9/11 Conspiracy Theory–Insane or Insightful?

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com 

I keep coming back to one question in the 9/11 conspiracy story: How did two jets knock down three New York City skyscrapers?  The jets only hit two buildings, and that is a fact.  I have posted a video from the group “RememberBuilding7.org” on the USAWatchdog.com site.  (Click here to see Building 7 implode.)  It clearly shows Building 7 of the World Trade Center imploding straight down, as if it was a controlled demolition.  I am not an expert, but it sure looks like that to me.  I, also, ran across this video from Corbettreport.com that summarizes the entire 9/11 conspiracy in less than 5 minutes. It was done on the 9/11 ten year anniversary.  I found it very well done and factually spot on, although it goes by fast, so you must watch closely.   Give it a look for yourself.  Do you think the 9/11 conspiracy theory is insane or insightful?—Greg Hunter.

Comments
  1. brian

    i have also questioned #7 and its collapse. the reason the 1st 2 towers fell, they say;was due to the jet fuel and structural damage. although ALL steel buildings are rated to sustain heat at much higher temperatures, the experts say that the fuel along with the combustable items could have generated enough heat to cause a collapse. I dont agree but lets just say for arguments sake that they are right. what about 7? no fuel, some damage from the other building hitting it but nothing to the extent that the first 2 towers endured.
    I would also like any of your readers to dig up another instance where a U.S. made steel building collaped in a vertical heap from fire damage….ever….in the history of america. then i would ask someone to give me evidence of any steel building in the world collaping from fire damage. it just doesn’t add up.

    • devon

      Very interesting/disturbing. Could someone please answer my question?
      What happened to Todd Beamer, “let’s roll” fame and the hundreds of passengers and flight crews of those planes? Where are they?
      Thanks.

      • Scott

        Only the guilty know for sure. That “let’s roll” is so typical when they manufacture a story of heroism. Supposedly those were Pat Tillman’s last words as well. I think the suicidal Muslim martyrs/hijacking story was manufactured. Look up the now declassified ‘Operation Northwoods’ document, where the Joint Chiefs of Staff tried to create the pretext for an invasion of Cuba. That seems to provide a blueprint for the 9-11 attacks 4 decades later:

        “It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircrat attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States… An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft… At a designatied time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual aircraft would be converted to a drone… Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of indignation.”

      • Radar

        Thoughtful article, on the question of passengers, over at VT:

        The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93?

      • Robert E. Salt

        To the best of my knowledge Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. Nothing wound up in that tiny hole in Shanksville. You’ll have to use your imagination as to what happened to the crew and passengers.

    • JH

      Greg et al:

      I believe we’re all interested in 911 for many reasons, but from a structural/engineering perspective Popular Mechanics has done the best job of debunking the many (perhaps too many) questions of the tragedy.

      Here is a link:
      http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center#wtc7

      Additionally, if you find the Pre-forward printed at a later date, you’ll find that even attempting to have a rational discussion on this subject can be virtually impossible as the authors quickly found out.

      JH

      • jim parker

        Nobody uses the Popular Mechanics arguments anymore. They avoid the difficult questions while attacking the wild conspiracy theories.

      • Scott

        ‘Popular Mechanics’ is a Hearst owned propaganda rag. Read David Griffin’s “Debunking 9-11 Debunking” where he counters every one of their arguments and points out their numerous ommissions.

        Fact: Shortly after 9-11, the editor and most of the staff at PM were replaced.

        • Pat

          David Ray Griffin? You mean the guy who brought us cognitive infiltration and the Cass Sunstein boogeyman? Please. If the guy’s not smart enough to stay clear of the Barnes Review, his opinion’s about 9/11 are worth squat.

          http://pdx911truthalliancedramatica.blogspot.com/2012/03/david-ray-griffin.html

          • Edward Rynearson

            “In the United States today, the phrase `conspiracy theory’ functions as a sort of giant cudgel, used to scare us out of talking openly about a broad (and ever-growing) range of scandals that the powerful cannot afford to let the people comprehend. In this new book, David Ray Griffin takes devastating aim at that repressive tactic, exposing it for what it really is. All those who cherish democracy, and intellectual freedom, owe it to themselves to read this brave analysis—and owe its author their sincerest thanks.” — Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Culture and Communication, New York University

            http://davidraygriffin.com/books/cognitive-infiltration-an-obama-appointees-plan-to-undermine-the-911-conspiracy-theory/

        • Henry

          JH, Popular mechanics does not explain WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop, nor what caused the massive central core structures of the towers to disintegrate. They don’t explain the molten metal, either. Nor the presence of highly refined military grade nano thermetic material in steel and dust samples. Also, They ignore the eutectic (molten and vaporized) steel documented in the video below.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

          Also, are you aware that PM’s “senior researcher” was 25 year old Ben Chertoff, a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security? He has no formal education in engineering or physics, either.

          • pebble garden

            Exactly so, Henry. Well said.

            I think it’s pretty obvious the whole event was staged, and scientifically designed to push the American peoples Fear button.

