Friday, March 31, 2006
David Ray Griffin at Grand Lake Theater
Audio download of his excellent speech 9/11:The Myth & The Reality. Transcript available here.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Monday, March 20, 2006
Did the Towers Explode?
As we mentioned, no steel-framed building had ever collapsed due to fire. The reverse truth is that every previous total collapse was due to a controlled demolition. The Twin Towers, like WTC-7, exhibited all of the features of a controlled demolition:
1) Sudden onset. Buildings are still, then suddenly and violently the collapse starts. As we've established, the fires were neither intense, extensive nor long-lasting. Heated steel does not suddenly break, it would have noticeably bent. No steel-framed building had ever even bent due to fire.
2) Straight down, symmetric collapse. Again the only way to accomplish this is for the support columns to fail simultaneously. The diffuse, cool-burning fires could not have caused this.
3) Near free-fall speed. By the Law of Momentum Conservation the floors would decelerate at every collision so had there been a pancake collapse the Towers would have fallen at free-fall speed. Since the Towers were exploded from the top down their decent depended upon the detonation timing. Free-fall wasn't necessary although it still came pretty close.
4) Total collapse. As we've shown a pancake collapse could not account for this. Again, prior to, and after 9/11 the only total collapses of steel-framed buildings were achieved through controlled demolitions.
5) Sliced steel. The only way for the buildings to come straight down was to slice through the vertical support columns. Only explosives could have shredded the steel. The disappearance of the cores is especially troublesome for the official story. That's why they've been so misrepresented in so many instances. The 9/11 went furthest by actually denying they even existed, calling the core a "hollow shaft with elevators."
6) Pulverization of concrete and non-metallic material. Virtually all of the concrete and non-metallic materials were pulverized into a fine talc-like powder throughout the collapse. The finer the material, the greater the energy required. According to researcher Jeff King, to produce this fine dust requires the breaking of chemical bonds. The physical process of slabs milling or grinding could not account for this pulverization.
7) Horizontal ejections. What besides explosives, could explain the horizontal ejections of the heavy steel columns in all directions at distances of up to 500 ft?
8) Dust clouds Jim Hoffman calculated the heat required to cause the expansion of the huge dust clouds,which were up to 5 times the volume of the building, to be 10 times the gravitational potential energy of the buildings. This implies another energy source.
9) Plumes or squibs of smoke. Horizontal ejections of white-grey smoke are seen below the collapsing areas. The location of the plumes correspond to the location of the core columns.
10) Molten metal in the basements and thermal hot spots. There were numerous accounts of molten metal buried under the rubble. Intense fires persisted for months. It takes temperatures of approximately 5200 degrees F to liquefy metal. Could the energy from the fallen building have caused this? No. There would not be enough directed energy as the concrete had been pulverized to powder before it hit the ground and steel beams had been ejected in all directions. Most of the building fell outside of it's footprint.
ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW
The fall of the Towers exhibited all the of features of a controlled demolition. Neither fires nor a pancake collapse could account for the total collapse of the buildings. Whereas WTC-7 was brought down by a classic bottom-up implosion The Towers were felled by a top-down explosion. Steel columns were ejected horizontally and virtually all of the concrete and non-metallic material was turned to powder before it hit the ground. The Twin Towers did not "collapse," they were SYSTEMATICALLY BLOWN UP.
The physical evidence is supported by survivor and eyewitness accounts. Policeman, firefighters, reporters and citizens spoke of bombs and huge explosions they saw and felt. In August of 2005 the 9/11 oral histories recorded by the Fire Department of New York were released. Many can be read in David Ray Griffin's paper Explosive Testimony. More eyewitness accounts excerpted from probably the book best book written on 9/11, Webster Tarpley's "9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA."
Recommended for additional reading:
Jim Hoffman's 9/11 Research.
Wing TV's "9/11 on Trial"
Steven Jones paper "Why Indeed Did The WTC Buildings Collapse?"
David Ray Griffin "The Destruction on the World Trade Center:" Why the Official Cannot Be True"
1) Sudden onset. Buildings are still, then suddenly and violently the collapse starts. As we've established, the fires were neither intense, extensive nor long-lasting. Heated steel does not suddenly break, it would have noticeably bent. No steel-framed building had ever even bent due to fire.
2) Straight down, symmetric collapse. Again the only way to accomplish this is for the support columns to fail simultaneously. The diffuse, cool-burning fires could not have caused this.
3) Near free-fall speed. By the Law of Momentum Conservation the floors would decelerate at every collision so had there been a pancake collapse the Towers would have fallen at free-fall speed. Since the Towers were exploded from the top down their decent depended upon the detonation timing. Free-fall wasn't necessary although it still came pretty close.
4) Total collapse. As we've shown a pancake collapse could not account for this. Again, prior to, and after 9/11 the only total collapses of steel-framed buildings were achieved through controlled demolitions.
5) Sliced steel. The only way for the buildings to come straight down was to slice through the vertical support columns. Only explosives could have shredded the steel. The disappearance of the cores is especially troublesome for the official story. That's why they've been so misrepresented in so many instances. The 9/11 went furthest by actually denying they even existed, calling the core a "hollow shaft with elevators."
6) Pulverization of concrete and non-metallic material. Virtually all of the concrete and non-metallic materials were pulverized into a fine talc-like powder throughout the collapse. The finer the material, the greater the energy required. According to researcher Jeff King, to produce this fine dust requires the breaking of chemical bonds. The physical process of slabs milling or grinding could not account for this pulverization.
7) Horizontal ejections. What besides explosives, could explain the horizontal ejections of the heavy steel columns in all directions at distances of up to 500 ft?
8) Dust clouds Jim Hoffman calculated the heat required to cause the expansion of the huge dust clouds,which were up to 5 times the volume of the building, to be 10 times the gravitational potential energy of the buildings. This implies another energy source.
9) Plumes or squibs of smoke. Horizontal ejections of white-grey smoke are seen below the collapsing areas. The location of the plumes correspond to the location of the core columns.
10) Molten metal in the basements and thermal hot spots. There were numerous accounts of molten metal buried under the rubble. Intense fires persisted for months. It takes temperatures of approximately 5200 degrees F to liquefy metal. Could the energy from the fallen building have caused this? No. There would not be enough directed energy as the concrete had been pulverized to powder before it hit the ground and steel beams had been ejected in all directions. Most of the building fell outside of it's footprint.
ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW
The fall of the Towers exhibited all the of features of a controlled demolition. Neither fires nor a pancake collapse could account for the total collapse of the buildings. Whereas WTC-7 was brought down by a classic bottom-up implosion The Towers were felled by a top-down explosion. Steel columns were ejected horizontally and virtually all of the concrete and non-metallic material was turned to powder before it hit the ground. The Twin Towers did not "collapse," they were SYSTEMATICALLY BLOWN UP.
The physical evidence is supported by survivor and eyewitness accounts. Policeman, firefighters, reporters and citizens spoke of bombs and huge explosions they saw and felt. In August of 2005 the 9/11 oral histories recorded by the Fire Department of New York were released. Many can be read in David Ray Griffin's paper Explosive Testimony. More eyewitness accounts excerpted from probably the book best book written on 9/11, Webster Tarpley's "9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA."
Recommended for additional reading:
Jim Hoffman's 9/11 Research.
Wing TV's "9/11 on Trial"
Steven Jones paper "Why Indeed Did The WTC Buildings Collapse?"
David Ray Griffin "The Destruction on the World Trade Center:" Why the Official Cannot Be True"
The Fall of the Towers (Above all else, believe the Party...)
I believe we've shown beyond any reasonable doubt that WTC-7 was brought down by a controlled demolition. Now let's look at the collapses of the Towers. We'll break our study down in sections - we'll look at the plane impact, the heat of the fires and the official theories regarding the collapses. If you don't need or care to read the background material provided you can skip down to "ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW."
Plane Impact
What role did the planes impact have in the collapse of the Towers? According to MIT professor of material engineering Thomas Eagar the plane impact was insignificant because "the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant [Towers were designed to handle 5 times normal load] structure." Hyman Brown, construction manager for the Twin Towers stated the Towers were over-designed to withstand almost anything, including hurricanes...and an airplane hitting [them]."( Bollyn: American Free Press)
The Towers were designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707(comparable to a Boeing 767), the largest aircraft at the time. According to Leslie Robertson, the project's structural engineer, the Towers "could probably sustain multiple impacts of jet airliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door, this intense grid, and the plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting." (Brett;whatreallyhappened.com)
According to the NIST report loads were increases by 25% some areas of the building and reduced by 20% in others. The Towers were actually designed to tolerate load increases of 2000% so the increased load is far below what would cause structural failure. NIST claims the most of the fireproofing was dislodged by the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires caused the buildings to collapse.
