jet fuel had burned away, and a fire based on paper, rugs, and furniture melts steel even less than one based on jet fuel. By all indications, the South Tower began the collapse sequence precisely at the moment when, well after the impact had been absorbed, the fires too were subsiding. The hole made in the North Tower by American 11 had cooled so much that, just before the collapse of the North Tower, survivors were observed looking out through the gash in the side of the building. (Marr 41)
The upper floors of both towers, after showing symptoms of high pressure which forced smoke out through the widows, exploded into spectacular mushroom clouds. Debris and other ejecta were thrown at speeds of 200 feet per second to distances of up to 500 feet in all directions. The clouds then descended, always emanating from the towers as these fell.
The mushroom clouds had expanded to two or three times the diameter of the towers after five seconds, and had expanded to five times the diameter of the towers after 15 seconds. Blast waves broke windows in buildings over 400 feet away. In the thick mushroom clouds, solid objects were hurled out ahead of the dust, another telltale sign of explosive demolition.
One might have expected the buildings to tip over at an angle starting at the points where they had been hit like a tree which leaves a stump as it falls towards the side where it has been most chopped, but instead they did not topple and there were no stumps; apart from some initial asymmetry in the top of the South Tower, the two towers both collapsed down on themselves in a perfectly symmetrical way – a suspicious sign, since this is one of the prime goals and hallmarks of controlled demolition.
The fall of the twin towers took place at breathtaking speed. The tops of the buildings reached the ground as rubble no more than 16 seconds after the collapse process had begun. A weight in a vacuum would have taken 9.2 seconds to cover the same distance. This meant that air resistance and little else had slowed the fall of the upper stories. This indicates that the lower floors must have been demolished and pulverized before the upper stories fell on them. The building, in other words, had been pulverized, and in many areas vaporized, in mid-air. No gravity collapse could have created this phenomenon.
The non-metallic elements of the twin towers, especially the cement slabs which formed the horizontal surface of each floor, were pulverized into a fine dust, with particles of less than 100 microns in diameter. This was the dust which pervaded lower Manhattan as the explosive clouds spread from hundreds of yards in all directions. This dust took a long time to settle, but the Giuliani administration tried to convince office workers in the area that there was no danger. All the steel in the building superstructures was simply shredded. The exceptionally strong central core columns were neatly diced into 10- or 20- floor segments – something which has never been explained.
According to Jim Hoffman ... the energy necessary to create the mushroom clouds and expand them to the extraordinary dimensions actually observed to pulverize virtually all the concrete in the towers, and to chop the steel into segments is far greater than the gravitational energy represented by the buildings in the first place. According to Hoffman, there must have been powerful additional energy sources at work. When prodded to do so at recent conferences, Hoffman has been willing to speculate that these energy sources might have been unconventional ones. High energy microwave interferometry using coaxial beams for constructive and destructive interference might be a possibility, but this would require so much energy that, if it had to be delivered as conventional electric current, it would necessitate a cable about half a meter in diameter – and there is no evidence of this. So the problem remains intractable.
THE TWIN TOWERS WERE ROBUST STRUCTURES
The twin towers were robust structures. The structure of the twin towers was represented first of all by an internal core of 47 steel box columns which measured 36 by 90 centimeters; the steel was thickest near the base, where it attained a thickness of 10 centimeters (about four inches), and tapered gradually down to 6 centimeters on the upper floors. There were 236 exterior columns in the buildings' facades; these were 10 centimeters thick at the base, but only 6 millimeters thick in the highest floors. Each floor was a steel plate into which concrete had been poured. In the center of the building was a reinforced core featuring four steel columns encased in concrete. The structure is abundantly cross-braced, so that stress in one sector could be efficiently shifted to other parts of the structure. All steel columns rested directly on the bedrock under Manhattan.
This structures had been designed to withstand 140 mile per hour winds, and had resisted them successfully for more than thirty years. They had been designed by Lee Robertson, the structural engineer who built the towers to absorb the impact of a Boeing 707, an aircraft roughly comparable in size and fuel capacity to the aircraft that appear to have struck the towers on 9/11.
In the case of the twin towers, the technical problem of how to account for the immense quantities of energy released would seem to point to an energy source beyond the capabilities of conventional controlled demolition. For a possible explanation of what kind of energy source could have been at work, we must turn our attention to the realm of new physical principles, and thus to the class of directed energy weapons which are probably most familiar to the general public in connection with President Reagan's so-called star wars speech of March 23, 1983. We may be dealing here with high energy microwave interferometry using coaxial beams for constructive and destructive interference. The inherent problem with this conjecture, as engineer Ken Jenkins has pointed out, is that such a device would require a power cable half a meter in diameter, and the presence of such a power cable has not been demonstrated. The solution to this problem will indeed require more time and research. -----
Tarpley's 2005 call for more research has been followed up on here and here.
This week, we open with some news updates about the Army's exoskeleton program, BEATLES, and State Department collusion in bringing the Chinese Communists to power. 
So, Sir Rudy installed an important new emergency radio system; but then made sure that it wasn't being used on 9/11. Was this radio system instead used to help disintegrate the Twin Towers? Stay tuned to total911.info our [b]real[/b]investigation continues.
MP3 DOWNLOAD -LISTEN HERE
More audio is available from the "Science of 9/11 Conference" held at the beginning of the month:
Recent research reveals the WTC "controlled demolition" debate has been a constructed Hegelian dialectic since no later than 9/12 2001. For it was on that day that one Van Romero, of New Mexico Tech, announced in the local Albuquerque Journal that the Twin Towers were obviously taken out by a conventional controlled demolition. Romero quickly and quietly retracted his claim and disappeared from the scene. What was not revealed until now however, is that Romero is a major player in directed-energy weaponry, and a long time member of the Directed-Energy Professional Society (See 911researchers.com).
MP3 AUDIO ARCHIVE 
DrJudyWood.com March 22: 
Independent 9/11 scholar Dr. Judy Wood has annotated H. Michael Sweeney's "25 rules of disinformation" (as featured by 911truth.org) in light of the debate over the directed-energy weapons used to destroy the World Trade Center. Some excerpts:
From pp. 224-226 of Webster Tarpley's 2005 9/11 Synthetic Terror : 
FEED
KEY DOCUMENTS ]
DAVE EMORY
MP3 DOWNLOAD
Check out the filing here