Freedom to Fascism

 
Jones Report
 

Thin aluminium can't slice through thick steel.

 

DEFEND ROSIE! SIGN THE PETITION NOW

OTHER NEWS
__________

NY Police Report Bomb to Frame Activist as Terrorist

Giuliani Caught in Bizarre WTC Building 7 Lie

Brzezinski Exposed for 9/11 Culpability

Dutch TV Exposing 2007 BILDERBERG Meeting

John Kerry: WTC 7 Was a Controlled Demolition?

Hillary Names "Activist" to Campaign-- fmr. La Raza President & North American Union Architect

Inaction"Unfathomable": Long-Term University Officer Alleges Black Op

Matt Kazee Witnesses VA Tech Aftermath Drill...

EU Nations Agree to New Racism Rules

2nd Amendment in Danger Under Bush

VA Tech Shootings: Cell Phone Reporter on Campus

Unprecedented Nuclear Drills in U.S. on April 23

Fed. Reserve of Dallas to Host 'Cross-Border Banking' Meet in TX May 11

NASCO, Lockheed, & 'Total Domain Awareness' Transportation Tracking

Out-Flanked: New Ethanol Bush Energy Empire in South America

E-Mails Sent to VA Tech Students

David Arquette a Truther

N.Dakota First to Ban Forced RFID Chipping

Vonnegut a 9/11 Truther?

Mob-Connected Giuliani Parading Mafia Voice During Campaign Stops

O'Reilly: Rosie is a Huge Story (9/11 Claims Aren't)

Help Defend Rosie & Save Free Speech

9/11 Physicist Contacted to Appear on The View

The Eleventh Day of Every Month: 9/11 Truth in the Third Stage

Kissinger: Iraq Victory Not Possible

CNN, BBC Reports Conclusively Prove Media Prior Knowledge on WTC7 Controlled Demo.

Brzezinski Suggests False-Flag Event Could Kick-Start Iran War

Get TERRORSTORM on DVD now

9/11 and more at PrisonPlanet.tv

Paul E. Coughlin / Sane Thinking | May 24, 2007

Aeroplanes are made of lightweight materials, they have to be or they wouldn't be able to fly, and commercial airliners of the kind that are supposed to have cut their way into the twin towers on 9/11, would have been made out of aluminium both for the fuselage and for the wings, and it is not possible for such material, aluminium, to punch or cut through steel at least not the steel columns that formed the outer frame of the towers (watch the ten minute film of their construction to see for yourself just how fragile or strong those steel columns were).

Of course if you make an extremely thin steel sheet and a very heavy and solid, aluminium object then that could change things but there is no such situation imaginable in the case of the two towers that supposedly had aeroplanes punch through their steel perimeters, which, by the way, are more correctly thought of as frames than columns. Those frames formed the columns but the frameness of those columns is important because, for one thing, it means that the linear cutting that was evidently taking place - and must have taken place - caused the initial collapse (the top part of the towers only, at the initial destruct phase) - which can be seen and must have been the case, in fairly equal parts on three horizontal sides whilst the fourth side held strong, as a hinge. This can ONLY have happened by cutting three sides equally and linearly whilst leaving the fourth to act as a strong hinge. I only mention this to explain one reason why it is important to understand that the steel perimeter was a strong frame structure and not merely a set of columns: such linear weakening and breaking just doesn't stand up to scrutiny and must have been done by cutting, calculated and linear cutting.

You don't actually need evidence of thermite to understand this although it would provide extra proof, but simply watch the initial collapse and the seconds leading up to it where you can see the cutting being done. But let's get back to what we saw, what we think we saw, and why we should question it.

 

The only reason we believe it is that we all saw it with our own eyes but did we? No, we saw film of it and those that seem to be actual eye witnesses don't describe what we all saw. If it were possible to make aluminium behave in such a powerful way then you can be sure that bullets would be made of aluminium because it is obvious that it is an extremely powerful material for the purpose that bullets have. I would offer a question based on this idea to anyone who wants to believe that those planes punched, like bullets, through those steel frames - and they were more than columns, they were frames - "Why do you suppose that bullets are made out of lead and never aluminium?" The phrase "seeing is believing" is obviously one to be qualified because we can easily be duped - how many times have we seen a woman being sawn in half only to discover that it was all a trick and far from being the macabre and sadistic behaviour of a madman, as we all presumably believed, it was, well, just a trick. Part of visual trickery is to fool us into believing what we see when what we are seeing is totally absured and utterly impossible and such trickery is not only possible it is quite easy too. Our eyes see one thing but cleverly manipulated we believe what is suggested to us that the 'magician' or trickster wants us to believe. Ordinarily it is for entertainment, we think, but as well as the whole world of advertising there is also the world of politics and now, well now we have a new or newish player on the scene and it seems to be ... well, I am jumping ahead here, so let's just stop there on that thought. What conclusion must we come to if we all accept the premise that an airliner cannot slice through such steel columns? That 9/11 was a trick that fooled us, hook line and sinker, and that it must have been an Inside Job.