In short, localized damage and high redundancy. Therefore, essentially the theory is the buildings collapsed due to fire. Remember that prior to 9/11 no steel-framed, high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire. Because of the properties of steel, if fire were to bring down a steel-framed building down it must be intense, extensive and long lasting. Moreover a steel-framed building would visibly bend before it collapsed. The fires were neither extensive nor long lasting and the evidence indicates they weren't particularly hot.
The Heat of the Fires
Jet fuel (kerosene) can reach a maximum temperature of 1520 degrees F. Liquid fuels quickly boil and evaporate, so the result was ordinary office fires. The thick, black smoke indicates cool,oxygen-starved. The fires in the South Tower were cooler than in the North Tower since most of the jet fuel was burned outside in the huge fireball. It had few visible flames when it fell yet it collapsed faster than the North Tower.
NIST examined 16 perimeter columns and only 3 of them indicated temperatures above 482 degrees F. And none of the core columns examined even reached this temperature. So we have cool, localized and short-lasting fires. It's safe to say the supporting steel columns were not weakened to any appreciable degree. So why did the Towers fall?
The Official Theories of the Collapses of the Towers
Truss Failure Theory aka Pancake Theory
MIT professor Thomas Eagar's Truss Failure theory is probably the most widely known and accepted. It was presented to the public on the Nova program "How The Towers Fell." According to Eagar the relatively lightweight trusses that held up the floors weakened in one area, "unzipped" quickly around the building and started a successive pancake collapse.
There are several problems with this theory:
1) There were no stack of floors at the bottom of the buildings. Most of the mass fell outside of the footprint of the buildings. The non-mettallic material was pulverized and ejected laterally from the onset of the collapse. This is the supposed crushing weight that is causing the floors to fall at near free-fall speed.
2) Nova/Eagar used deceptive depictions of the structures of the Towers. They eliminated the massive steel cores, the perpendicular floor trusses and the corrugated steel pan that unified the structure. This gave the impression the Towers were flimsy structures that could easliy pancake. The truth is they were designed to withstand earthquakes, plane strikes and 140 mph winds. The core could support the entire structure support and the trusses had to be strong to shift the loads during high winds.
3) Eagar ignores the redundant design of the trusses. There were hundreds of points of connection between the floors and the core and perimeter columns. The failure of a few truss-column connections would not cause the nearly simultaneous failure of the other connections. In 1975, the North Tower withstood a hotter, longer fire suffering no structural damage and no trusses needed replacing.
5) The speed of the collapse is too fast. By Galileo's Law of Falling bodies an object dropped in a vacuum from the height of the Towers would reach the ground in 9.2 seconds. The Towers fell in about 13 - 16 seconds. A pancake collapse would be reactive - each floor would have to wait for the floors above them. Using the Law of Momentum Conservation 9/11 researcher Jim Hoffman calculated that it would take about 15 seconds for the floors to pancake even if they offered no resistance. Of course the floors that were, according to Eagar, designed to hold 1300 tons over their own weight, would have provided plenty of resistance.
6) Does not explain the total collapses of the buildings. Perfectly symmetrical pancaking of the floors would not account for the disappearance of the steel cores. The floors would have fallen down around the cores like records on a spindle. The perimeter walls might also have been left standing. Both the core and perimeter columns were anchored 70 ft. below street level and were abundantly cross braced. During its nearly 24 hour fire, the top ten floors of the Windsor Building pancaked yet the steel columns it collapsed around and the perimeter columns it collapsed inside of, remained intact.
In summary, the Truss Failure Theory cannot account for the rapid decent or total collapses of the Towers and must therefore be rejected.
NIST Report on the collapses of the Twin Towers:
Whereas Eagar suggested the truss-vertical column connection was weak, NIST asserted it was actually very strong. Their theory is that the heat of the fires caused the floors to sag causing the perimeter columns to bow inward. This increased the load on the core columns that were weakened by temperatures that reached 1832 degrees F. They used a computer model to simulate "collapse initiation" and assumed "global collapse" was then inevitable. By their own account they did not address the "structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse were reached."
A few of the problems with the NIST Report:
1) UK experts who studied the NIST report objected saying the core could not pull the perimeter inwards via the floor.
2) What happens after "collapse initiation?" We certainly don't see columns being pulled inward. Also the pulling inwards of columns slows the collapse even further. Does it turn into a pancake collapse? It's unknown. We're left to guess here since they don't go beyond the start of the collapse.
3) The claim of core temperatures reaching 1832 F is pure speculation as we've seen the highest recorded temperature of the steel they tested was not even 500 degrees F.
4) Since no "global collapse" of a steel-framed building had ever occurred due to fire, they have no scientific basis to claim that it was inevitable. Every previous total collapse has been due to a controlled demolition.
5) NIST's timeline stopped at the start of the collapse thus ignoring the demolition-like features of the collapse.
6) They adjusted input parameters until they could obtain "collapse initiation" and refuse to show the visualizations of the collapse of the Towers.
The NIST report is meaningless and dishonest. Jim Hoffman has an extensive critque of the report.
ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW
It's impossible to have a near free-fall collapse (had the floors been pancaking) and the total destruction of a building (massive resistance) at the same time. The buildings came down centered around their vertical axes following what would ordinarily be the path of most resistance, which means the integrity of the vertical support columns must have been breached simultaneously. Neither the fires nor the alledgedly pancaking floors could accomplish this.
So what could account for the simultaneous near free-fall collapses and destruction of the buildings? Explosives. We'll look at the evidence for explosives in the next article.
Plane Impact
What role did the planes impact have in the collapse of the Towers? According to MIT professor of material engineering Thomas Eagar the plane impact was insignificant because "the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant [Towers were designed to handle 5 times normal load] structure." Hyman Brown, construction manager for the Twin Towers stated the Towers were over-designed to withstand almost anything, including hurricanes...and an airplane hitting [them]."( Bollyn: American Free Press)
The Towers were designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707(comparable to a Boeing 767), the largest aircraft at the time. According to Leslie Robertson, the project's structural engineer, the Towers "could probably sustain multiple impacts of jet airliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door, this intense grid, and the plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting." (Brett;whatreallyhappened.com)
According to the NIST report loads were increases by 25% some areas of the building and reduced by 20% in others. The Towers were actually designed to tolerate load increases of 2000% so the increased load is far below what would cause structural failure. NIST claims the most of the fireproofing was dislodged by the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires caused the buildings to collapse.
In short, localized damage and high redundancy. Therefore, essentially the theory is the buildings collapsed due to fire. Remember that prior to 9/11 no steel-framed, high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire. Because of the properties of steel, if fire were to bring down a steel-framed building down it must be intense, extensive and long lasting. Moreover a steel-framed building would visibly bend before it collapsed. The fires were neither extensive nor long lasting and the evidence indicates they weren't particularly hot.
The Heat of the Fires
Jet fuel (kerosene) can reach a maximum temperature of 1520 degrees F. Liquid fuels quickly boil and evaporate, so the result was ordinary office fires. The thick, black smoke indicates cool,oxygen-starved. The fires in the South Tower were cooler than in the North Tower since most of the jet fuel was burned outside in the huge fireball. It had few visible flames when it fell yet it collapsed faster than the North Tower.
NIST examined 16 perimeter columns and only 3 of them indicated temperatures above 482 degrees F. And none of the core columns examined even reached this temperature. So we have cool, localized and short-lasting fires. It's safe to say the supporting steel columns were not weakened to any appreciable degree. So why did the Towers fall?
The Official Theories of the Collapses of the Towers
Truss Failure Theory aka Pancake Theory
MIT professor Thomas Eagar's Truss Failure theory is probably the most widely known and accepted. It was presented to the public on the Nova program "How The Towers Fell." According to Eagar the relatively lightweight trusses that held up the floors weakened in one area, "unzipped" quickly around the building and started a successive pancake collapse.
There are several problems with this theory:
1) There were no stack of floors at the bottom of the buildings. Most of the mass fell outside of the footprint of the buildings. The non-mettallic material was pulverized and ejected laterally from the onset of the collapse. This is the supposed crushing weight that is causing the floors to fall at near free-fall speed.
2) Nova/Eagar used deceptive depictions of the structures of the Towers. They eliminated the massive steel cores, the perpendicular floor trusses and the corrugated steel pan that unified the structure. This gave the impression the Towers were flimsy structures that could easliy pancake. The truth is they were designed to withstand earthquakes, plane strikes and 140 mph winds. The core could support the entire structure support and the trusses had to be strong to shift the loads during high winds.
3) Eagar ignores the redundant design of the trusses. There were hundreds of points of connection between the floors and the core and perimeter columns. The failure of a few truss-column connections would not cause the nearly simultaneous failure of the other connections. In 1975, the North Tower withstood a hotter, longer fire suffering no structural damage and no trusses needed replacing.
