Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Earl who wrote (9107)	12/1/2004 1:24:26 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 20039

Don > Abu Ghraib gets all the attention, yet the official story is the conditions in Abu Ghraib resulted from confusion over if it was okay to use the same methods being used in Cuba Sure, Gen Miller was brought across to Iraq to use the same methods although I am confident the sex stuff was particular to Abu Ghraib. In fact, I think that occurred only under Karpinski's rule and that it had stopped by the time Miller arrived. disinfopedia.org >>The Army Times reports (http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2923919.php) on May 17, 2004: "House and Senate members are also focusing on the role of Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, who was so effective at eliciting useful information from terrorism suspects at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, that he was named last month to run U.S. prisons in Iraq. It was Miller who recommended last September that military intelligence officials have command over prisons and prison guards to improve the intelligence gleaned from interrogations." << The reason why Abu Ghraib is the focus of the German inquiry is because four Iraqis filed complaints. I'm sure eventually when detainees are released from GITMO they will do the same. >>The Center for Constitutional Rights and four Iraqis who were tortured in U.S. custody have filed a complaint with the German Federal Prosecutor’s Office against high ranking United States civilian and military commanders over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison and elsewhere in Iraq. We are asking the German prosecutor to launch an investigation: since the U.S. government is unwilling to open an independent investigation into the responsibility of these officials for war crimes, and since the U.S. has refused to join the International Criminal Court, CCR and the Iraqi victims have brought this complaint in Germany as a court of last resort. Several of the defendants are stationed in Germany.<<

To: Don Earl who wrote (9107)	12/1/2004 5:22:41 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

Don, back to 9-11, this time to the pyroclastic dust and the effects of the dust on those who were at the WTC. newscientist.com > The extent of air trapping was found to reflect the amount of time each worker was exposed to the dust and debris of the buildings’ collapse. The most likely culprit behind this type of airway disease is pulverised alkaline cement<< Pulverised alkaline cement, but no-one asks how the collapse of a building can pulverize the cement sufficiently finely to cause a dust inhalation problem? However, some of us already know the only way this can happen is if the concrete had been subject to the compressive and destructive forces of an explosion. 911-strike.com >>A study by Paul J. Lioy et al. examined three samples of dust deposited by the WTC disaster, and found that the samples consisted of a homogeneous mixture, primarily made of cement and soot (37 to 50%), glass fiber (40%) and cellulose (9 to 20%). The proportion of particle sizes from 75 to 300 microns in diameter ranged from 42% to 46%, while particles less than 75 microns in diameter made up 30 to 39 percent of the samples. This dust was deposited around Manhattan in tremendous quantities (up to 10 cm thick at distances of 700 meters from the collapse site), consistent with the idea that most of the concrete, drywall and fireproofing in the buildings ended up as dust. Creation of such a finely ground and homogeneously mixed debris is difficult to explain as the result of a mechanical pounding process, but could be explained by highly turbulent combustion effects at high temperatures -- at least hot enough to cause spalling of the concrete due to explosive evaporation of entrapped water. ---------- When all is said and done, I believe that the analysis by Jim Hoffman is substantially correct -- the energy required to heat this huge mass sufficiently to reduce it to powder is very difficult to account for by any reasonable combination of gravitational and combustion effects, without the input of additional energy from explosives.<<