America Freedom to Fascism
A must see film ivestigating the
Validity of tax law and how
theyer inforced
Movie:1
Loose Change 2nd Edition
play movie>
Movie:2
Everybodys Gotta Learn Somtime
play movie>
Movie:1
Improbable Collapse
play movie>
Improbable Collapse
Improbable collapse
9/11 Mystery's
An excellent forensic report on WTC
Uncovered
The Whole Truth about Why
America's at war with Iraq
The Corporation
A must see film about the corporate
entity
JFK
Who Killed President John F Kennedy
?
& How was America Deceived?
Aaron Russo: The Architecture of the
Prison Planet
Aaron Russo interviewed by Alex
Jones
talks about the federal reserve
Ed Brown VS IRS
Join Ed as he stands up against
tyranny and injustice of the IRS
Meet Your Meat
A short film by PETA a must for
everyone to witness
Disclaimer;
News Links News is a non profit alternative
news linking service.
Dedicated to presenting news articles  with a
different  point of view than the mainstream
network news media gives on politics and
world events.
Although Rink A Dink Productions and the
editors try to find  the most truthful and
accurate  news information, Free of corporate
bias and influence.
We cannot be responsible for the accuracy of
all content.

Top Of List
Movies
Important Links
EVIDENCE;
911 Ripple Effect
http://www.911rippleeffect.com/
The film that's being hailed as the most
professionally produced and up to date
9/11 video ever made... See it for free or
buy it on DVD. 911 Ripple Effect
champions a very powerful message;
backed by expert examination of video
evidence and packaged in an
imaginative and captivating production
that will keep you on the edge of your
seats. An absolute must see!
Prod. & Written by William Lewis & Dave
vonKleist
1 hr 26 min     WATCH IT NOW FREE
New Video:                       
    
Alex Jones / ENDGAME
full version of the newest and best film
yet from Alex Jones. Watch it NOW! Click
Here!
More On 9/11      Click Here!
Movie Links, Articles, Web Links
and Evidence  
ENRON - THE SMOKIN'
CANNON OF 9/11?
PART 1 of 2 By: Devvy January 16, 2006

NewsWithViews.com
The information below represents the content of
e-mails sent by a gentleman who has done a lot of
research on Enron and possible connections to
9/11 to a member of Congress. I have received
permission to share this information without
disclosing his identity; please feel free to forward.
January 5, 2006
Today it was reported on CNNMoney.com that
former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling tried to sell 200,000
shares of Enron stock on Sept. 6, 2001.
Sept. 6 is but a few days prior to 9/11.
More importantly, Sept. 6 is only 1 day prior to
Friday, Sept. 7 (2001).
Sept. 7 is very important in context and substance,
because on this day, the October Fed Funds
Futures (which is a hedge mechanism for interest
rates) as mentioned before, exploded upward, and
made new seasonal/contract highs.
This portended that such would continue, and
interest rates would go sharply down (there is an
inverse correlation; i.e. if fed funds futures go up,
interest rates go down and vice-versa). This is
exactly what happened, and is strongly indicative
that someone(s) in the Federal Reserve knew the
attacks against America were in the offing.
Jeff Skilling was also on the Houston branch of the
Dallas Federal Reserve Board. All of this simply
further substantiates the fact that the "smoking
cannon" of 9/11 is Enron. As a corollary of this, the
purported off sheet "debts" of Enron, as also stated
previously, were in fact income, generated in large
part through "Federal" Reserve bank trading
programs, which 9/11, I believe was orchestrated to
try to cover-up and keep Enron from imploding by
evil doers.

Please share with them too, if you will, the other
backdrop communiqués to you to enlighten them
about the cold reality of this, particularly one
Thomas E. (Enron) White.

White, if you recall, came from the top hierarchy of
the Pentagon, went to work for many years at
Enron, in charge of their trading department where
all the financial games were largely played, in the
first half of 2001 left Enron to become Army
Secretary. (Isn't it most interesting that he headed
the most corrupt component of Enron but was not
charged with anything?)

One week after 9/11 letters were sent to dominant
media entities about Anthrax. White then wore
another hat as head of Homeland Security. Do you
remember the great fear about Anthrax then? Not
knowing all of this, I faxed to the NY Times, the
Pentagon, and Ted Koppell of ABC News in
Washington a scientific narrative as to how Anthrax
could quickly be negated by low cost Ozone (O3)
machines.  Read Full Story
EVIDENCE/PROOF
9/11 Ripple Effect
Full Version  Watch Now  
    “911 Ripple Effect” presents
    evidence and information about
    images shown to the world that
    were described to us by the
    media, but the twist is, these
    very images do not support the
    “official” story the media and
    government continue to tell.  
    Even these stories have
    changed to fit the terrorist
-riddled version of tragedy in the United States.
VonKleist and Lewis provide some
fairly damning reports, especially by Pentagon
Correspondent Jamie McIntyre of CNN, Marc
Birnbach of FOX News, and a reporter for the
BBC, that are in direct conflict with the “official
versions.  McIntyre, nearly five years later, is
heard trying to explain away statements he made
during live, first coverage broadcasts, Birnbach
disappeared from FOX News for several years,
and has now returned, and the BBC reported the
collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 nearly
twenty minutes earlier than the actual collapse.
WATCH IT NOW FREE!
Get more information on 9/11. Click here!
Recommended Links
9/11 Truth Websites

Other 9/11 Skeptic Activist
/ Movement Websites
Mainstream Non-
Governmental Official 9/11
Websites

9/11 Skeptic Dailies          
9/11 Skeptic Weeklies

Governmental ~
United States of America
A whistleblower that was on a team
working for Silverstein Group in 2002 has
made public an extensive set of detailed
architectural drawings of the World Trade
Center, that prove beyond any doubt that
the official reports into the collapse of the
towers misrepresented their construction.













The documents were passed to physics Professor
Steven Jones, formerly of Brigham Young
University, who has done extensive research into
the collapse of the buildings and contends that
explosives were used to bring them down.

Little is known about the identity of the
whistleblower at this point, however the blueprints
provided consist of 261 drawings included detailed
plans for the North Tower (WTC 1), the World
Trade Center foundation and basement, and the
TV mast on top of the North Tower.

Most of the drawings can be viewed here.

The blueprints, unlike those of any other publicly
funded building, have been withheld from public
view since the 9/11 attacks without explanation
and were even unavailable for viewing by the team
of engineers from the American Society of Civil
Engineers, who were assembled to investigate the
collapses by FEMA, until they had signed legal
documents which bound them to secrecy and
demanded that they never use the information
against the buildings' owners as part of a lawsuit.

The website 911research.wtc7.net, one of the
sites at the forefront of independent investigation
into 9/11 for years now, states:

The detailed architectural drawings make clear
what official reports have apparently attempted to
hide: that the Twin Towers had massive core
columns, and those columns ran most of the
height of each Tower before transitioning to
columns with smaller cross-sections.

Both of the government-sponsored engineering
studies of the Twin Towers' "collapses" -- FEMA's
and NIST's -- are highly misleading about the core
structures. Neither Report discloses dimensions
for core columns -- dimensions that are clearly
evident in the architectural drawings. Both Reports
use a variety of techniques seemingly designed to
minimize the strength of the cores or to conceal
their structural role entirely.

FEMA, in its explanation of the collapses, stated:

As the floors collapsed, this left tall freestanding
portions of the exterior wall and possibly central
core columns. As the unsupported height of these
freestanding exterior wall elements increased, they
buckled at the bolted column splice connections,
and also collapsed.

The blueprints show that FEMA's report was
inaccurate in stating that core columns were
"freestanding" when in fact large horizontal beams
cross-connected the core columns in a three-
dimensional matrix of steel.

The NIST report into the collapses has also been
proven inaccurate by the blueprints as it has
implied that the only the corner columns were
"massive" and that the core columns decreased in
size in the higher stories when, in fact, the sixteen
columns on the long faces of the cores shared the
same dimensions for most of each Tower's height.

These omitted and distorted facts serve to render
the official reports extremely questionable. It
seems that facts were being tweaked in order to
get closer to an explanation for the collapses.
Even then the reports both failed to provide
adequate explanations of why the buildings fell.

The buildings more or less fell into their own
footprints, which is something that normally takes
weeks of expert planning when a building is
intentionally demolished and there are only a few
companies on the planet that can do it.

Within each trade tower there were 47 steel
columns at the core and 240 perimeter steel
beams. 287 steel-columns in total. According to
the official story, random spread out fires on
different floors caused all these columns to totally
collapse at the same time and at a free fall speed,
with no resistance from undamaged parts of the
structure.

Professor Steven Jones points out that the total
annihilation of the building, core columns and all,
defies the laws of physics unless it was artificially
exploded:



















"Where is the delay that must be expected due to
conservation of momentum – one of the
foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-
falling floors strike lower floors – and intact steel
support columns – the fall must be significantly
impeded by the impacted mass. If the central
support columns remained standing, then the
effective resistive mass would be less, but this is
not the case – somehow the enormous support
columns failed/disintegrated along with the falling
floor pans."

Below is an examination of the official
reports in more detail.

The Official Explanation of the collapses of
the Trade Towers and Building 7

The official explanation says that the towers
collapsed because of the combined effect of the
impact of the airplanes and the resulting fires. The
report put out by FEMA said: “The structural
damage sustained by each tower from the impact,
combined with the ensuing fires, resulted in the
total collapse of each building".

And building 7's collapse according to FEMA was
also due to fire, however FEMA could not give
specific details:

"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they
caused the building to collapse [“official theory”]
remain unknown at this time. Although the total
diesel fuel on the premises contained massive
potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/damage-
caused collapse] has only a low probability of
occurrence. Further research, investigation, and
analyses are needed to resolve this issue."

FEMA is not an investigative agency, but it was
entrusted with the sole responsibility for
investigating the collapses. It began to coordinate
the destruction of the evidence almost
immediately. The structural steel was quickly
removed and loaded on ships for transport to blast
furnaces in India and China. Meanwhile, FEMA's
investigation of the collapses consisted of
assembling a group of volunteer investigators from
the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE),
dubbed the Building Performance Assessment
Team (BPAT). The group was headed by W. Gene
Corley, a structural engineer from Chicago who
led the investigation of the bombing of the Alfred
P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

FEMA's investigation of one of the worst and most
pivotal events in history was farcical:

*
No independent investigation was funded: FEMA
allocated $600,000 for the BPAT's study, which
included the cost of printing their report.
*
Except for an early "tourist trip", The BPAT
volunteers were barred from Ground Zero.
*
They did not see a single piece of steel until
almost a month after the disaster.
*
They had to guess the original locations of the few
pieces of steel they saw.
*
They collected 150 pieces of steel for further
study (out of millions of pieces).
*
Their report, which called for "further investigation
and analysis", was published after Ground Zero
had been scrubbed.

A key facet of the FEMA report on the towers'
collapse was the pancaking floors theory, whereby
each floor successively gave way due to buckled
columns and the weight from above. This theory
has since been roundly dismissed as it totally
ignores the fact that the building's central core
columns even existed and also ignores the
toppling effect witnessed during the collapse of the
South Tower and the explosive pulverizing of all
materials into fine powder.

NIST's Investigation

It was not until long after the Ground Zero clean-
up was completed that an investigation with a multi-
million dollar budget began: NIST's 'Federal
Building and Fire Safety Investigation' was funded
with an initial budget of $16 million.

Where as the FEMA investigation in
understanding the Collapse of the World Trade
Center could be chalked up as a farce, the NIST's
investigation cannot. NIST's results strongly
indicate a cover-up. NIST's Final Report on the
Twin Towers shows that:

*
NIST avoids describing, let alone explaining, the
"collapse" of each Tower after they were "poised
for collapse." Thus, NIST avoids answering the
question their investigation was tasked with
answering: how did the Towers collapse?
*
NIST describes the Twin Towers without reference
to the engineering history of steel-framed
buildings, and separates its analysis of WTC
Building 7 into a separate report. By treating them
in isolation, NIST hides just how anomalous the
alleged collapses of the buildings are.
*
NIST avoids disclosing the evidence sulfidation
documented in Appendix C of the FEMA's Building
Performance Study.This unexplained phenomenon
was described by the New York Times as "perhaps
the deepest mystery uncovered in the
investigation."
*
NIST has refused to publish the computer models
that its report imply show how the fires in the
Towers led to "collapse initiation".

The report explains the collapse of both towers
with the following sentence:

"The change in potential energy due to downward
movement of building mass above the buckled
columns exceeded the strain energy that could
have been absorbed by the structure. Global
collapse then ensued."

So NIST promulgates a theory of "progressive
collapse" - ie once the top started coming down,
the whole lot came down with it, even the
undamaged sections of the building.














NIST admits that it didn't even attempt to model
the undamaged portions of the building and only
modeled a portion of each tower in any detail -- its
"global floor model" which consisted of "several
stories below the impact area to the top of the
structure." Thus the structurally intact floors 1-91
of WTC 1 and floors 1-77 of WTC 2 were excluded
from the so called "global" models of the towers.
NIST provides no evidence that its model even
predicted "collapse initiation".

The excellent research website www.911review.
com, which everyone should visit, succinctly sums
up the cover up perpetrated by the NIST report:

In summary: The reports by NIST say nothing
about how -- and if! -- the collapse was able to
progress through dozens and dozens of
structurally intact floors without being stopped. If
no external energy was available e.g. in the form
of explosives, this would have been the
opportunity to show that no such energy was
needed. On the other hand, if some unaccounted-
for energy broke the supporting structures
enabling the collapse to progress with the speed it
did, there would have been many good reasons
not to try to model the impossible, ie. a purely
gravitation-driven collapse. Stopping the analysis
early enough also saves NIST from trying to
explain the symmetrically of the collapses (despite
non-symmetrical impact damage and fires), the
almost complete pulverization of non-metallic
materials as well as the extremely hot spots in the
rubble. These remain as inexplicable by the official
story as they have ever been.

Despite calls from leading structural and fire
engineers, and despite the fact that they
published models of the plane impacts, NIST has
refused to publish visual simulations from its
computer models of the collapses.

In an even more startling admission in its own
report, NIST reveals that it "adjusted the input" of
variables in tests beyond the visual evidence of
what actually happened in order to save its own
hypothesis:

"The more severe case (which became Case B for
WTC 1 and Case D for WTC 2) was used for the
global analysis of each tower. Complete sets of
simulations were then performed for Cases B and
D. To the extent that the simulations deviated from
the photographic evidence or eyewitness reports
[e.g., complete collapse occurred], the
investigators adjusted the input, but only within the
range of physical reality. Thus, for instance,…the
pulling forces on the perimeter columns by the
sagging floors were adjusted..." (NIST, 2005, p.
142)

NIST simply "discarded" realistic tests based on
the empirical data because they did not cause the
buildings to collapse.

If this is not indicative of a cover up then what is?
The investigation is the wrong way round, NIST
has already decided what happened and is
manufacturing data to prove it!

Story from www.prisonplanet,com
9/11 Birth Of Treason
This stunning new documentary provides the
most comprehensive view of the evidence
which proves 9/11 was an inside job.
9/11: Press for Truth   Released September
8th; a video from the families who fought to
create The 9/11 Commission -- and succeeded
More Ground Zero Heroes
On The Record: Building 7
Was Deliberately Brought
Down  







Testimony of multiple rescue personnel that they
were told Building 7 was going to be imploded
means FEMA, NIST, Silverstein Properties and
federal government all lied, revelations demand
immediate grand jury inquiry into insurance fraud,
vindicates call for new independent 9/11
investigation.    Continued
17 Questions About 9/11

1. Don't all the high-level officials agree on what
happened on 9/11?

No. Numerous present and former high-level
military leaders and politicians have questioned the
administration's version of 9/11.

2. Isn't 9/11 a partisan political issue, where
extremists in one party are simply trying to smear
the other party for political gain?

No, credible people from across the political
spectrum question 9/11, including prominent
conservatives, prominent liberals, and prominent
centrists.

3. Isn't it disrespectful to the victims of 9/11 and
their families to question the events of that day?

No. Many of the families of the victims question the
official story and are demanding that the truth be
disclosed. The same is true of many dying heroes -
the first responders who worked tirelessly to save
lives on and after 9/11 - and are soon to become
victims of the 9/11 attacks themselves. See this
article.

4. Isn't it clear that Muslims carried out 9/11, and
the war on terror is a clash of civilizations and
religions? Therefore, isn't 9/11 skepticism harmful
to our faith?

Actually, 9/11 truth is a vital issue for all people of
faith. That is why prominent Christian theologians
state that 9/11 was an inside job, and prominent
Jewish scholars and rabbis say that uncovering the
truth of 9/11 has the power to bring positive, lasting
change to our nation and to our world.

5. Isn't this kind of thinking really a psychological
problem? And isn't it promoted by anti-semites?

Not at all. Some very prominent psychologists
question the government's version of 9/11, as do
many people of Jewish faith.

6. Aren't conspiracy theories anti-American, and
isn't all the questioning of 9/11 part of what's wrong
with America today?

Questioning our government is part of what it
means to be a patriot and to love your country.
People who question 9/11 are patriots who love
their country.

7. Doesn't questioning 9/11 distract from much
more important issues facing America today?

On the contrary, it is one of the very most important
issues facing our country, and is closely connected
with other problems we face.

8. But the government would NEVER hurt its own
people. At least not intentionally.

Actually, the U.S. government -- and many other
Western governments -- have done so before.
Initially, the Joint Chiefs of Staff actually approved a
plan to carry out terrorist attacks and kill U.S.
citizens and blame it on Cuba, as a justification for
invading Cuba. And a government informant has
stated that he tried to stop the 1993 World Trade
Center bombing, but that the FBI intentionally let
the bombing happen . There are many other
examples of other governments killing their own
people for political gain, and the U.S. government
doing killing its own as well.

As additional examples of the U.S. government
letting U.S. citizens die based upon deceptions,
many people breathed in highly toxic dust near
ground zero, after the government knowingly
misrepresented the risk, going as far as
discouraging first responders from wearing masks.
The U.S. government also misled the American
people into the Iraqi war, causing thousands of
American deaths.

9. Terrorists crashing planes into the World Trade
Center and Pentagon was wholly unexpected in
2001, wasn't it?

No, it was not unexpected.

10. But there is always confusion in any battle
situation. Wasn't it the "fog of war" which prevented
a successful response to the 9/11 attacks?

It was not the fog of war. Instead, it was the multiple
war games, including hijack exercises involving real
planes, and the injection of fake radar blips onto air
traffic controller's screens which prevented the
good people in the military from stopping the
attacks from succeeding against their targets in
New York and at the Pentagon.

11. Wouldn't a huge conspiracy involving
thousands of people have been necessary to carry
out 9/11, and wouldn't someone have spilled the
beans by now if there really was a conspiracy?

Not necessarily. In fact, a small handful of people
could have pulled it off.

12. Let's get back to the government's failure to
stopping or intercepting the attacks. If the U.S.
government wasn't perfect in stoping the 9/11
attacks, wasn't it due to a series of innocent
mistakes or -- at the very worst -- incompetence?

Initially, the incompetence argument doesn't really
pan out, and appearances may be deceiving. And
there are many examples of the U.S. faking
intelligence in order to promote its political goals.

Moreover, the government has not acted like it is
trying to close vulnerabilities or fix problems which
supposedly were unforeseeable before 9/11. Why
wouldn't such vulnerabilities be corrected if they
were the real cause of 9/11?

And there has been a clear government cover-up
of the facts of 9/11. Why would the government
work so hard to cover up the true facts of 9/11,
going so far as to repeatedly misrepresent the facts
and change its story, if incompetence was the only
problem with the official story?

And, apparently, fake evidence was planted to
implicate certain people for 9/11. Why would fake
evidence be needed if the offical was true? Do
innocent people plant fake evidence?

13. Didn't a government agency come clean about
their mistaken timeline, solving the whole 9/11
"conspiracy" once and for all?

Norad's newest "confession" is just the latest of
multiple, completely conflicting versions of what
happened on 9/11 (also listen to this interview).

Moreover, the latest statements by the military
simply attempt to scapegoat one government
agency, since the previous attempts to blame other
agencies made no sense.

14. Isn't talk about "demolition" of the Twin Towers
just a crazy theory by a couple of nutty people?

In fact, a lot of credible eyewitness testimony
supports this theory, and more and more credible
experts are discussing this theory every day.

15. But no one could have planted all of the
explosives needed to bring down the Twin Towers
without people noticing, right?

No, that is not true.

16. If rogue elements within the U.S. government
did cause 9/11, why would they have used bombs
to bring down the Twin Towers, when crashing
planes into the buildings would have been sufficient
to act as a "Pearl Harbor" type justification for war?

Apparently, for its shock and awe effect, which
made for a very overwhelmed, afraid, and thus
compliant population.

17. I've heard claims made by the so-called "9/11
Truth Movement" which have turned out to be false.
Doesn't that invalidate the whole 9/11 thing?

No, for two reasons. First, there are so many lines
of evidence which overwhelmingly prove that 9/11
was an inside job, that even if one or two theories
are disproven, the basic thesis still stands.

Moreover, there are some people who are simply
sloppy in their thinking, and who throw out
unfounded theories which do not stand up to
scrutiny. In addition, there are, unfortunately,
disruptive people who are working hard to make
crazy claims to intentionally discredit the movement.
This is a traditional tactic for undermining those
who question the government.

Courtesy of  ROGUEGOVERNMENT.COM
Articals
Demonstratio
n of Support
for Rosie
O'Donnell
This
Wednesday
at ABC
Studios
Read Story
Here!
Smoke did Not
(Entirely) Come from
WTC 7
Defenders of the official story about the collapse
of WTC 7 often show photographs of the South
side of the building to bolster the claim that raging
fires caused building 7 to collapse
See Pictures Here!