The 9/11 Omission and the NIST Reports are well-known frauds. Many of the Sub-Contractors NIST employed in order to create their report were precisely those who were most likely to have been involved in 9/11 itself.

Under the US Constitution, Senator McCain is disqualified from any US Presidency.

In an attempt to standardise US Naturalisation, the 1790 Naturalisation Act came into force for 5 years. It contained a goof, which allowed citizens born outside the State boundaries to become President.

Within those 5 years this goof was realised, and so the 1795 Naturalisation Act was brought in to replace the 1790 Act. (Note: To REPLACE, not AMEND).

The current flavour of the month is that 'nukes' dunnit. I'm on record (here) as saying "Maybe, but I'm not convinced". I see other explanations perfectly possible for 'forensics' of the aftermath. And, even those forensics for which 'nukes' seem to be the logical conclusion, does not mean to say (a) The forensics aren't faked and/or (b) That there is no other technological explanation.

I repeat - as I have said elsewhere- To hang one's hat on nukes is shaky ground, and not even necessary

I make no claim to be particularly "good" at Research. There are (especially) ladies, who post here, who are far better at this than I will ever be. (My acid tongue is better at "criticism", which will come as no surprise, I'm sure)

What I propose may be a wild goose chase and, if that is the case, I can only say "Sorry. It was an idea".

The idea is that there are 'plane makers', and there must be the opposite: i.e. 'plane breakers' (dismantlers). There must be companies who make their living by dismantling aircraft (and have the tools & equipment to do that job).

This is a bit of a deviation from 9/11 Research, but I think it is worthwhile posting. For the simple reason that it contains The Truth, and is essential knowledge.

In this piece, by a so-called "professional" Douglass K Daniel, there is a (fairly obvious) circular argument.

This was submitted by TheSalGirl on 13th August, 2007:

http://www.911researchers.com/node/917

While, on the one hand, the points raised by the "Anonymous Physicist" are reasonble, he makes a number of (I think) serious omissions.

The characteristics of a nuclear explosion are:

(1) Ball of Fire (fireball) generally reaching a height dependent on the explosive yield.

(2) Brilliant flash of light that can cause midnight to appear as 'noonday'.

(3) Wilson Condensation Cloud as back-pressure causes atmospheric humidity to condense into water.

This year my friend Louise gave me the best Christmas Present I have ever had.

It was a present that should be shared, and so I pass it on to you, below.

It is a series of approximately 10 minute (or so) audio recordings made in about 1967. Back in 1967 Myron Fagan already knew what we now know.

I've just noticed the new link, under "9/11 Researchers" (and where it goes!).

Suggestion to anyone who hasn't: Check it out!

Actually you probably won't.

... and doesn't get any reply.

Almost every e-mail I send now bounces back.

This is almost certainly due to Fred Burks.

He always signs off saying he is "deeply committed to what's best ... yada ... yada ...".

I quoted him saying he was "deeply committed", and told him that - if there was any justice in the world - he would be "deeply committed" one day, along with his buddy Steven Jones.

I guess he took umbridge, and reported me as a spammer.

Some people have just got no sense of humour.