Using Logic to Counter 9/11 Non-Thinkers

[Wokeman]

By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to Rense.com
11-21-6
"Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload of illogical humans." -Spock

Most folks don't think, not logically, about 9-11. Most people prefer that others-so-called experts--do the thinking for them. Understandably, to really think about the events of 9-11 requires an abiding love of truth, a logical mind, a rational mind far removed from emotion and prejudice, and a trust of scientific law rather than an unquestioning trust of the state. Let us now look at only five facets using these principles of logic.

1. A building constructed over a highly sensitive, highly dangerous, highly expensive industrial site will be engineered and constructed that much stronger. Logical and rational, right? WTC-7 was engineered to be stronger, not weaker, than other buildings surrounding it, simply because it enclosed an electrical power station. But WTC-7 fell at near free fall speed. Logical deduction would conclude building 7 was purposely demolished at the end of the day on September 11, 2001, most likely to destroy evidence of arson and to clear the WTC site entirely.

2. Fuel fires burn intensely for short periods of time. Fuel fires also burn at well-known scientific temperatures. Scientifically, and thus logically, fuel fires cannot melt steel, which requires blast furnace conditions. Melted pools of steel were discovered, observed and recorded in the debris of three steel skyscrapers long after September 11, 2001. Logically then, fuel fires alone did not destroy the World Trade Center. Logically then, some other, far more powerful substance that could melt steel must have.

3. Passengers on commercial jets are required to check in at the desk and present their ticket and boarding pass. No passenger is allowed to board a major commercial carrier without first being logged onto a computer today. This list of passengers is called a flight manifest. This list of passengers is available to airline personnel within minutes. Logically then, the names of ALL hijackers should have appeared in the mainstream media hours (and days) after the flights crashed. They did not. Either there never were any hijackers or they boarded through the complicity of airline personnel, thus indicating a greater conspiracy. Logical.

4. When the chief of security of one government gives $100,000 to an alleged terrorist mastermind, and then meets with the security heads of the government to be attacked on the exact day of the attack, logically, some complicity is suspected. In the days before September 11, 2001 the head of Pakistani Intelligence, General Mahmoud Ahmed, wired $100,000 to the lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta. Ahmed then attended breakfast on the morning of 9-11 with Porter Goss, the head of the House Intelligence Committee (and the next head of the CIA) and Florida Senator Bob Graham. Coincidentally, Florida was home base to most of the alleged hijackers. According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" (to use the FBI expression), allegedly ordered the bank transfer of $100,000 to the accused 9/11 ring-leader, Mohamed Atta, and then met on the morning of the attack with a trio of US lawmakers and top intelligence insiders, Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl for a friendly breakfast. What exactly did they discuss? Logically then, one could conclude a huge conflict of interests. Logically one could conclude a vast government conspiracy. As if to confirm a government conspiracy between the two security states, $8 billion in US aid was funneled to Pakistan between 2002 and 2006, ostensibly to fight the war on terror. No word where that $100,000 came from (US taxpayers?), money that was wired to mastermind Atta to attack America.

5. Airplane parts are easily traceable. Airplane parts are stamped with serial numbers. Machined airplane parts are made to exact specifications. Logically an aviation expert could take any large, machined part from any of the 911 attack sites and say, yes or no, this part originated from a Boeing 757. Or did NOT originate from a Boeing 757, as Jon Carlson claims. Scientific study of the engine parts alone could have demolished any and all 911 conspiracies. Logical, correct? But because no such investigations were permitted or conducted, a huge government conspiracy appears likely. Logically then, one could conclude the conspirators had something to hide.

I have noted only FIVE suspicious anomalies. Dozens of other examples exist. For example the disappearance of the black boxes from the WTC. While first responders claimed the black boxes were found, the government denies it. Since most of the WTC debris was sifted and sorted (or melted), anyone could logically conclude the government had something to hide. Anyone could logically conclude, without too much effort, that 911 was an inside job and continues to be the greatest unsolved crime in American history.

USAF veteran and author of suspense thriller, The Guns of Dallas, Douglas Herman writes regularly for Rense.

[flamesong]

On anomaly number 5, I'd like to draw attention to a recent Channel Four documentary called, 'Who Downed Douglas Bader' in which a Spitfire expert's knowledge of the tiniest individual parts was used to categorically prove that the remains of a Spitfire buried in a French field for fifty years was not that of Douglas Bader. It eventually proved the aircraft to be that of another pilot whose name, quite coincidentally, had the same initials.

If such forensic science could be used to identify a fifty year old wreck buried under soil for fifty years by, if my memory serves me correctly, a small part associated with the aircraft's weapon's trigger assembly - there is no reason it cannot be employed on the wreckage resulting from 9/11.

As a former aircraft mechanic I can verify that no serviceable parts are used on aircraft which are not logged by their serial number in the aircraft's service documents. That said, I witnessed the 'disappearance' of an entire Wasp helicopter - twice. I wish I knew its airframe number because I would love to know what its 'official' history was.