            I mean, come on. Just look at the date. 9-11? No Arab terrorist came up with that? It’s an obvious psyop, creating an instant and unavoidable association with “danger” and “save me!” The same people who came up with “Shock and Awe” (Shekinah) to ire the victims of their horrendous military attacks.

      • jp

        For a better proof of 9/11 operation look at the Pentagon’s “C” ring hole …

        Popular Mechanics says, landing gear of a plane punched it …

        http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon

        But, after watching FBI’s videos taken inside of the Pentagon, it’s obvious that they lied again …

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3RaJHltYUY
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVcPe6lVJsM

      • Brian

        Popular Mechanics is a tabloid pop culture magazine. It certainly is entertaining, especially with things like covering future concept planes and cars, etc… But Popular Mechanics is not science which could be introduced into a court of law as a legal argument. I would recommend looking into Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (ae911truth (dot) org). There you’ll find thousands of professional Architects and Engineers who have deeply examined the collapses and the evidence of Nano-Thermiteand and they’ve concluded beyond a doubt that the three towers were controlled demolition. As well, Daniel Jewenko, one of the top Controlled Demolition experts in the world has publicly stated that WTC 7 is unquestionably a Controlled Demolition. The group of Engineers and Architects do not get involved with Conspiracy Theories or who is responsible for the Controlled Demolition, they merely prove Controlled Demolition. It is unpleasant to think who might really have been behind those building collapses, but nobody should ever be afraid the truth, no matter what it is.

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Brian,

          There are not thousands of engineers and architects who have signed AE911T’s petition… and few structural engineers… less than 100 or so. I don’t know the exact number.

          I do know that the signers have NOT examined the details of the destruction and most have only a casual acquaintance with the event… just like the general public. A few have studied it.

          All signers believe that the official story was flawed and deceptive, incomplete and inaccurate and are demanding a new investigation.

          Asserting the the destruction of the 3 towers were controlled demolitions IS a conspiracy theory and AE911T pretty much is asserting that it was a MIHOP… an inside job.. made to happen on purpose but not by who we were told did it.

          There are some many bogus explanations even coming from engineers who have not studied the structure nor the observables and are offering opinions.. that includes Danny Jowenko and other experts.

          Even AE911T has not produced a building performance study or forensic analysis. They cited tell tale signs of CD and said looks like a duck so it’s a duck. That’s not a forensic study nor a building performance study. It’s conspiracy PR… masquerading to look “serious”.

          You’ve bought the snake oil.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey, when you speak about non existent 8 hour fuel oil fires and curtain walls in WTC7, and pancaking floors racing through the towers producing “400 mph mega force tornado winds”, and you completely fail to understand that free fall acceleration can only take place when there is no structural support, thereby proving demolition beyond any and all doubt, it’s quite clear who is pushing snake oil, and it’s not the thousand plus experts at http://ae911truth.org

    • Crabjuice

      “I would also like any of your readers to dig up another instance where a U.S. made steel building collaped in a vertical heap from fire damage…”

      I probably could if there ever was a prior instance of a fully loaded and fueled commercial passenger jet that slammed into a U.S. made steel building.

      • Henry

        “Crabjuice”, WTC7’s massive, hurricane and earth quake resistant, highly resilient, reinforced, and over engineered steel frame suddenly crushed itself at the same rate it would have fallen through air. No fully loaded and fueled commercial passenger jets slammed into WTC7, and it was not significant;y damaged by debris impacts from the tower demolitions. All it had were some ordinary, isolated office fires on a few floors.
        The false flag attack of 9-11 (911) was likely the most significant and pivotal event to take place in your lifetime. It’s a topic worthy of some fundamental research, don’t you think? Why not start with WTC7?

        http://911speakout.org
        http://911research.com

    • TXPatriot

      Just show us the damn Pentagon surveillance videos. All will be cool at
      that point.

  2. Scott

    That’s a great clip, Greg. Thanks for posting it.

    Building 7 is the “smoking gun” that proves the use of controlled demolitions. The symmetrical freefall implosion of that 47 story building into its own footprint could not have been caused by jet fuel, nor could that account for the destruction of the North and South Towers. It takes 2,800 degrees to melt steel, and the fires at the World Trade Center never surpassed 800 degrees (that’s not even hot enough to weaken steel, regardless of what the NIST, the MSM, ‘Popular Mechanics’ and ‘Frontline’ attempt to pass off as truth). There was still molten steel burning in lower Manhattan for more than 3 weeks after the attacks. The use of nano-thermite has been confirmed by a number of physicists who tested the residue from ground zero. The planes (possibly drones) were just a sideshow. The collapses were caused by well placed explosives and incendiaries. What could possibly account for enormous steel beams (heavier than the airplanes) hurling out hundreds of feet into adjacent buildings like Deutshe Bank and WTC 7?… Almost 1,700 licensed architects and engineers have petitioned for a new investigation into these mysterious collapses that defy all known laws of physics and thermodynamics: http://www.ae911truth.org/

    The two hour stand-down in air defenses, which allowed the Pentagon to be struck also needs a clear explanation (among many other unanswered questions). That’s the most heavily protected air space in the world. It’s only 10 miles from Andrew’s Air Force Base and is protected by ant-aircraft missile batteries.

    • Greg

      Thank you Scott, Ken and Tom H.
      Greg

  3. Ken

    I agree with you here Greg.

    WTC Building 7 is the smoking gun, and achilles heel Official Dogma.

    EVERYONE who looks at this issue should focus on that. There are many other good arguments against the Official Dogma, but the symmetrical and free fall collapse of WTC is something that the government simply can’t fit into its fair tale.

    They try to ignore it, and I find many people who still don’t know there was even a 3rd building that fell that day. When I tell them, they are confused, or think I’m confused, and often try to deny it because it’s something that they haven’t heard before.

    That is a failure of the Whore Media, but an opportunity for us. We don’t have to go into complicated theories and analysis. All we have to do is tell the truth about WTC 7, that’s it. No conspiracy theories need apply.

    -Ken

  4. Tregonsee

    Insane. Period.

    • Robert

      Wow! That’s some deep thinking. You want to give us a little clue as to why you think it is insane to question the official story, which does not explain the events of the day? Have you ever looked at Building 7 drop? A child can tell that’s controlled demolition. And careful analysis shows that it dropped at free fall, a point the government was forced to admit. This can only happen when there is nothing holding the building up. And there is only one way to remove all the support for a building simultaneously: controlled demolition.

  5. Art Barnes

    Greg, I think I remember Osama on video admitting the attacks just after 911. After the fist hit of one of the towers he told a another one of his group “just wait” there will be more, and, of course, there was. If all the above is true, then the video had to have been faked, which I don’t think it was.

    • Socrates

      OBL has denied MANY, many times that his forces did 9/11. Problem is, we don’t get that info in US. There are more than a half dozen interviews with him where he denied any participation.

  6. Doug Cowlthorp

    Greg.
    Thanks for posting this very important and totally ignored reality. Anyone that wants to look at the evidence with an open mind cannot help but ask a huge number of questions that have just been completely covered up. Just as in the picture that accompanies this piece, all those flames are burning jet fuel! That is a lot of fuel burning OUTSIDE of the tower. Now how can any remaining (small amount if any)fuel burn at such a rate and intensity to bring down that tower about 30 minutes later. Complete BS, and tower 7 is even more of a BS story. They even have one of the people on tape saying that they had to “bring it down” ie controlled demolition. Look at all the crazy new laws and freedom killing legislation your country has brought in in the name of 911. Scary.

  7. sensetti

    Sorry Greg
    My post should have read;
    I never have been able to reconcile WTC 7, that building dropping like it did makes no sense at all.

  8. Robert Hamburger

    Hi Greg. What about the Pentagon??? Google pictures of the Pentagon on 9/11 – the fire trucks are up against the building – where the wings, 2nd half of the fuselage, and tail of the plane should have been given the size of the hole in the building. That’s right, the hole in the Pentagon was only big enough for the front part of the fuselage, which would have left the back half of the plane to fall just short of the building. And yet not one scar on the ground against the building.

    The “official” explanation is that the heat of the jet fuel destroyed the plane, in full. Yet look more closely at the photos. The contents of the offices alongside the hole in the building, including papers on a desk, are intact and unburned. I think such would be an impossibility given the heat of a jet fuel fire.

    Am I suggesting that the idea of plane flying into the Pentagon is one of the greatest con jobs of all times? Looking at the photos I have no other suggestion.

    And what does it say about American Society that the top leaders (Bush/Cheney) were then allowed to testify not under oath.

    Hamburger

    • Robert

      If we the people (or the MSM) really wanted to know what happened at the Pentagon, we would demand the video records that they confiscated that day. A building like the pentagon has video surveillance from many cameras, and I have read that something like 80 video camera records from surrounding buildings were seized by the FBI. Show me the video of the plane hitting the building. Should be simple in a free and open society, right?

      The Pentagon incident whatever it was, killed the accountants who, according to Rumsfeld at a press conference the day before, had found that 2.3 TRILLION dollars could not be accounted for. That’ll teach them to keep tabs on the military/industrial complex.

      Also a hit on the Pentagon certainly helped to get the rest of the military/washington folks motivated for the coming wars. All part of the psy op by the rogue element at the top.

  9. droidX-G

    Greg,
    This one is laughable insane

  10. AndyB

    Greg: Those in control must assume that there are few left who can engage in critical thinking. The lack of airplane wreckage at all 3 sites; the confiscation of all video surveillance tapes at the Pentagon; the fact that cell phones of the day were not powerful enough to call from in-flight airplanes; the NORAD standdown; the BBC broadcast from NY studios that announced the destruction of WTC7 even as the camera showed it still standing, etc etc etc. So many lies, so little true investigation. And worse yet: a multi 1000 page Patriot Act, totally destroying our cherished Bill of Rights, appears within days.

  11. Elizabeth Hanson

    Hi Greg—

    I looked into 9/11 for probably 200 hours. I’m a Linguist by training so my mind looks dispassionately at cause and effect, patterns and probabilities. I’ve reached the conclusion that 9/11 was allowed to happen and that many people benefited. Without 9/11 we wouldn’t be in this mess today… and with the huge disparity of income, the wars, the loss of civil liberties.

    Oddly, most people won’t look at 9/11. They think you are a nut. Manning a table displaying books at a 9/11 event last year, I was approached by a man who looked at me and in all serious said, “Are you sure you want to be doing this? Aren’t you scared?”

    That’s the thing about me Greg. I ain’t scared. :-) Thank you so much for posting on 9/11.

    • Greg

      Thank you Elizabeth and Navy91!
      Greg

  12. Navy91

    I’m sitting on the fence with the whole conspiracy theory thing. I agree that WTC7 looks like a controlled demolition. I have no other idea what could (realistically) have happened to WTC7. I believe that it is possible that the whole attack was staged. But I keep coming back to one question… why? Why would people in our government stage such an attack?

    Mark

    • jay

      To set off a chain of events leading to a one world money,and controll over all people.Just look at where we were 12 yrs ago and where we are today. all caused by 911,and reactions to it.

      • true

        All of the wars and laws taking away rights including the NDAA which amounts to secret arrests and torture or murder of american citizens, could not have been passed off on the public without 911.

    • callemasiseeum

      Navy91 (Mark),

      The question of “Why 9/11″ is one that may never be answered until, if ever, every intelligence document becomes public, or the real plotters come forward and even then can we ever trust what they say. I will note that not knowing the answer is not mutually exclusive to the existence of the crime. Motive is not required to prove guilt in a court of law. G.W. Bush told us on 9/11 it was because of our freedoms. I suppose that reason sits under the piles of Iraqi WMDs.

      Certainly, I have no answer to that question, but there are some things to consider. Our intelligence service regularly uses assassination, political insurrection, coups, and all manner of deceitful methods to undermine foreign governments. It isn’t a far stretch that they would use those methods here in the US. The release of the documents for Operation Northwoods clearly demonstrates they do.

      From a military point of view, our top brass my have considered the 9/11 event as a “necessary evil” for the better good. I understand how that must sound, but from a global point of view it can make perfect sense. If our top military/political/financial leaders had some reason to believe we had to capture territory in the mid-east and/or central Asia for purposes of securing resources essential to our security, our dependence on foreign oil comes to mind first, then a trade-off of 3,000 (while minimizing financial losses using insurance and insider trading) may be deemed as acceptable.

      There is also the nefarious goals of the Global Domination Project (yes it is real) which could consider a 9/11 like event as needed. Google PNAC: New American Century which claims a “new pearl harbor” would be needed to accelerate military spending/advances. See this interview http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2003/04/18_falk-interview.htm

      Another possible reason is cover up or to perpetuate an even bigger lie. I know what you must be thinking “A BIGGER LIE!?” Yes, there is even a bigger lie our gov’t continues to perpetuate. The grand daddy of ‘em all, and that is our debt based fiat currency is, by any definition, a ponzi scheme. And it is a ponzi scheme of global proportion. Try reading the short book by Marc Plummer, Dishonest Money, found at amazon. This article is a good place to start too. http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/ron-hera/fifteen-fundamental-problems-with-fiat-currencies

      I know its a lot take in, but there are many many reasons why. Too many to mention and I just mentioned the prospects in my judgement. I hope one day we’ll know for sure before I die. Good luck.

  13. xxxxx

    The whole world knows 9/11 was a inside job. The whole world knows American bankers can’t be trusted.
    So when people talk about saving the dollar I just LOL,because you can’t have a money system in a lawless land.
    As a old Ironworker who spend his life raising steel. I was home on 9/11 watching the towers on fire. If you watch the floors above the damage,they started to lean.
    We called steel falling over[ heading for the street], just as the top floors were tipping over the building turn to dust.
    I was glad when many educated people who understand engineering came out and said the 9/11 report is BS.
    Yes Greg, the country leaders and MSM are killers and lairs. The whole world knows the truth. Other nations can’t trust banking and trading with a lawless nation like America. This is why the truth must come out sooner are later, no rule of law no money system.
    It’s simple I will trade with anyone who is honest but cheat me once and that’s it. Countries are no different then people.

  14. DayOwl

    1. The official stories never quite added up.

    2. It was awfully convenient for the politicians in power and their agenda. (I had this thought just days after the event.)

    I vote for: Insightful.

  15. M SMITH

    Greg, they forgot to mention the large sum of gold bars removed from building #7 just days before the building collapse. I wish I knew the links pointing to the movement of 16 or 60 metric tons of gold bars & where/whom it was shipped to! I sure one of your readers will remember & provide the info about why/when/where the gold went! If not I will find the link & post it here.

    Now a story most will never hear about. After the fed came out with it’s no QE, a friend who works in sales at a large bullion dealer in the U.S. gave me call & the chat turned to the big drop in PM’s prices. As soon as gold & silver hit their lows, huge orders for physical started coming in from Asia/China. We are not talking about a monster box, we are talking about 500 plus monster boxs of ASE’s to one person & huge quantities of AGE’s, gold bars, Mapels all leaving the U.S. to private buyers in China & Asia. He also reported, there was very little selling of PM’s except some 90% U.S. coins. This is no false report, he said this has become the norm as the fed & bullion banks do their take downs of PM’s. China & other private citizens from Asian nations come in & buy huge amounts of gold & silver coinage that needs no assay like kilo bars do. When it come time to sell, this is what my friend told me. The company he works for will buy & pay for coins that were minted in the U.S. & Canada first, then bars take longer to get paid for because of the time to get assayed, then scrap comes last, so owning the right form of PM’s means how fast you are able to exchange them for fiat, if needed! He did not recomend selling any gold unless it was scrap & then buy U.S.gold AGE’s & ASE’s with the money you get for scrap. Great advise I would say!
    Have a great day folks!

  16. Jeff S.

    I have no doubt whatsoever there’s been a massive cover-up over 9/11. I strongly suspect if the American people ever learn the full truth, there very well might be an armed insurrection against our government and maybe even against some of our so-called allies.

  17. Sean

    There are too many anomalies in the “official” story to accept it all at face value. Here are a few of the red flags for me:
    – It took the government a year to respond to families of 9/11 victims who demanded an investigation, before anything was officially conducted.
    – Declared that the source of funding for the hijackers was not relevant
    – Ignored arrests on 9/11 of foreign intelligence operatives who were witnessed setting up cameras and filming the first tower strike (before anyone supposedly suspected an attack) and later arrested in a van found to contain explosive residue, that belonged to a foreign owend moving company that was funded by US government money and held contractor passes to the World Trade Center. The five were allowed to leave the US by federal government officials.
    – Some of what the 9/11 Commission failed to report:
    – no mention Building 7 anywhere in the report, which housed the NYC Emergency Operations/Command Center, a major Secret Service Office (that was conducted the largest securities fraud investigation in history), and several other critical federal agencies
    – The report ignored testimony and evidence by the Able Danger military team, showing government knowledge and tracking of hijackers.

    There are more unresolved issues that the families are still seeking answers for, but these are some of the ones that stick out to me as stumbling blocks that need answered before I could accept the official story.

    Another point that someone showed me one time is in the official FDNY follow-up interviews that they conducted with many of the firefighters from the scene. A few of the senior firefighters described rings of explosives going off on a few levels of the towers in the seconds before they came down, and others described the lower floors of the towers as completely blown out before they came down. When I heard that I looked carefully at some of the vidoe footage of the collapses and you can actually see blasts of powederized debris blowing 100’s of feet out of the sides of the towers as the collapse progresses downwards. Those are odd to me because they really do look the same as the blasts that you see in controlled demolitions as lower floors are blown out to eliminate resistance to the fall.

    So I can’t say who was fully responsible or how it was done – that would require a real investigation. But I do have serious doubts about the official story. It just doesn’t stand up when I get really honest with myself, ignore what I want to believe, and dig straight into the details (while also ignoring a lot of the rediculous garbage and stupid claims that some people or websites have made about 9/11, like there were no planes etc).

  18. John Nobody

    No, I don’t believe any government would do anything to hurt any of its citizens for any reason. I also believe everything TV tells me. I am willing to suspend reason and critical thinking any time [sarcasm off]

    • MasterLuke

      You sir must be a fine lover of puppy dogs.

  19. Splat

    Greg, President Bush watched the first plane hit the tower on television, remember? Because, obviously the TV was on, you know…obviously…because it would have to be. And whatever channel would have to have a camera pointed at the WTC for some reason before the 1st plane hit so that Bush could be sitting there watching it happen. I think that clears it up.

    Unless he “misspoke” about…something.

  20. Tom

    At first I thought the conspiracy theorists were out there. To some, everything is a conspiracy. Well, maybe not everything is a conspiracy but it is hard to remember the last time the government ever told us the truth about anything. And as time goes on it seems like the only thing to come out of 9/11 is the loss of our own liberty and freedom. 9/11 has become an excuse for the deprivation of our freedom to move about, to communicate, to conduct commerce, or even express an opinion without consequence. We must show our papers for everything we do except vote. Strange, no?

    • Mark Gobell

      Indeed.

      But you must remember the meme:

      They, the alleged guilty party that were named on TV by the usual suspects within minutes of the 9/11 event, are the ones that are supposed to hate our freedoms and way of life.

      So, it must have been Osama Bin Laden and his crew that have forced your government and my government to enact all those laws that have taken away those very freedoms to, erm, protect us all for the chaps that want to take away our freedoms.

      Clever chap that Osama Bin Laden wasn’t he ?

  21. M SMITH

    I must fix the statement my friend told me, it was not 500 plus monster boxs, it was all the ASE’s in stock & all of the silver maples in stock. Also one person bought over a 50 million in gold coins & bars.
    I called him on his lunch break today & these large orders are still coming in. He corrected me on what was selling. He also said his boss is busy on the phone trying to get more inventory in as fast as possible to fill orders.
    Sorry for the misstake, but this says alot who & why PM’s are in such big demand by people who live out side the USA!

  22. Kerry

    I guess Building 7 fell down on its own because of the vibrations from the other buildings collapsing. Right, that could happen.

    • grandma caesar

      it fell due to heartbreak. it just couldn’t go on living after observing it’s older twin brothers destroyed.

  23. jay

    Greg…Im a conspiracy nut case on 911. my opinoin on 911 can not be said by typing on the computer.Anyone with a 10th of a percent of a brain can see this investagation was never finished. over 3,000 architect,s around the world have spoken of how planes could not take a building that size down at free fall. Impossible! This is not a theroy! this is fact.. Its sad that the government allows the world oligarchy to get by with this to any country..even more so to america.
    I have bought 100 dvds on 911 from onedollardvdproject.com and pass the around to open minded people. I for one will always call for a investagation into this crime of ,and by the government of the usa.Either our leaders was in on it,or they covered the truth about who did it. I know good men should be allowed to disagree.
    I could go on for days on this subject.. The truth is on the internet. People just need to do there own research. Believe your eyes; and ears rather then the lame extreem lieing media.

  24. matt

    Imo, it is very tough for any reasonable person to objectively look at all of the information that is out there and not question the official story.

  25. dave

    How about the Pensy Plane crash? There have been pictures of Plane crashes onT.V. on the Enternet why was there no debirs ?

  26. Davis

    From my own blog published in May of last year

    Growing weary of 9-11 Truthers.

    It seems like about once a month or so we get another article somewhere either raising questions if not making nefarious accusations about the fate of Building 7 at the World Trade Center. The latest being that it was deliberately brought down so that it could be done in a controlled manner so as to minimize any collateral damage of it coming down on its own.

    Whether it’s this scenario or any of the others, there are a couple of questions that I never see addressed. One: If it was a controlled demolition, how was it done so quickly? There exist many video productions of controlled demolitions. They all, without exception, document how it is a well thought out, planned and fully engineered process involving specific physical modifications to the structure that can take weeks if not months to put into place before the sirens go off and the button is pushed. Two: Even if one were to dismiss question #1 and contend that it was “rush job” executed to some pre- arranged plan, how can it be explained that during those events of that terrible day, as literally dozens if not hundreds of cameras both of the news media and private citizens, were focused on ground zero, no one has come forth with any video of these alleged demolition crews either going into or out of the building. Police, fire and rescue crews were everywhere, yet none have come forward to document any such “suspicious activity.”

    I do know that that the center of building 7 contained a large open area with large, long span beams supporting the structure above it. These beams, as manufactured and installed may well have been more than adequate to do the intended job and I’m sure calculated to factors of safety to withstand shock loads. Much of the strength of these kinds of beam structures comes from both the particular alloy used and from how they are heat treated to lock in particular grain structures in order to maximize and balance yield and tensile strengths. When these kinds of specially conditioned steels are subsequently subjected to prolonged exposure to heat, as with an uncontrolled fire, grain structures change, molecules revert from the stronger face centered structure to the weaker body centered structure, and their thermally engineered strength goes away. Already subjected to huge loads, coming out of design intent, that their new metallurgical condition can no longer sustain, they bend and collapse. Having been located centrally in the structure everything then fell into this now unsupported void, looking very much like a “controlled” event.

    Just my two cents worth, but I think it’s kind of an “Occam’s razor” kind of deal.

    • xxxxx

      Building seven did have a long span on the bottom floors. Steel building are boxes, you could crush the bottom boxes. Then you would end up with a bunch of mess up boxes sitting on top.
      Building seven and the towers were both controlled take downs.
      If the buildings were crush under there own weight, they would buckle zig zag. They wouldn’t fall at free fall speed straight down.
      All you got to do is take a long light metal tube. Weld it down , then push down on it. It will bend over, not go straight down. Tall buildings are just long tubes with floors. The floors even make the tube stronger. My 2 cents

    • Wayne

      Davis….you might want to Google the video called ‘Loose Change’ by Dylan Avery. It could answer a lot of questions and as far as any demo crews are concerned it’s a pretty good bet they did their best work in the dead of night without any cameras rolling.

    • Scott

      Davis, the explosives and incendiaries were not planted on the day of the attacks, but rather over the course of months preceding the attacks. George Bush’s brother Marvin, and cousin Wirt Walker were on the board of directors at Securacom, the company which oversaw security at the WTC (as well as Dulles, Logan Airports, as well as United Airlines). Don’t you think that’s a bizarre coincidence?

      The use of military patented nano-thermite was detected in the debris at ground zero, and numerous first responders and survivors testify to the use secondary explosive devices. The nano-thermite could’ve been painted on the walls during the numerous renovation projects at the WTC, and those painting would not be aware of its presence. Securacom oversaw the installation of new “security devices” throughout the buildings in the months prior to 9-11.

      Jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steel (take 2,800 degrees and the fires at the plane impact zone never exceeded 800). If you argue that it was hot enough to weaken the steel, then how do you explain the freefall destruction of the lower floors? What caused enormous steel beams to project hundreds of feet into surrounding buildings? They should’ve dropped straight down, not exploded outward. There were huge molten pools in lower Manhattan that burned for 3 weeks after the attack. How could jet fuel account for those? After the moment the planes impacted, there were numerous survivors waving for help near the openings. Shouldn’t they have been incinerated, if the jet fuel fires were hot enough to melt the steel of 110 floors?

      Check out http://www.ae911truth.org where 1,700 architects and engineers have petitioned for a new investigation.

      • Davis

        Sorry but no melting required, it only takes 300 deg. for sustained period to cause the transformation from face centered to body centered grain structure. Thaats why when these engineered alloys are welded they have what are called interpass control tempetures.

        • Henry

          Davis, you’re right that melting isn’t required for structural steel to gradually weaken and begin to slowly deform. But melting of steel did take place. Here is just one example of many that can not be explained by fires, but is readily explained by the highly refined military grade naonthermetic material that was discovered in steel and dust samples.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

        • Mark Gobell

          But melting is required to melt iron (2800 deg F) and molybdenum (4753 deg F), which have been found in the WTC dust by the RJ Lee Group and the US Geological Survey respectively.

          NIST claim max gas temp for the WTC fires of 1800 deg F

          Houston we have a problem …

    • ben

      Use “Occam’s razor” but not as a lobotomy tool. Seriously, your suggestion that it is impossible for building 7 to have been taken down by demolition because there was no evidence of demolition guys rushing about trying to wire it ON THE DAY of 9/11 itself, is beyond thin. How about, they did it beforehand? Is that so hard to imagine? It would take the building owner and the head of Security to put the word out that construction or fireproofing or elevator maintenance would be going on (as was the case) and no one would think twice to the sight of these workers. Seriously, if you got a memo that construction work was going on in your building, would it ever occur to you that it might be something devious instead? I’m guessing not.

    • Mark Gobell

      Hi Davis

      I think you might want to step back a little and start from scratch with your notion, if I’ve understood you correctly, that the demolition charges which clearly brought down WTC7, must have been planted on the day.

      Clearly that is highly improbable.

      The 47 storey steel framed skyscraper, WTC7, fell to the ground in under 7 seconds. Fact.

      The main aspect of the WTC7 story that you might like to focus on is the belated admission by NIST that for 2.25 seconds of it’s demise, the WTC7 building fell for 100 feet, at gravitational acceleration.

      That’s freefall to you and me.

      Remember that the top of the building shoud be falling through the path of most resistance, ie: the thousands of tons of building below it.

      The only way that it’s possible for WTC7 to fall for 100 feet in 2.25 seconds is for the entire supporting stcuture to have been removed.

      That’s the mystery that NIST have admitted to, but have so far failed to explain.

      NIST were only forced to confront this scientific fact, not by their own research, costing you millions of tax dollars, but from the elementary research of a high school physics teacher, David Chandler.

      So, are the NIST reports value for money would you say ?

      Many scientists have openly accused NIST of “scientific fraud”.

      NIST will still not release their WTC computer models, for the stated reason they doing so might “compromise public safety”.

      So, the kind of “science” that NIST has produced to explain the destruction of 3 steel framed skyscrapers, is not allowed to be seen by other scientists.

      Secret “science” is not science.

      See this video on the font page at http://www.ae911truth.org

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hZEvA8BCoBw

    • callemasiseeum

      Davis,

      Question 1. It in all likelihood did take a very long time to plan and implement. For example, we know the largest elevator upgrade was taking place throughout 2000/01. We know that new kind of fire proofing was applied to columns in the impact zones. Many tenants reported more than usual evacuation drills and being moved to different floors for renovations in months leading up to 9/11. Certainly, much of the work could be done during off hours as well.

      Question 2. No is dismissing the first question, no suggested it was a “rush job”. Why would anyone be led to believe a demo crew was there that day? We do know that 20 employees from ACE Elevator evacuated the towers after the first strike and refused to re-enter the building to assist firefighters with inoperative cars. This may be very innocuous, make of it what you will.

      WTC 7 did use long floor spans, but there is no reason to believe this is a flaw in the design. No evidence exists about what temperatures critical steel beams/columns actually reached so entire “collapse scenario” is pure speculation. Unless NIST finally releases ALL of their supporting data which they refuse to do.

      As for Occam’s Razor, we would need to suspend known facts about steel structures and laws of physics in order to believe the official 9/11 narrative. There many demonstrable falsehoods in 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports. So applying Occam’s Razor really lies with the fact that 9/11 was a staged event for our consumption and support US hegemony and imperialism.

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        “we would need to suspend known facts about steel structures and laws of physics in order to believe the official 9/11 narrative. “…

        Not so.

        What known facts must be suspended and what laws of physics must be suspended to …. explain the collapse of those buildings.

        NIST didn’t actually explain the collapse phase… what they called global collapse in the twin towers. They did come up with an implausible explanation of what LED to the global collapse..

        Once it began the global collapse… to use their term… did not defy any laws of physics or engineering principles of steel design or materials science.

        In the case of Bldg 7 NIST came up with a rather incredible collapse model… FEA which doesn’t even resemble the observed collapse. They claim it demonstrates how a their single column failure could progress to global collapse. But it’s not the observed one so it’s invalid and irrelevant.

        Their whole thrust was to demonstrate an office fire driven cause for the global collapse. Their science and engineering was incorrect with respect to the performance of the girder supported by column 79 in any case so their initiation explanation was incorrect and irrelevant.

        Your scenarios and read of the events are all driven by your BELIEF in controlled demolition.

