9/11 - Key Issue of our Time
Steel framed house survives the ravages of an extreme bushfire without any deformation
NICKY PHILLIPS | April 17, 2010
IT TOOK less than a minute for this new house to be engulfed by flames. Luckily no one was too upset to see it burn.
The house, built almost entirely of steel, was being tested to see if it could survive a bushfire and, although it is now a little singed, it passed.
Not only was it still standing, if it had been occupied there was a good chance the people inside would have survived, the CSIRO scientist and test leader Justin Leonard said.
The test house, designed and built by the National Association of Steel Framed Houses with the CSIRO, had most features of a domestic house.
Mr Leonard and his team, aided by the Rural Fire Service at Mogo on the south coast, mimicked the conditions of a bushfire in the test. First the house was subject to radiant heat from gas burners placed metres away for more than half an hour, imitating a bushfire's approach.
Gradually the intensity of the gas burners grew until the house was engulfed in flames three metres high for nearly two minutes.
According to Mr Leonard, the test house underwent an "extreme" bushfire scenario. "The duration of the flame immersion was longer than a bushfire could possibly dish up," he said.
At its peak, the temperature of the fire would have been more than 1000 degrees.
The full effect of the fire on the house still needs to be assessed, but the researchers believe the design could be an affordable option for construction in bushfire-prone areas.
During the "Black Saturday" bushfires in Victoria in February last year more than 2000 homes were destroyed by fire.
Unlike most houses, the test house minimised to use of elements that could be combustible. Its frame, walls, floor and roof cavities were all made of steel. The thermal insulation and the plaster walls and ceiling acted as another fire-proof barrier.
"All the layers work together as a system to protect the occupants," Mr Leonard said.
While people are not encouraged to stay in their house during a bushfire, Mr Leonard said if people did not get sufficient warning it could become unsafe for them to leave their property.
"We're testing the house's ability to create a safe place of refuge during the time you'd be forced inside the house if you were unlucky enough to be there."
Mr Leonard said the flame test would help the researchers explain to builders how they should construct houses to make them "inherently robust" for bushfires.
Australian Broadcasting Corporation's 'Radio National' does Hit Piece on 9/11 Truth Advocates
April 13, 2010
By John Bursill, Engineer, 9/11 Truth Advocate and Researcher
On April 12th, 2010 ABC Radio National's "Counterpoint" host Michael Duffy decided to weigh in on the truth of the 9/11 events. In this clearly biased and ludicrous attack on those who would question the still unexplained events of September 11, 2001, Duffy demonstrated he has done little research into the matter. Seemingly, he has decided research is neither warranted nor required to make wild assumptions about and apply derogatory labels to 9/11 researchers and their questions.
In this short and emotive hit piece Duffy uses an excerpt from a recent lecture given by Clive Williams, Adjunct Professor at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University (ANU), to provide the spin. Professor Williams lays out an overview of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories as part of his lecture called "Terrorism Conspiracy Theories and the 1978 Sydney Hilton bombings, Lockerbie, 9/11 and the London 7/7 bombings". This lecture will be played in full on Radio National's "Big Ideas" on Sunday 18th April at 5pm and is available in podcast at the ABC. In this excerpt Williams skims over the evidence of an alternate "conspiracy", citing the predictable "straw man" arguments and loose journalistic attempts to look at the evidence, using the Discovery Channel's laughable documentary, "9/11: Science and Conspiracy" as a reference. Ironically, Williams uses these absurdities ignorantly in his attempt to debunk the experts who are actually qualified to comment on such matters, and -- surprise, surprise -- he also conveniently forgets to mention them. In a desperate attempt to make sense of his "reality", Williams rolls out the blind academics' favourite proof that 9/11 was just as we were told -- yes, it's the argument that the government is, without doubt, just too damn incompetent to pull off such a complicated plan! Unfortunately, this so-called educator misses the irony in the stark "official reality" that 19 poorly trained and ill-equipped Arab hijackers did pull it off!
Duffy introduces this crude attempt at journalism as follows:
"Just who was responsible for the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington? Was it Osama Bin Laden or are there other contenders? Perhaps it was rogue government agents operating with the tacit support of an equally shadowy group of industrialists. Or maybe it was revenge-seeking aliens who escaped from area 51."
For readers who wish to listen to Duffy's Counterpoint piece, "Terrorism and Conspiracy Theories", it can be found here: www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2010/2870592.htm
The fact that no criminal investigation of this mass murder has ever been carried out and those murdered included ten Australians is apparently of no consequence to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, as they continue to fail to report on the real 9/11 investigative news. I and many thousands of other Australians continue to wonder why we have not heard from our taxpayer-funded news service about the discovery of nanothermite in the dust by a team of international scientists, or about the demands of more than one thousand Architecture and Engineering Professionals for a new investigation into the building collapses. It is now clearly proven for those who care to look that without added energy from explosives, the three building collapses on 9/11 defy both logic and Newton's Laws of Motion. To the great shame of "our" ABC, its viewers and listeners are without a clue of this fact based on what their so-called journalists have produced to date.
