May 04, 2008

Deseret News: 9/11 theorist not curtailing his research

Writing about web page http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695275973,00.html

A positive mainstream article (!) on Steven Jones' research into the 3 building collapses on 9/11 indicating the use of explosives, after he authored a paper published April 18 in a civil engineering journal.

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695275973,00.html


- 4 comments by 1 or more people Not publicly viewable

  1. Just look at the primary evidence yourself, rather than looking at other people’s!

    06 May 2008, 12:33

  2. Have done. Extensively.

    Have you?

    06 May 2008, 17:06

  3. Would you agree that the moon landings were faked?

    07 May 2008, 10:32

  4. No. Why bring that up? And you didn’t answer my question.

    Blanket treatment of “conspiracy theories” is intellectually lazy. I suggest you “look at the primary evidence yourself, rather than looking at other people’s”.

    Please don’t patronise me. I’m not a conspiracy hobbyist, this is a very serious issue. I have sent letters to our entire Engineering and Physics department faculties encouraging them to take a look:

    http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/jackmorgan/entry/open_letter_to/

    I have received only one reply but it was positive. I will soon be arranging to meet with those in the departments who are most qualified to discuss the issue.

    I guess the fact that there are 358 architectural and engineering professionals in America petitioning Congress to investigate the collapses of the 3 buildings on 9/11 means nothing…

    http://www.ae911truth.org

    Watch the numbers grow and either grow some balls and look at the primary evidence, or keep muttering about the moon landings.

    07 May 2008, 13:35


Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

Jack Morgan's blog


The primary purpose of this blog is to syndicate information that is largely excluded from, or spun by, the increasingly consolidated corporate media.


I believe the “War on Terror” is a synthetic construct. It is part of a long term agenda of the political/corporate elites to aggressively consolidate global control. “War on Drugs” deja-vu.


I support a new criminal investigation into the events of 9/11. The previous investigation avoided hundreds of known pieces of evidence contradicting the government’s account – for example, the fact that the head of Pakistani intelligence funded the alleged lead hijacker, and the fact that World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed at 5.20 pm in the exact manner of a controlled demolition.

Disclaimer: I often paste articles from other websites but this does not imply that I am affiliated with them or that I agree with the totality of their content.

Blog archive

Loading…

Most recent comments

  • …I've never wanted you more! by on this entry
  • "Recording my IP is the sort of thing you seem to be very much against. I'm not worried by it, just … by on this entry
  • I watched the program last night. Your comments add to my unease with the reporting and representati… by CT on this entry
  • I watched this last night. It was all very subtle, but one or two moments really demonstrated the bi… by londonbob on this entry
  • Good analysis. There are perhaps a few things to add that the program dealt with badly. The first is… by redadare on this entry

Search this blog

9/11 Research

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Do Not Submit to the National Identity Register

Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's Blog

Craig Murray's Blog

Greg Palast's Website

Peace Strike

We Are Change UK

May 2008

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Apr |  Today  | Jun
         1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31   
Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder
© MMXXI