5) The speed of the collapse is too fast. By Galileo's Law of Falling bodies an object dropped in a vacuum from the height of the Towers would reach the ground in 9.2 seconds. The Towers fell in about 13 - 16 seconds. A pancake collapse would be reactive - each floor would have to wait for the floors above them. Using the Law of Momentum Conservation 9/11 researcher Jim Hoffman calculated that it would take about 15 seconds for the floors to pancake even if they offered no resistance. Of course the floors that were, according to Eagar, designed to hold 1300 tons over their own weight, would have provided plenty of resistance.
6) Does not explain the total collapses of the buildings. Perfectly symmetrical pancaking of the floors would not account for the disappearance of the steel cores. The floors would have fallen down around the cores like records on a spindle. The perimeter walls might also have been left standing. Both the core and perimeter columns were anchored 70 ft. below street level and were abundantly cross braced. During its nearly 24 hour fire, the top ten floors of the Windsor Building pancaked yet the steel columns it collapsed around and the perimeter columns it collapsed inside of, remained intact.
In summary, the Truss Failure Theory cannot account for the rapid decent or total collapses of the Towers and must therefore be rejected.
NIST Report on the collapses of the Twin Towers:
Whereas Eagar suggested the truss-vertical column connection was weak, NIST asserted it was actually very strong. Their theory is that the heat of the fires caused the floors to sag causing the perimeter columns to bow inward. This increased the load on the core columns that were weakened by temperatures that reached 1832 degrees F. They used a computer model to simulate "collapse initiation" and assumed "global collapse" was then inevitable. By their own account they did not address the "structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse were reached."
A few of the problems with the NIST Report:
1) UK experts who studied the NIST report objected saying the core could not pull the perimeter inwards via the floor.
2) What happens after "collapse initiation?" We certainly don't see columns being pulled inward. Also the pulling inwards of columns slows the collapse even further. Does it turn into a pancake collapse? It's unknown. We're left to guess here since they don't go beyond the start of the collapse.
3) The claim of core temperatures reaching 1832 F is pure speculation as we've seen the highest recorded temperature of the steel they tested was not even 500 degrees F.
4) Since no "global collapse" of a steel-framed building had ever occurred due to fire, they have no scientific basis to claim that it was inevitable. Every previous total collapse has been due to a controlled demolition.
5) NIST's timeline stopped at the start of the collapse thus ignoring the demolition-like features of the collapse.
6) They adjusted input parameters until they could obtain "collapse initiation" and refuse to show the visualizations of the collapse of the Towers.
The NIST report is meaningless and dishonest. Jim Hoffman has an extensive critque of the report.
ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW
It's impossible to have a near free-fall collapse (had the floors been pancaking) and the total destruction of a building (massive resistance) at the same time. The buildings came down centered around their vertical axes following what would ordinarily be the path of most resistance, which means the integrity of the vertical support columns must have been breached simultaneously. Neither the fires nor the alledgedly pancaking floors could accomplish this.
So what could account for the simultaneous near free-fall collapses and destruction of the buildings? Explosives. We'll look at the evidence for explosives in the next article.
WTC - 7, Free-fallin' down the memory hole
On 9/11, the largely forgotten World Trade Center Building 7 apparently became the first steel-framed, high-rise building in history to fall solely due to fire. Buildings such as the Windsor Building in Madrid, Spain and One Meridian Plaza survived despite suffering from hotter, more extensive and longer fires than WTC-7.
WTC-7 had minor fires on the 7th and 12th floors that are only noticeable in a few windows. At 5:20 p.m. the building suddenly collapsed into it's own footprint at free-fall speed. What could have caused this collapse? Nearly 5 years later we have no official explanation. FEMA, who conducted the on-site investigation, stated "further investigation was needed to determine the cause of the collapse."
The 9/11 Commission, despite their stated intent "to provide the fullest possible account of the events of 9/11" didn't mention Building 7 in their report on the terrorist attacks upon the United States. In 2005 the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) released a report on the collapse of the North Tower however they did not cover Building 7.
There is one photo showing structural damage to the the Southwest corner which would have been caused by WTC 2 over 300 ft. away. Raises a few points.
1) Is the photo legitimate? Why only one photograph and no video/.
2) WTC Buildings 3, 4, 5 & 6 suffered far more structural damage yet stood.
3) How could massive steel beams from the Towers be trown with such force without explosives?
4) If the damage were fatal the building would have toppled towards the damaged side.
Building 7 fell as if brought down by a controlled demolition. Dan Rather (click on 1st image) and other commentators noted this similarity. Indeed, the collapse exhibited all of the features of a controlled demolition, including:
1) Sudden onset. In a controlled demolition the building is stable then suddenly collapses due to explosives slicing through the supporting steel columns. Building 7 was supported by 24 interior steel columns and 58 perimeter steel columns. Due to steel's thermal conductivity, the temperature of the steel is far below that of the fires. Further, were fire able to bring down a steel frame building, it's collapse would be gradual and asymmetric.
2) A symmetrical, straight down collapse following what normally be the path of most resistance. One of the hallmarks of a controlled demolition is a straight down collapse to minimize the damage to surrounding structures. To accomplish this, vertical support columns must fail nearly simultaneously. This is done by carefully placed explosives detonated in a specific pattern.
3) Free-fall collapse. Building 7 fell in about 6.6 seconds. In a vacuum (no air resistance) an object dropped from the top of the building would have fallen in 5.9 seconds. Therefore the building encountered no resistance, meaning floors were falling ahead of the floors above them.
4) A noticeable crimp in the center of the building indicating the interior columns were failing slightly before the exterior columns. In a controlled demolition this is done to help pull the building inwards, again this is to protect surrounding buildings.
5) Squibs or puffs of smoke. These can be seen moving rapidly up the building and are another indication of explosives.
There was also molten metal found burning in the basement requiring temperatures in excess of 2900 degrees F. The exact composition of the metal is unknown, however it's worth noting that molten iron is the end-product of a thermite (incidiary agent used to slice steel) reaction. There were also partially evaporated steel beams. To evaporate a steel beam requires a temperature of 5000 F.
ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW IS:
The collapse of WTC -7 exhibited all the features of a controlled demolition. No collapse exhibiting the features of a controlled demolition had ever NOT been a controlled demolition. The free-fall symmetrical collapse required a simultaneous breeching of the vertical steel columns at crucial locations and could only been achieved through the use of explosives.
Next we'll look at the fall of the Twin Towers.
[Highly recommended for additional reading - WTC 7 by researcher Jim Hoffman.]
WTC-7 had minor fires on the 7th and 12th floors that are only noticeable in a few windows. At 5:20 p.m. the building suddenly collapsed into it's own footprint at free-fall speed. What could have caused this collapse? Nearly 5 years later we have no official explanation. FEMA, who conducted the on-site investigation, stated "further investigation was needed to determine the cause of the collapse."
The 9/11 Commission, despite their stated intent "to provide the fullest possible account of the events of 9/11" didn't mention Building 7 in their report on the terrorist attacks upon the United States. In 2005 the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) released a report on the collapse of the North Tower however they did not cover Building 7.
There is one photo showing structural damage to the the Southwest corner which would have been caused by WTC 2 over 300 ft. away. Raises a few points.
1) Is the photo legitimate? Why only one photograph and no video/.
2) WTC Buildings 3, 4, 5 & 6 suffered far more structural damage yet stood.
3) How could massive steel beams from the Towers be trown with such force without explosives?
4) If the damage were fatal the building would have toppled towards the damaged side.
Building 7 fell as if brought down by a controlled demolition. Dan Rather (click on 1st image) and other commentators noted this similarity. Indeed, the collapse exhibited all of the features of a controlled demolition, including:
1) Sudden onset. In a controlled demolition the building is stable then suddenly collapses due to explosives slicing through the supporting steel columns. Building 7 was supported by 24 interior steel columns and 58 perimeter steel columns. Due to steel's thermal conductivity, the temperature of the steel is far below that of the fires. Further, were fire able to bring down a steel frame building, it's collapse would be gradual and asymmetric.
2) A symmetrical, straight down collapse following what normally be the path of most resistance. One of the hallmarks of a controlled demolition is a straight down collapse to minimize the damage to surrounding structures. To accomplish this, vertical support columns must fail nearly simultaneously. This is done by carefully placed explosives detonated in a specific pattern.
3) Free-fall collapse. Building 7 fell in about 6.6 seconds. In a vacuum (no air resistance) an object dropped from the top of the building would have fallen in 5.9 seconds. Therefore the building encountered no resistance, meaning floors were falling ahead of the floors above them.