A case can now be clearly made that the ABC is failing in its fiduciary duty to the Australian public and is actively supporting the cover-up of the events of 9/11. This is amply demonstrated with this simple listing of some of the important events they have failed to report on in Australia:
- The attendance of Councillor Yukihisa Fujita, Director of the Japanese Parliamentary Committee for Foreign Affairs and Defence, to a conference in March 2008 in Sydney where he spoke questioning the 9/11 events and their use as a pretext to war
- Lectures made by Senior Architecture Lecturer Dr David Leifer at Sydney University, demonstrating the official version of the Towers' Collapse provably false in 2008 and in 2009
- The discovery of an explosive incendiary nanothermite in the dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe in 2009, by a team of international scientists including Australian Doctor of Chemistry, Frank Legge (see www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM)
- The recent milestone of "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" reaching 1,000 professional members including 40 Structural Engineers, one being an Australian Building Inspector, Paul Mason (see www.AE911Truth.org)
It is probably most disturbing for us who care, however, that the ABC has never reported to the Australian public that the 9/11 victims' families are demanding a new investigation and have broad support by the majority of the world's population in questioning the official 9/11 "conspiracy theory". Please, Mr Duffy and Mr Williams -- please think again and consider that maybe it is you that are in need of a "reality check"?
Now, if one wished to make an excuse for the ABC, that perhaps they have not been made aware of these "realities", I will list what I personally know they have received from the Australian public to date:
- Thousands of e-mails have been sent including links to documents and information about the truth of 9/11
- Hundreds of complaints have been made to our ABC about a lack of coverage of evidence showing the official 9/11 story is false; many of those have gone all the way to the Board
- Many press releases have been sent to them about events questioning 9/11 within Australia and the rest of the world, like the recent "Hard Evidence Tour" (see www.thehardevidence.com)
- Many invitations have been given to meet and discuss evidence with academics and researchers questioning 9/11
- On no fewer than four separate occasions protests have been held at the ABC's Head Office and studios in Sydney where documents and DVDs have been hand-delivered to staff and journalists over many hours. At one recent protest American Architect Richard Gage, AIA, founder of www.AE911Truth.org, made himself available for interview in person, but alas, the ABC could not even send a junior reporter to investigate.
Unfortunately for us, the harsh reality of the ABC's failure to report the news about 9/11 explosive evidence is that the victims' families continue to suffer without closure and without justice, while wars in their name continue without any clear justification other than the official myth of 9/11.
Mr. Duffy and Mr. Williams, I will remind you, Sirs, that without truth there can be no justice and without justice there will never be peace on this Earth. Shame on you and the ABC. You are a disgrace to this great nation and to the field of journalism!
Complaints may be made to the ABC here: www.abc.net.au/contact/complain.htm
[Photo source: (Sourcewatch.org])
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of an internet forum
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a ‘uncontrolled forum.’
Technique #1 - ‘FORUM SLIDING’
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by ‘forum sliding.’ In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to ‘age.’ Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a ‘forum slide.’ The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a ‘forum slide’ and ‘flush’ the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then ‘replying’ to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting ‘slides’ down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - ‘CONSENSUS CRACKING’
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at *********) is ‘consensus cracking.’ To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger ‘evidence’ or disinformation in your favour is slowly ‘seeded in.’ Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely be dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then ‘abort’ the consensus cracking by initiating a ‘forum slide.’
Technique #3 - ‘TOPIC DILUTION’
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a ‘gossip mode.’ In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to ‘drive in the wedge.’ By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - ‘INFORMATION COLLECTION’
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment an ‘I show you mine so show me yours’ posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your ‘favorite weapon’ and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favorite ‘technique of operation.’ From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - ‘ANGER TROLLING’
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing their powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to ‘stage’ a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to ‘lead’ the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you ‘do not care what the authorities think!!’ inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - ‘GAINING FULL CONTROL’
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavorable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ‘ultimate victory’ as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a ‘honey pot’ gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precedence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share them with HQ.
Free speech activists hit the streets of Sydney's CBD
On 1st April 2010 a coalition of free speech activists took to the streets of Sydney's CBD to protest the impending "Mandatory" ISP Filter which has been likened to repressive censorship regimes in China, Iran and North Korea.
Truth News Radio Australia was there to track the progess and report on the gagged protesters as they wound their way through Sydney's busy streets during rush hour.
The protest was also reported by itnews.com.au:
Find out more about the ISP filter and other important issues that affect your life at:
Find out what you can do to help at: