[THS] Jesse Ventura's piece on 9/11--KILLED BY HUFFPOST!

[Peter Webster]

From: Mark Crispin Miller <markcrispinmiller at gmail.com>


As I noted in an item yesterday, Jesse Ventura has a new book out, co-authored with Dick Russell, called American Conspiracies, which includes an excellent chapter on election fraud and its connection to the likely murder of Mike Connell.

Well, this morning, Jesse had a front-page piece on 9/11 up at HuffPost: a front- page piece that quickly slipped off that front page--and then completely disappeared.

Here's what you'll find there now (or will, until they take that down as well):

Jesse Ventura
Author, American Conspiracies
Posted: March 9, 2010 11:00 AM

Editor's Note: The Huffington Post's editorial policy, laid out in our blogger guidelines,
prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories -- including those
about 9/11. As such, we have removed this post.

All that's up there now are the comments left by 65 of HuffPost's readers.

It's worth noting that HuffPost already ran an excerpt from another chapter of American Conspiracies, about the US "war on drugs," and they had no problem with that subject.

But this one is, as we all know, taboo. Clearly, even to question the official story of 9/11 is to engage in "conspiracy theories" (as if the official story weren't itself a "conspiracy theory," and a preposterous one at that). Such is always the response of the US mainstream media (the foreign media tends to be more open-minded)--and it's also the response of our left/liberal media, as this amazing act of censorship makes clear.

So here is the offending piece. Please read it; and let's all try to locate the particular points that are so obviously wild and baseless that HuffPost had to kill the whole piece insantly.

MCM


Huffington Post/Jesse Ventura - Article #2 ("American Conspiracies")

                        WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON SEPTEMBER 11TH?

You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a
conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers
signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the
destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11.
That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy - because they
don't buy the government's version of events.  They want to know how 200,000 tons
of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds.  They question whether
the hijacked planes were responsible - or whether it could have been a controlled
demolition from inside that brought down the Twin Towers and Building 7.
Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of
Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, put it like this:  "The official Federal
Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and
Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the
circumstances of the towers' destruction."  He's especially disturbed by Building 7,
whose 447 stories  came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon - even
though it was never hit by an aircraft.
This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this
week by Skyhorse.   An excerpt follows:

Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one
another, because of the way they were constructed.  Well, those 425,000 cubic yards
of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707,
the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973.  Analysis had
shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would
not cause major damage.   The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going
440 and 550 miles an hour.
Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought
down these two steel-framed skyscrapers.  Keep in mind that no other such
skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire
damage.   So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from
inside the buildings?  I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as
part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow
things to hell and high water.   And my staff talked at some length with a prominent
physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without
demolition charges defies the laws of physics.  These buildings fell, at nearly the rate
of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds.  An
object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in
about 9.2 seconds.  Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as
200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation
on August 21, 2002.  When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later,
the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition.  But
Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof
that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible.    I visited the site about
three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry.  It didn't mean
anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they
were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures.  These fires kept burning for
more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever.  And this was all
due to jet fuel?  We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit.
Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research
paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical
Physics Journal, in April 2009.  In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists
found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive.  Here's what
the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry
department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the
Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7:

"Thermite itself dates back to 1893.  It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder,
which react to create intense heat.  The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500
degrees Centigrade.  This can be used to do welding.  It can also be used to melt
other iron.  So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles,
perfectly mixed.  When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly.
Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very
effective explosive.  It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as
rocket fuel."[i]

Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers
who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many
implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses.  As he puts it bluntly:
"Once you get to the science, it's indisputable."