4) A noticeable crimp in the center of the building indicating the interior columns were failing slightly before the exterior columns. In a controlled demolition this is done to help pull the building inwards, again this is to protect surrounding buildings.
5) Squibs or puffs of smoke. These can be seen moving rapidly up the building and are another indication of explosives.
There was also molten metal found burning in the basement requiring temperatures in excess of 2900 degrees F. The exact composition of the metal is unknown, however it's worth noting that molten iron is the end-product of a thermite (incidiary agent used to slice steel) reaction. There were also partially evaporated steel beams. To evaporate a steel beam requires a temperature of 5000 F.
ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW IS:
The collapse of WTC -7 exhibited all the features of a controlled demolition. No collapse exhibiting the features of a controlled demolition had ever NOT been a controlled demolition. The free-fall symmetrical collapse required a simultaneous breeching of the vertical steel columns at crucial locations and could only been achieved through the use of explosives.
Next we'll look at the fall of the Twin Towers.
[Highly recommended for additional reading - WTC 7 by researcher Jim Hoffman.]
"Remembering September 11th 2001" by Dan Ernest
Long, but worth it. The original document may be viewed here.
You sat for hours on September 11th 2001 watching the events unfold. You watched the towers collapse into their own footprint; perfectly, symmetrically and totally. But something was odd. You could not put your finger on it but something was definitely strange about the whole attack. From the airplanes (or lack there of) to the late response of military fighter jets to the complete and total collapse looking much like a controlled demolition. However a few hours later the FBI had a good lead on the case then you heard the song, "Proud To Be An American" 30 or 40 times and everything began to make sense.
Still a bit puzzled on how the hijackers could plant bombs throughout both towers, it was quickly realized that all of the booms and bangs that were reported by those on the scene didn't actually happen. So you didn't have to worry about those cumbersome reports of explosions, bombs and detonating charges anymore.
You tried to forget that you really did not see an airplane at the pentagon however you saw the fire and smoke and you were told that a plane had crashed there.
You remember that some silly reporter was foolish enough to make a statement publicly saying that "no plane had crashed anywhere near the pentagon." Then there was that crater where flight 93 crashed straight into the ground at 500 miles per hour and damned if you could see any pieces of airplane there either. What was happening here?
There was a hole in the ground about 15 feet deep and 30 feet wide. There is smoke coming from the hole where the airplane crashed. Your common sense told you that for a legitimate airplane crash there must be an airplane. I mean you can not have a car crash without a car so it just figured that an airplane crashe would involve an airplane. Just one airplane would be enough to legitimize the airplane crash. To make matters worse there was that reporter again making the statement publicly that there were no pieces of airplane at the airplane crash site. Rats!
You knew that what ever happened on that flight was heroic. "Lets Roll" heard over a cell phone from 32,000 feet was a little easier to believe then another plane missing from an airplane crash site. Its a good thing we have such competent FBI agents otherwise these questions may have lingered around taking up a good portion of the common sense areas in our minds.
You wondered, why did those damned Arabs do this in the first place? What would cause these kamikaze Arabs to take their own life and the life’s of innocent Americans?
Well its a good thing the president knew cause I sure didn't have a clue, Furthermore, if I tried to guess I probably would have come up with a theory lacking substance befitting of the crime.
But the President was there with answers.
"America is the brightest beacon for freedom in the world".
"They hate America's freedom!"
There you see? A perfectly reasonable explanation. That’s why he's the president. Mystery solved.
Osama must be much happier with the United States now because we have done plenty about the freedom problem we were having over here. Who-da-thunk that all we had to do to stop middle eastern extremist from stealing our airplanes and knocking down our sky scrapers could be as simple as eavesdropping on Americans, reading their email, monitoring their phone calls and trumpeting into law that our President could attack any country that he felt was a terrorist threat or may some day become a terrorist threat or any country that may become a threat to United States interest anywhere in the world? You may believe it to be unconstitutional and the reason our forefathers created the constitution but you can't argue with the results. After all how many boogiemen have been seen carrying box cutters since the patriot act was hoodwinked into law?
Returning to the FBI agents, lets not forget about the job that the FBI did. Wow! Fast! unreal, I mean really unreal. Think about it; these FBI agents knew exactly which flight school(s) to investigate. Damn they are good. Indeed, at an almost eerie pace, photos of Osama Bin Laden were everywhere. Sometime late in the afternoon of September 11th another building nearly half the height of the twin towers fell to the ground. Though it was not hit by an airplane or had any significant fires in it, another explanation for its collapse was told to us by reporters.
"Because of the devastation earlier today World Trade Center Building number 7 collapsed."
There you see? Another perfectly reasonable explanation. Obviously the building was heart broken due to earlier events.
The President knew Osama had to be behind this attack because decades ago Osama attacked other Americans in other lands and not once did he fail to take the credit. Furthermore he hates Americas freedom. What more evidence do you need?
Can you imagine how awkward it must have been for Osama's brother? I mean for your own brother to have his minions stealing airplanes and joy riding in the North East Defense Corridor then messing up the landscape by knocking over buildings and much of this is being played out on live TV while your trying to enjoy omelets with the presidents dad. Osama's brother must have just been embarrassed at the spectacle. It's no wonder the Bin Laden family was flown out of the country while everyone else was grounded.
Osama denied and denounced the attacks of 911 but lets not get caught up in rhetoric regarding the fact that he has always claimed responsibility in the past. Indeed he tried to trick us by denying the attacks. Furthermore we said he did it and by God that means he did it!
As you watched in anger, you talked about what we should do when we caught Osama Bin Laden. You couldn't pass by a September eleventh collection fund without dropping at least a buck into the kitty.
The administration asked you to immediately support a war against terror and a war against the Taliban government. The President gave you a choice. Two choices as a matter of fact.
"Your either with us, or your with the terrorists."
Now I didn't need any help from the president on this choice, I just did what everyone else did, I accepted the only choice there was. We are with you Mr. President. Let's bomb-em!
The Taliban, (after muttering "Is it October already?") refused to extradite Osama bin Laden and all other Al-Qaeda leaders that were based in Afghanistan to the United States without evidence. However, the Taliban did agree to extradite to an Islamic country.
To my simple mind this seemed like a fair offering but again that's why I'm not the president.
The white house responded only like the white house can. No! Were not going to provide evidence when we can just come and bomb you. We may loose a few hundred maybe a thousand American soldiers and kill twenty or thirty thousand Muslims but asking a democratic country for evidence involving criminal activity is, well, well, we need to bomb you just for being so naive. Furthermore we have had troops there for months now waiting for the attacks err waiting to protect the world from evil terrorists. Occupation of strategic middle eastern countries is vitoil to the war on terroilism. We must spoil any terroilst campaigns before the evoil doilers step foot in America. Occupation is mandatoil.
In other words the Taliban had two choices either we were going to bomb them or we were going to drop bombs on them.
That evidence was not given and a coalition led by the United States launched an invasion in to Afghanistan on October 7. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, "The United States has evidence of Bin Laden’s role in terrorists acts that it will present in due time". Its February 2006, No Osama Bin Laden, No Evidence except for the following absurd story:
19 Islamic hijackers entered the United States, some of the hijackers left parts of their applications blank, some with no specific reason to be in the United States, some with destinations such as hotels.
These hijackers then moved freely about the country obtaining pilots licenses and learning to fly. Somehow these hijackers learned how to fly and navigate these jumbo jets without the aid of air traffic controllers.
These hijackers have no record of purchasing tickets, do not show up on the flight manifest nor are they listed in any autopsies report. There is no photographic or video evidence of any of the hijackers boarding the airplanes. In sum; we can not prove that the hijackers were scheduled to be on those flights, we can not prove that they paid to be on those flights, we can not prove that the hijackers ever boarded any of those flights nor can we prove that any of the hijackers died on any of those flights.
None of the American pilots or co-pilots or navigators on any of the 4 flights thought to send a distress signal while these hijackers were beating down the cockpit doors.
The hijackers were somehow able to get through locked cockpit doors and with nothing except razor blades, plastic knives and/or box cutters these amazing Arab pilots took control of all 4 airplanes even though some of the American pilots that gave up their airplanes had a military background.
Indeed, the hijackers were a perfect 4 out of 4 in take-aways.
The 911 commission report would lead you to believe that they lost flight 77 from radar for 40 minutes because the hijackers turned off the transponder. Do you think enemy bombers that may enter into United States air space would be kind enough to leave their transponders on so we could locate them with our radar and shoot them down?
So simply switching off the transponder on an aircraft must render it invisible to radar because after all, the flight traffic controllers, NORAD and the entire United States military air defense system had nearly an hour to find flight 77. Flight 77 flew directly at the pentagon for 40 minutes then circled the building before crashing into it. Since they were all looking for that particular flight it must be true that our trillion dollar air defense system relies on the enemy to provide their location by leaving their transponder on. Makes perfect sense to me!
Notwithstanding that the Pentagon is ringed by anti-missile batteries, which are programmed to destroy any aircraft entering the Pentagon’s airspace, except for any aircraft with a US military transponder and if Flight 77 had entered the Pentagon’s airspace, it could have escaped being shot down only if officials in the Pentagon had deactivated its anti-aircraft defenses. This Pilot somehow out smarted this anti-aircraft defense system.
The Arab pilots had enough skill to fly close to the ground without anyone hearing the loud roaring jet engines. Engines that are powerful enough to have blown automobiles off of the roadways as they roared over.
It is important to understand that the official conspiracy theory does not show (as one would think) flight 77 diving into the pentagon.
The official conspiracy theory holds that flight 77 flew below the tree tops knocking over light poles and clipping antennas off of automobiles as it passed over the roadways. Indeed the hijacker flew parallel to the ground just inches above the grass at the pentagon and slammed into the ground floor. In other words, if the pentagon had not been in the path of the aircraft the pilot could have simply pulled back on the yoke and regained altitude. No shit? These are some amazing piloting skills. To think your going to hit a cement wall at 500 miles an hour in just a few seconds and your able to keep a steady hand. Your able to keep from upsetting the pentagons gardener by being careful not to scrape the lawn with the jet.
Even as you hate these Arab Pilots one can not deny their cunning and calmness. This pilot was so cunning he turned up alive in Saudi Arabia. When the FBI realized that this experienced pilot was still alive they simply changed that aspect of the official conspiracy theory stripping the first Arab pilot of his wings and awarding them to another Arab that was lauded as a terrible pilot by his instructors. Fortunately for the folks that are hawking the official conspiracy theory, this inexperienced pilot has not turned up alive. It should also be noted that he has not turned up dead either.
In sum now it was no longer an experienced pilot that flew this 757 like it was a toy, it was in fact an inexperienced pilot that flew this plane with jaw dropping skill and pin point accuracy. Sounds reasonable doesn't it? One can imagine how betrayed the inexperienced pilot felt when he found out that the experienced pilot had missed the flight.
Luckily for the military the hijackers chose the only part of the pentagon that was undergoing renovation to make it stronger in case of an attack. As evil and sinister that you believe this inexperienced Arab pilot was, one can not help but wonder if he were trying to limit the number of casualties. After- all he had to go out of his way to hit the renovated section of the pentagon which happened to be the furthest possible section of the building from the offices of the top brass.
Indeed, the inexperienced Arab pilot had to fly completely around the pentagon to hit the west wing that was undergoing an upgrade to make it stronger and because of that upgrade that section of the pentagon had the fewest number of people in it most of which were civilian contractors.
In sum, the inexperienced pilot made a 280 degree turn in Pentagon air space circling 4 of the 5 sides of the pentagon then flew this jumbo jet just a wee bit above the ground without leaving so much as a scrape on the grass. He went through all of this trouble so he could slam into the strongest part of the pentagon that had the fewest number of people in it.
Who ever was behind these attacks probably knows what was attached to the belly of flight 175. Since commercial Boeing airliners do not have pods attached to them, some theorists believe it is a pod for a missile.
Apparently the flash that has been recorded by 4 different camera angles showing what appears to be a missile fired from this pod is where this theory is drawn from.
Flight 11 hitting the North tower and exhibiting the same flash that the south tower missile shows just before impact may also be supportive of this theory. Naturally it is possible that someone is playing a cheap photo shop trick on Americans by manipulating the video so it would probably be a good idea to confirm this strange flash by using the video from the major news agencies and slowing it down yourself as did I.
This would sure go a long way in determining whether the official white house conspiracy theory where 19 freedom hating hijackers with box cutters was indeed the correct version or if someone else may be sitting back and laughing at our gullibility’s.
Those dust clouds that we saw chasing people all over Manhattan are perfectly normal in the collapse of a building so long as the collapse is done with high explosives.
Indeed, until September 11th only volcanic eruptions and high explosives have been able to achieve this pulverizing of material into a pyroclastic flow. Evidently the hundreds of firemen and policeman and citizens and reporters at ground zero were all mistaken about all of the huge explosions they saw, heard, felt and then described.
Explosions that took place in and around the towers just before and while the towers were collapsing.
Once again our president fixed this little problem by placing a gag order on government city and county employees who were at the scene.
Make no mistake about it, people from all over the country are gagging right now. Those who have been ordered to, and those who have not.
They want you to ignore the fact that no steel framed sky scraper had ever collapsed due to fire until September 11th when suddenly 3 steel framed sky scrapers collapsed within hours of each other. (You didn't know about the third one did you.)
They want you to ignore other steel framed sky scrapers that had fires burning in them that were much hotter and burned many hours longer completely gutting the entire building yet when the smoke cleared there was no collapse or any stack of floors from a pancake experience.
They want you to believe them when they tell you that 47 separate steel columns which made up the core of the building was actually a hollow steel shaft. They hope you don’t understand that even given their insulting pancake theory there should have been these massive support columns sticking hundreds of feet up into the air but somehow these massive columns were also shredded into pieces 30 feet or less conveniently ready to be loaded onto trucks.
"No no no no, there were no explosions at the World trade center" gushes the official conspiracy theory. "There were no bombs in the buildings it was refined kerosene burning for 102 and 56 minutes in the North and South towers respectively.
You see om, what happened was em, the steel, it got hot because well, you know it was a lot of jet fuel in there burning, and the hot fire got hotter, err that central core was hit real hard probably made the hot fire even hotter, all at the same time those cheap lightweight floor trusses ahem, the perimeter was actually the buildings support because of those winds that blow hard, then it heated enough so ahem well the fire was really hot and these are really big and really heavy buildings so when the light weight steel trusses were exposed so long to the fire, well ahem yes of course it has to turn the concrete to powder, oh and the stuff on the steel fell off so without the fire proofing material well you know it probably fell off, lots of the stuff fell off so the steel got hot so it must have fell off, so it was inevitable because its clear that nothing could have survived those hot jet fuel fires. You know it was jet fuel burning in there, really hot jet fuel, and furniture and whatnot. Lots of hot burning stuff was burning in there real hot. Its all in the 911 commission report. Isn't it obvious? Why do you ask?
And there you have it. Initial collapse always leads to total collapse in big steel framed buildings with floor trusses.
No. no no no, no bombs anywhere in any of the buildings, So when Larry Silverstein (Lease owner of WTC) told PBS that they blew up building 7 he was also hallucinating or he mis-spoke or it wasn't really him, or he didn't mean what he said or rhetoric, rhetoric, rhetoric.".
Indeed, those raging fires in those black holes carved out by the airplanes heated the trusses evenly enough and hot enough to where hundreds of beams gave at the same exact moment thus causing total collapse via the pancake theory.
Forget about thermal conductivity because its not even mentioned in the 911 commission report.
If you know anything about Thermal conductivity in steel then you are most likely incredibly insulted by the fire theory. If you do not know anything about thermal conductivity in steel ask a welder or a steel worker how long it would take to heat the entire skeleton of the building up. Also ask them why they bother with electric arcs and bottled oxygen to cut steel when a few gallons of jet fuel will do the trick.
They don’t want you to ask them where a photo can be seen showing this stack of floors otherwise you may begin to understand that those floors were made up of a light weight concrete and they were blown to smithereens causing the volcanic like clouds otherwise known as a pyroclastic flow.
They hope you do not see the picture of the woman standing on the edge of the tower where the airplane entered the building and after the fire had died down.
After all if you saw a live human being standing on the edge of the impact floor holding onto a nearly molten steel beam it would be hard to sell the official conspiracy theory that 1500 degree fires on the impact floors is what caused the building to collapse.
Its good to know that the government is there protecting us from mind bending anomalies such as the tapes in which for over a year the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey with the blessing of the United States Justice Department refused to release.
So what in the name of box cutters could have been on those tapes?
Tapes that were withheld from Americans until a court order forced the government to release?
It turns out that the tapes were the only recordings of firefighters that had reached the impact floors.
You remember the floors that had 1500 degree fires in them?
Sure, you remember those 1500 degree fires that heated all of the steel trusses enough to cause them all to give at once which started the initial collapse which we now know always leads to total collapse along with pulverizing any non metallic material into a pyroclastic flow?
You should recall it is inevitable in large steel framed skyscrapers with floor trusses.
It seems these fire fighters were mistaken when they reported two isolated pockets of fire that they could knock down with two lines.
Evidently these fire fighters did not realize that the entire floor was engulfed with 1500 degree fires that were about to cause a controlled demolition like collapse of the entire building including the 47 steel columns which were nearly a quarter mile in length.
Well this oversight by the fire fighters is completely understandable. After all, remember the picture of the lady shown standing on the impact floor looking over the edge? Evidently she also did not realize that she was standing in 1500 degree fires and leaning on a beam that was so hot it was about to shoot hundreds of feet horizontally causing the building to collapse perfectly, symmetrically and totally.
They want you to believe that the keystone flight traffic controllers were on duty that day botching all four opportunities to scramble fighter jets even though they successfully scrambled those same fighters 67 times that year. They want you to believe that these keystone air traffic controllers were able to safely land nearly 4500 flights within an hour admirably achieving something that had never been done before however these same air traffic controllers were not able to pick up a phone and warn NORAD in time.
No don't ask why NORAD relies on the FAA alerting them about wayward aircraft even though NORAD has the most sophisticated tracking equipment on the planet just go with it.
Indeed, they were able to accomplish an unprecedented event of landing thousands of flights but could not perform a routine mission of informing NORAD to scramble jets onto the wings of wayward aircraft.
They hope you forget that the television coverage on September 11th didn’t show an airplane at the pentagon. They hope you will buy the amazing story that for the first time in aviation history the airplane vaporized due to the heat of the fire.
Please do not ask how a Boeing 757 with a wingspan of 125 feet, a height of 44 feet and a length of 155 feet disappeared into a 16 foot diameter hole then vaporized and left no wreckage on the outside of the building.
No the airplane did not simply melt into a giant pool of molten aluminum, steel and titanium it actually burned hot enough to turn it into a vapor that was then blown off by the gentel summer breeze.
They hope you will not connect the dots when they say they recovered most of the human remains at the pentagon even though the airplane itself vaporized. Obviously those who doubt that airplanes can vaporize are wrong otherwise FOX or NBC or one of those pillars of responsible journalism would question it. So apparently there have been significant changes in the temperature hydrocarbons can burn in the atmosphere and/or there have been changes as to what temperature it takes to melt er vaporize aluminum, titanium and steel.
If anyone except our government showed you a smoking hole in the ground minus an airplane and were told that an airplane crashed there would you believe it? Rational people seem to understand that there should be an airplane at an airplane crash site however there were two airplane crash sites minus the airplanes on September 11th 2001.
They hope you do not compare the small amount of heat damage at the pentagon to the heat damage that caused three steel framed sky scrapers to collapse perfectly, symmetrically and totally.
They hope you do not see the video of building 7 that collapsed into a tiny pile of rubble at free fall speed and compare that collapse to another video of a controlled demolition.
They hope you do not question the gag order placed upon firefighters who were at the scene and policemen who were at the scene. They hope you buy the asinine excuse that the gag order is for national security.
Lets all come together as Americans and sign over the entire constitution and the bill of rights so we can get these terrorists once and for all. What the hell, why don't we just give our constitution and bill of rights away to a country that can use them. Besides when was the last time you remember the United States using them? As president Bush stated. "Stop throwing the constitution in my face! It's just a god damned piece of paper!"
Aside from the nearly 3000 heroes that have given their lives at ground zero, the pentagon and Shanksville, their are indeed more heroes that have descended from September 11th 2001. However these heroes are presently being treated as communists or conspiracy theorists. These heroes are trying to persuade you to pull your heads out of the main stream media long enough to simply look at the video evidence they have gathered through a form of media that the government has not been able to seize. These heroes are your own sons and your own daughters. I listened to my son and it turns out that it was the best thing I could do for my country. Please give your son or daughter one hour of your time. Please.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
"Conspiracy and Closed Minds on 9/11" by Dr. Morgan Reynolds
(This is an excellent essay on the subject of America's Cognitive Constipation by 9/11 Truth Scholar Dr. Morgan Reynolds. The original document is posted here, and a printer friendly copy of this article is available here.)
Where does this passive attitude come from? Causes are many but American indoctrination has two sides that figure prominently in the explanation:
Belief in “American Exceptionalism” Disbelief in conspiracy
The first belief massages the American ego that we are heroes, always the good guys in history, and we can trust our government to be the same. The second steers us clear of subversive theories and thwarts connecting the dots. American exceptionalism is Civics 101, the Disneyfication of U.S. history, the “we’re so good” formula, “those stupid romances commonly called history.” Like no other nation in history, we are an unparalleled success, goes the story. With American self-esteem unrivalled, denial about 9/11 is hardly surprising. Conventional wisdom, in effect, says Yes, criminal gangs have ruled in other nations from time to time, perhaps always, but it has never happened here and cannot happen here. Evidence to the contrary is bogus, I do not have to even look at it. For one thing, I vote. We are the world’s greatest duh-mocracy. In fact, I voted for Bush-Cheney (or that other skull-and-bones candidate from Yale, I forget). I am fully invested with the regime and I’m not a criminal or traitor, so Bush-Cheney must not be either. After all, we the people are the government. Criminals and traitors do not look like us either, they look like Arabs, Germans, Japanese, Chinese.
Nero burned Rome to blame the Christians A.D. 64 US provoked Mexican-American war 1846 USS Maine sinking 1898 Lusitania sinking 1915 Reichstag fire 1933 Hitler’s staged attack on the Gleiwitz radio station 1939 The “surprise attack” at Pearl Harbor 1941 Bay of Pigs conspiracy 1961 Operation Northwoods 1962 LBJ’s Gulf of Tonkin conspiracy 1964 Kuwaiti baby incubator hoax 1991 Bush Jr.’s 9/11, yellow cake and WMD scams
Ruthless though plotters be, the basic principle “is as mundane as insurance fraud,” as Webster G. Tarpley writes (9/11 Synthetic Terror, 2005, p. 104), and nicely illustrated by the obscure hoax that started World War II. Hitler wanted to invade Poland but knew the German majority did not support war, so a group of hapless German convicts was dressed up in Polish army uniforms (by Tarpley’s account, also see these variations), marched to the Gleiwitz radio station, machine gunned to death, arranged as if storming the building, and Nazi agents read an anti-German statement in Polish declaring Polish forces had invaded Gleiwitz and taken over the radio station. With this farce and related border stunts, Hitler invaded Poland the next day, September 1, 1939. “Wag the dog” anyone?
Errors about Conspiracy
Many Americans know that the JFK, RFK, MLK and other assassinations were inside jobs, and Nixon’s Watergate and Reagan’s Iran-Contra are proven conspiracies with criminal convictions. Blatant government murder of U.S. citizens occurred at Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Oklahoma City bombing. Yet fools and liars argue that the scale of 9/11 was too big to be an inside job because it would involve so many people. A conspirator would surely squeal and we would hear about it, goes the argument, and that has not happened.
Conspiracies—partnerships in crime—are common: a corner drug deal is a conspiracy and one in four federal prosecutions include a conspiracy charge. Hundreds rather than thousands probably were necessary to pull off the 9/11 psychological operation. Many conspirators are ideologues committed to the idea that the 9/11 hoax would serve the interests of the nation. Worthy ends justify murderous means to this crowd. The human cost of 9/11 turned out to be “only” a month’s highway fatality toll and served the magnificent ends of starting a global war on terror, two invasions and more to come, billions more in defense spending, torture, new agencies, “Patriot” controls, domestic spying, enormous new contracts, more debt and many other attractive consequences. Many participants are cunning sociopaths (amoral) with the mindset of stone cold killers. They wear a suit or military uniform but have no respect for the lives of the “little people.” They are ruthless, witness the fool in the White House: “But all in all, it’s been a fabulous year for Laura and me,” a tone-deaf president declared in a December, 2001 interview. Only the trustworthy are at the center of the hub-spoke-and-wheel compartmentalization necessary in a complex conspiracy. Only the arrogant few at the hub know the big picture before hand. The most secretive regime in U.S. history puts a huge premium on personal loyalty and gets it. Most participants did not know in advance how “over-the-top” the twin tower demolitions were going to be. That job probably was contracted out to ruthless foreigners. Once done, it’s too late to get out. Any participant would hesitate to squeal after the event because disbelief, disgrace and grief would follow, at a minimum, anyway. The major media, inside 9/11 from the start, would discredit squealers, as necessary. Risk-taking behavior is always greater in groups than for lone individuals (psychology 101). Once involved in the plot, everyone is “in for good.’ Conspirators face no threat of arrest, prosecution and punishment by the government’s justice system, a proven fact since government and media obstructed and trashed New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison’s JFK investigation and prosecution. Controllers discipline participants through $billions in black budgets and drug money, death threats, assassination and black mail. Blatant and repeated resistance against truthful investigations, aided by obstruction of justice and abetted by media silencio, prove there is a lot to hide.
Consider one control technique among many: a very high CIA official died a few years ago and on good authority I know that he had a 7/24 CIA presence to protect against a deathbed confession in front of Hospice personnel. “I’m not into conspiracy theories,” says filmmaker Michael Moore, “only those that are true.”
The fundamental difficulty is not really disbelief about the ability to keep conspiracy secrets but disbelief that U.S. government officials could really collaborate in attacking America and take all those innocent lives at the World Trade Center. This is naïve. First, government is the instrument of social compulsion. Organized force is what government does. The belief that soft-hearted people rise to the top in government is akin to the belief that softies were whipping masters on slave plantations. Second, setting WTC bombs could easily have been contracted out to Mossad, otherwise known as “executioner to the world.” Killing? It’s what we do (because this is “life or death for Israel,” blah, blah). Third, people are taught that they control their government and live in a duh-mocracy but all governments are run by insiders, usually permanent and dominated by the paymasters. When policy or personnel really matter, international bankers call the tune for modern governments daily dependent on them for new loans and refinance of the old. These financiers look out for themselves and believe in a New World Order, a one-government world, and have no allegiance to America or its founding principles. Fourth, the U.S. military oath requires an oath-taker to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The enemy within the gate is key today, whether called conspiracy or not, not the enemy outside.
Skepticism about conspiracy, small or large, is somewhat beside the point in the case of 9/11 because the official Osama-and-Nineteen-Young-Arabs (ONYA) conspiracy tale is so farcical and impossible. Nearly everyone in America has easy access to the internet and hundreds of websites expose the 9/11 fraud. The analysis is out there and in a few dozen books, although the mainstream media ignores it all. Only government could have pulled off a psy-op this big, not a rag-tag band of Arab incompetents with no visible means of support repeatedly running afoul of law enforcement in the field. All the other intelligence services and governments know the real story about who did 9/11. It is like an elephant in the living room, studiously ignored by insiders who keep quiet about it. After thorough exposure via the Downing Street memo and other irrefutable evidence about the Bush-Cheney lies to justify invading Iraq, it takes a lot to remain ignorant about 9/11. It is not about a conspiracy too large to work. Ignorance increasingly has to be willful.
While more Americans doubt the 9/11 story every week, evidence abounds that many have a mental block against rational examination of the evidence about 9/11. The possibility that it was an inside job is a non-starter for them. Programmed “cut outs” insure that 9/11 doubts are consigned to the “conspiracy” closet.
Last June I was explaining the fuss over my 9/11 article to a family member who shall remain anonymous and he interrupted and said, “I don’t want to talk about it.” Millions join him in that sentiment. By implication they might as well say: “I’d rather cling to the official 9/11 myth” = “If mass murderers run free, I’m fine with that” = “If 9/11 was an inside job, then I’m ruled by monsters and I might have to do something about it, I’d rather watch Paris Hilton.”
Where does this passive attitude come from? Causes are many but American indoctrination has two sides that figure prominently in the explanation:
The first belief massages the American ego that we are heroes, always the good guys in history, and we can trust our government to be the same. The second steers us clear of subversive theories and thwarts connecting the dots. American exceptionalism is Civics 101, the Disneyfication of U.S. history, the “we’re so good” formula, “those stupid romances commonly called history.” Like no other nation in history, we are an unparalleled success, goes the story. With American self-esteem unrivalled, denial about 9/11 is hardly surprising. Conventional wisdom, in effect, says Yes, criminal gangs have ruled in other nations from time to time, perhaps always, but it has never happened here and cannot happen here. Evidence to the contrary is bogus, I do not have to even look at it. For one thing, I vote. We are the world’s greatest duh-mocracy. In fact, I voted for Bush-Cheney (or that other skull-and-bones candidate from Yale, I forget). I am fully invested with the regime and I’m not a criminal or traitor, so Bush-Cheney must not be either. After all, we the people are the government. Criminals and traitors do not look like us either, they look like Arabs, Germans, Japanese, Chinese.
Besides, conspiracy theories are little more than a symptom of a mental disease. Such asinine theories stem from delusion and paranoia, not objective reality. On its face, it is preposterous to believe that the U.S. government would attack its own people. History is about accidents, bungling, lone nuts, chaos and coincidence, not planning, cause-and-effect, execution and cover-ups.
False Flag Terrorism
Americans know a great deal that just is not so. The hidden history of false-flag terrorism is key, followed by trained aversion to conspiracy. When bad things happen on a large scale, chances are that an important group of people wanted them to happen and made them happen.
Governments throughout history have provoked or staged attacks on their own people to serve the powers behind the throne (“the money power”), glorify themselves, engage in vast government spending, reward friends, exert domestic control, stimulate the juices of war, annex neighbors and pursue vast geostrategic rearrangements (the “global domination project”). A few examples:
Ruthless though plotters be, the basic principle “is as mundane as insurance fraud,” as Webster G. Tarpley writes (9/11 Synthetic Terror, 2005, p. 104), and nicely illustrated by the obscure hoax that started World War II. Hitler wanted to invade Poland but knew the German majority did not support war, so a group of hapless German convicts was dressed up in Polish army uniforms (by Tarpley’s account, also see these variations), marched to the Gleiwitz radio station, machine gunned to death, arranged as if storming the building, and Nazi agents read an anti-German statement in Polish declaring Polish forces had invaded Gleiwitz and taken over the radio station. With this farce and related border stunts, Hitler invaded Poland the next day, September 1, 1939. “Wag the dog” anyone?
Errors about Conspiracy
Many Americans know that the JFK, RFK, MLK and other assassinations were inside jobs, and Nixon’s Watergate and Reagan’s Iran-Contra are proven conspiracies with criminal convictions. Blatant government murder of U.S. citizens occurred at Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Oklahoma City bombing. Yet fools and liars argue that the scale of 9/11 was too big to be an inside job because it would involve so many people. A conspirator would surely squeal and we would hear about it, goes the argument, and that has not happened.
JFK’s triangulation murder involved hundreds and nobody “ratted” that out in any substantial way, although Jack Ruby was close before he was found dead in his cell and dozens of deaths surrounded the case. Here’s how large, inside conspiracies work:
Consider one control technique among many: a very high CIA official died a few years ago and on good authority I know that he had a 7/24 CIA presence to protect against a deathbed confession in front of Hospice personnel. “I’m not into conspiracy theories,” says filmmaker Michael Moore, “only those that are true.”
The fundamental difficulty is not really disbelief about the ability to keep conspiracy secrets but disbelief that U.S. government officials could really collaborate in attacking America and take all those innocent lives at the World Trade Center. This is naïve. First, government is the instrument of social compulsion. Organized force is what government does. The belief that soft-hearted people rise to the top in government is akin to the belief that softies were whipping masters on slave plantations. Second, setting WTC bombs could easily have been contracted out to Mossad, otherwise known as “executioner to the world.” Killing? It’s what we do (because this is “life or death for Israel,” blah, blah). Third, people are taught that they control their government and live in a duh-mocracy but all governments are run by insiders, usually permanent and dominated by the paymasters. When policy or personnel really matter, international bankers call the tune for modern governments daily dependent on them for new loans and refinance of the old. These financiers look out for themselves and believe in a New World Order, a one-government world, and have no allegiance to America or its founding principles. Fourth, the U.S. military oath requires an oath-taker to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The enemy within the gate is key today, whether called conspiracy or not, not the enemy outside.
Skepticism about conspiracy, small or large, is somewhat beside the point in the case of 9/11 because the official Osama-and-Nineteen-Young-Arabs (ONYA) conspiracy tale is so farcical and impossible. Nearly everyone in America has easy access to the internet and hundreds of websites expose the 9/11 fraud. The analysis is out there and in a few dozen books, although the mainstream media ignores it all. Only government could have pulled off a psy-op this big, not a rag-tag band of Arab incompetents with no visible means of support repeatedly running afoul of law enforcement in the field. All the other intelligence services and governments know the real story about who did 9/11. It is like an elephant in the living room, studiously ignored by insiders who keep quiet about it. After thorough exposure via the Downing Street memo and other irrefutable evidence about the Bush-Cheney lies to justify invading Iraq, it takes a lot to remain ignorant about 9/11. It is not about a conspiracy too large to work. Ignorance increasingly has to be willful.
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
PRIORITY: Sign the Scholars' Petition for the Release of 9/11 Information
This is IMPERATIVE. Sign the petition below, HERE.
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT,
On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the Undersigned Scholars for 9/11 Truth Hereby Petitions for, and hereby demands, Release of the Following kinds of documents, video and films, and physical evidence to the public for study by experts and scholars investigating the events of 9/11:
1. Immediate release of the full Pentagon surveillance tapes, of which five frames (only) have been released via the official ASCE report, as Judicial Watch has also requested. We further demand release of the video tape seized by FBI agents minutes after the Pentagon hit, from the fuel service station near the Pentagon, as well as any other videotape which shows the 9/11 strike on the Pentagon.