Now why, after five and a half years after the event, is it worth bothering to talk or write about this? Because just a day or so ago the president of the USA has given himself extra powers of a dictatorial kind added to all the extra dictorship powers that he accumulated following 9/11 and based on 9/11 explanations about foreign terrorists and people who hate America and so on. Its actually more about a militarisation program than about true dictatorship. Anyway, five years or fifty years, we should never forget and always want to know what really happened.

Now, even the most naive of political followers must surely be wondering why after all this time does the president need to keep empowering his position when there have not been any real events that might tend to explain it? Isn't that a reasonable question for any right-minded adult who has even a scanty interest in the day to day politics of the USA?

And what answer can sound plausible?

So here then is the point to carry on from where I left off earlier. The president is the front man, whoever he is and whichever branch of politics he comes from, it makes no difference, that's why his name is unimportant: "Long live the king; The king has been shot!; The king is dead; Hail our new King; Long live our king" is part of the idea, just switch president for king and bear in mind my version is more sinister than the traditional version because there is a hidden government that is in power and the president is merely a kind of puppet to a greater or lesser degree by which I mean when he speaks and governs for most of the time it is probably as a President as we normally asign the term but when it comes to anything at all that the real government has an interest in then that is when he is a puppet - he says and does what the government tells him to.

Now can you begin to grasp what is happening with these extra powers? They are for the hidden government, but the president will always, hopefully, be the one who is seen to be using them - and chances are, they will be used, so I say "hopefully" because the alternative is that he will be brushed aside and the real government will come into focus instead. You don't need me to explain the consequences and circumstances of such a scenario for you to agree that "hopefully" is an apposite word here.

In fact, this new event, this latest in a series of increasing government empowerments, is difficult to give any plausible explanation for just using the naive or popular view of post 9/11 USA. Despite all the war crimes by the USA in foreign, and innocent, countries, there has not been any real sign of anything that might be vaguely cited as plausible excusefor these new laws.

But when you realize that the real government of the USA isn't what it seems but is secret and hidden then you begin to grasp what is really going on and what is being lined up for us all - because this will hit the whole world one way or another.

When, seemingly, the planes punched their way like bullets into the twin towers on 9/11 and almost nobody questioned it, almost everyone accepted what they saw to be what actually happened, that signalled back to the perpetrators that they had got their evil planning and criminal scheming spot-on, that their trick worked 100% and everyone was fooled. They are right to celebrate on the basis of that clear fact and they are right to treat the people as stupid idiots because, as a society that is what they obviously are, what we obviously are, as a society, which does not mean that each of us is stupid or idiotic, it doesn't but that as a society we are both and the perpetrators would simply be correct to assess that as being the case. As individuals we could change that, we could make our various societies a lot less stupid and a lot less imbecilic but what signs are there that we do and what does that say about us, again as a society, but also in this observation, about us as individuals. But that aside, are the perpetrators also right to treat people as if their lives are worthless because that is what they are also doing. It is not just the lives of the 9/11 victims, the victims following that in clearing up the mess, the soldiers sent of to be killed, maimed, traumatise in phoney wars and the victims in the countries that have been subjected to those phoney wars and all the ongoing atrocities consequent but to all of our lives as this monster thrashes around, exercising it's new-found power. Collectively we are utter fools. As individuals, if collectively we are such fools as to permit this and perpetuate it then what are we as individuals if we choose to close our eyes, ears and minds to it?

If you believe those planes, with ali wings and ali fuselage, could have even dented those steel frames then watch the film of the construction of the twin towers then take some ordinary kitchen foil (it's ali too) and make a solid rod with it by just taking the whole pack and scrunch it into a solid piece. Now as hard as you can hit a steel saupan with it until you make a dent in the saucepan. Then when it doesn't work make a more solid ali rod out of even more foil and keep hitting the saucepan until it dents. Figured out yet why there are no aluminium bullets?

If you think the experiment is infair because the ali foil is too thin then try using an empty drinks can which are usually ali too. Fix it to a strong rod so you can whack the saucepan with it. Does the saucepan, made of steel, get dented? No, it doesn't. And by the way, as you realize how much stronger the steel is in that saucepan, realize too, that it can be subjected to blue flame temperature, which is always hotter than orange or red flame termperature and yet it will never soften, weaken or melt. Anyone who has used a steel frying pan on a gas stove must surely know this already.

Once you grasp that you have been duped then you are beginning to take power, beginning to re-empower yourself. Until you do or unless you do, then you consign that power to those that performed the trick because you don't really believe they exist and even their increasing power will hardly rouse you.

In that case we will all just wait and see what lies in store for us as these new powers are taken advantage of, because, you can be sure of one thing, these new powers are not taken for the fun of it, they didn't do this to pass the time, they did it with a purpose, a plan, in mind.

Get TERRORSTORM Before the History of Government-Sponsored Terrorism Catches Up With You.

CLICK ON THE BANNER TO BUY TERRORSTORM IN
"HARD COPY

Get Terrorstorm on DVD

See a Scanner Darkly

Visit the Infowars Store

Join Prison Planet.tv