See
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1211_wirepentagon.html
www.defenselink.mil/releases/2000/b05012000_bt218-00.html
www.defenselink.mil/news/May2000/20005022a.jpg
perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/fct-videos.html
2. Immediate release of 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage held by NIST, largely from private photographers, regarding the collapses of WTC buildings on 9/11/2001 (NIST, 2005, p. 81). In particular, all footage relating to the collapse of WTC 7 (including shots before, during and after the collapse) must be released immediately, without waiting for the NIST report on WTC 7, which is long overdue and may be prolonged indefinitely.
3. An explanation from Vice President Richard Cheney regarding the "orders" described by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta in his testimony before The 9/11 Commission. Secretary Mineta stated that while in an underground bunker at the White House, he watched Vice President Cheney castigate a young officer for asking, as a plane drew closer and closer to the Pentagon, "Do the orders still stand?" The officer should be identified and allowed to testify at a deposition under oath.
See www.911truthmovement.org/video/hamilton_win.wmv
4. The documents generated by Vice President Cheney's energy task force have been kept from the public. A court case brought forth a few maps that display oil fields in the Middle East. We hereby put Congress on notice that there is probable cause with regard to criminal activities by the Cheney Energy Task Force involving a criminal conspiracy to launch illegal wars and/or terrorist activities. We therefore demand that Energy Task Force document that comprise, discuss, or refer to plans to invade the Middle East, including Iran, and Venezuela or other sovereign nations be released immediately.
See Cheney v. District Court 542 U.S. 367 (2004) and United States v. Nixon 418 U.S. 683 (1974).
See www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33642
5. Audio tapes of interviews with air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 were intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building. We demand an explanation for this destruction of evidence and ask that the possible existence of other copies of such tapes or perhaps of written transcripts of the interviews be pursued. All air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 should be allowed to testify during a public forum under oath.
See
query.nytimes.com archive
web.archive.org suntimes cst-nws-tape07.html
6. The Secret Service, which is highly trained to protect the President from danger and to move him to a secure location in the event of a threat, breached its own standard procedures by allowing President Bush to remain at a public location for 25 minutes after it was known that the nation was under attack. All Secret Service personnel who were at Booker Elementary School with President Bush on 9/11 should be required to testify in public and under oath about these events.
See
abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121331&page=1
www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/feral_press_9-10.gif
www.whatreallyhappened.com/bushbook.mov
7. On the morning of 9/11, some five "war games" or "terror drills" were being conducted by U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise employing aircraft. These drills reportedly included the injection of false radar blips onto the screens of air traffic controllers. In addition, the government was running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building the morning of 9/11. Who was in charge of coordinating these war games and terror drills? Who had the ability to issues orders in relation to their conduct? On which screens were "false radar blips" inserted? When did such false injects commence? When were they purged from the controllers' screens? What was the effect of these activities on standard procedures for interdicting hijacked aircraft?
See
www.911readingroom.org article_id=92
www.fromthewilderness.com Mckinney_transcript.shtml
www.spiegltech.com McKinney2.rm (6 minutes, 12 seconds into the video)
www.boston.com 0903_plane_exercise.htm
8. It has been reported that the FBI long ago found three of four "black boxes" from the two airplanes which hit the Twin Towers, yet has consistently denied that they were ever found. Their data would be of the greatest importance to understanding the events of 9/11. This matter must be investigated and the data they provide released to the public.
See
www.pnionline.com/dnblog/extra/archives/001139.html
www.counterpunch.org/lindorff12202005.html
For each of the four sites under investigation, the 9/11 Commission reported that two Boeing 757s, and two Boeing 767s (FAA, Part 121, airliners) owned by United Airlines and American Airlines were hijacked by novice pilots and were subsequently crashed, resulting in an unimaginable loss of life. Approximately 3,000 people died the morning of 9/11 as the direct result of these officially reported hijackings and subsequent crashes.
These four scheduled airliners were reported to have carried a total of 266 passengers and crew members, which, under FAA and NTSB regulations, demands a comprehensive investigation of the primary and contributing causes of each. In the case of suspected criminal foul play, the NTSB would normally assign the lead investigative role to the FBI, with assistance of investigators from the NTSB and FAA. A comprehensive investigation of each aircraft crash is not a regulatory option: they would have been mandatory. Therefore, we demand public release of each comprehensive crash investigation report, including access to all physical evidence that was required to have been collected and secured at a suitable facility. Such evidence should have included a large assortment of indestructible parts, including landing gears, surface actuators, engines, black boxes, and so on. The serialized parts would be invaluable in identifying each aircraft and, contrary to some reports, could not have "vaporized" upon impact.
Considering the enormous loss of life and financial collateral damage, if no crash investigations were conducted, who made the decision to disregard the FAA, Part 121, regulatory requirement? In the absence of the Part 121 investigation reports, the identity of the responsible authorities who made the decision not to investigate must be released, and they should be made immediately available for deposition under oath.
9. In the weeks before 9/11, the US Stock market showed rather high levels of activity on companies that would subsequently be affected by the attacks. The afternoon before the attack, alarm bells were sounding over trading patterns in stock options. A jump in United Air Lines some 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, for example, and 285 times higher than average the Thursday before the attack, have been reported. A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal the day before the attacks has also been reported. No similar trading occurred on any other airlines appear to have occurred.
Between September 6-10, 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw suspicious trading on Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley, two of the largest WTC tenants. An average of 3,053 put options in Merrill Lynch were bought between Sept. 6-10, compared to an average of 252 in the previous week. Merrill Lynch, another WTC tenant, saw 12,215 put options bought between Sept. 7-10, whereas the previous days had seen averages of 212 contracts a day. According to Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg News: "This would be the most extraordinary coincidence in the history of mankind, if it was a coincidence. This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you’ve ever seen in your entire life. It’s absolutely unprecedented."
On September 18, 2001, the BBC reported: "American authorities are investigating unusually large numbers of shares in airlines, insurance companies and arms manufacturers that were sold off in the days and weeks before the attacks. They believe that the sales were by people who knew about the impending disaster".
According to the London Independent, October 10, 2001: "To the embarrassment of investigators, it has also emerged that the firm used to buy many of the 'put' options—where a trader, in effect, bets on a share price fall—on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by 'Buzzy' Krongard, now executive director of the CIA."
See
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1549909.stm
news.independent.co.uk/business/news/story.jsp?story=99402
The 9/11 Commission, after looking into the pre-9/11 stock trades, never denied their unusual nature. Instead, the Commission declared that al-Qaeda did not conduct the trades, and asked no further questions.
See amazon.com David Ray Griffin's book
Who, if not al-Qaeda, performed the incriminating trades? This information exists, it can be easily obtained, and it needs to be made public. Moreover, illegal money transfers may have been processed through computers housed at the World Trade Center before the planes crashed into the Twin Towers on 9/11. We demand a disclosure of the source of the put options and that this whole sordid affair receive a complete and public investigation.
See
www.rediff.com/money/2001/dec/17wtc.htm
archives.cnn.com/2001/TECH/industry/12/20/wtc.harddrives.idg/
10. Eyewitness testimony and a substantiating photographic record suggest that a large sample of slag from the World Trade Center is being held at Hangar 17 of the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. Access to the slag sample should be made available to appropriate physicists in order to conduct non-destructive X-ray Fluorescence tests and other forms of examination, which should reveal evidence of the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers. Based on these tests, we further demand two small samples (about the size of a fist) be extracted from this large piece for further scientific analysis.
See 911proof.com/resources/Slag+Sample.gif
11. Release of a complete inventory of the plane wreckage and debris from flights 11, 77, 93 or 175 or any other aircraft that crashed or was destroyed on September 11, 2001, including, but not limited to:
(a) the location (whether warehouses or otherwise) of all such items;
(b) a catalog of photographs and videotapes taken of any and all such items; and
(c) a list of all tests and examinations concerning any and all such items, including reports of such tests or examinations.
12. Release of a complete inventory of any steel, other metal or other material from the World Trade Centers, including, but not limited to:
(a) the location (whether warehouses or otherwise) of all such items;
(b) a catalog of photographs and videotapes taken of any and all such items; and
(c) a list of all tests and examinations concerning any and all such items, including reports of such tests or examinations.
On behalf of the People of the United States of America, we demand that the cover-up in this case end and that the kinds of documents, video and films, and physical evidence described above be provided to the public for experts and scholars to evaluate and assess in their efforts to expose falsehoods and reveal truths about events on 9/11.
FOR THE SOCIETY:
James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
Founder and Co-Chair
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Steven E. Jones, Ph.D.
Co-Chair
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