        Bldg 7 came down because it rapidly lost axial support quite lot down… at the 8th floor or above. The likely place to look was in the mech floors where several transfer trusses and 8 cantilever girders held up the entire core and row of columns on the north side.

        Study how progressive failures cascade through system to understand how the a structural system performs under stress since it has reserve strength or redundancy. The moment the reserve strength is lost… the structure fails instantly, catastrophically and globally… it only takes the last straw to break the camel’s back.

        • Henry

          Jeffrey, there is no such thing as a free fall and symmetric “progressive failure” of a hurricane and earth quake resistant steel framed high rise. Read this letter and see if it helps you understand why the gradual, asymmetric weakening of a few support columns can’t possibly cause the instant, total, and symmetric failure of all the support columns. These are two entirely different events.

          http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/f/LeggeLastTry4.pdf

        • callemasiseeum

          J. Orling asks:

          “What known facts must be suspended and what laws of physics must be suspended to …. explain the collapse of those buildings.”

          1. The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

          In your own words “They did come up with an implausible explanation of what LED to the global collapse” So lacking any other natural cause, once the energy of the plane impacts dissipated, the building structure remained as it was designed to do. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930227&slug=1687698 The downward force and the upward resistance are in balance. For the top portion of either building to move, the upward resistive force must have been removed first.

          2. The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear.

          Using the North Tower as an example, If the top 12 floors were really crushing the lower portion, it would have to slow down, but in all 3 buildings, they accelerate. The damage being done to the lower section would also be done to the top section. At the very most, the top 12 floors could only destroy the next 12 floors. Bazant has claimed that the debris provided a cushioning effect for the top portion. This is absurd in the face of Newton’s 3rd law, the effect is both ways, you can’t have it in just one. To see this principle at work, see the measurements of the balzac-vitry demolition. First note it takes a CD to bring the structure straight down. Also note how it starts in the middle, applying Newton’s 3rd law. Also note the building is a masonry structure. This demolition technique does not work with steel structures because of steel’s strength. 2.25 seconds of freefall seriously violates Newton’s third law and strains credulity to believe fire could accomplish this.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL3705E482383CCA91&feature=player_embedded&v=NiHeCjZlkr8

          3. Angular Momentum

          The South Tower tilts 22 degrees moving its center of gravity outside of the building footprint. Yet it precipitously changes direction to “crush” the lower section? Even though symmetrical waves of destruction run down the building on the opposite side. In this video, as in all WTC videos, you can visually see the work of explosives.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DChR1XcYhlw&list=PL3705E482383CCA91&feature=player_embedded

          I could continue but what more could you possibly need. Good luck

          • Jeffrey Orling RA

            Calle:

            The top section 16 floors for tower 1 and 32 for tower 2 were NOT crushing the columns of anything!

            In fact, what we see in the top sections is very much the mechanism that we observe in a typical CD… the columns at the base of the structure are weakened or destroyed and the floors and structure above them comes crashing down… usually it crashed to the ground (where the columns were weakened). In the case of the twin towers… the structure came down upon the 95 floor for tower 1 and the 78th floor for tower 2…. not the solid ground.

            The the progressive FLOOR collapse destruction began because the 4″ thick concrete floors could not support the tens of thousands of tons of materials from the floors above raining down on them (a la CD… or similar to one.) and shattered and the runaway floor collapse began. Nothing could stop it in the towers… THE COLUMNS WERE NOT CRUSHED. The core columns SURVIVED the collapse of the floors. The facade columns were not crushed. They lost their lateral support which came from the floors and toppled over and away from the towers. LOOK at the video.

            Many people are confused by the tipping top of tower 2. What they fail to understand is:

            The tipping was about a *virtual hinge* on the NW side of the core…so the tipping caused the SE side to dig into the building crashing the floors of the tilting top into the standing bottom on the SE side.

            The center of gravity of the tilting top never moved outside the footprint of the tower. Which meant that the gravitational force was within the tower not outside the tower.

            There was some angular momentum which drove part of the upper floors outside the footprint and as the 32 stories continued to drop those part remained outside the footprint. But MOST of the energy and motion was vertical not rotational… as the virtual hinge was ALSO dropping. Notice the horseshoe buckled columns showing drop AS WELL as translation. You can find some vids in which you can see the very top tipping roof line disappear INTO the tower at about the 50th floor. This shows the top section has clearly crushed about 25 something floors as it descends and then disappears… all 32 floors have been crushed or crashed into the structure below… taking out the top 25 floors of the lower section. LOOK carefully. Look at ALL the vids especially the ones from the north north east… lock south.

            view this video and see how long and how far the roof line descends and how much of the tower below is gone when you lose sight of it. Not the facade then peels off and emerges from the debris canopy as it’s pushed the the east. LOOK CAREFULLY

            David Chandler is a sloppy observer and very biased and often wrong.

            I don’t know if the links work… but read this:

            http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/

            Introduction
            1: Science vs Subjective Viewpoints
            2: WTC Collapses Misrepresented
            ….2.1: Progressive Floor Collapse in the WTC Towers
            ….2.2: Purpose of the NIST Reports
            ….2.3: NIST WTC1 Misrepresentation
            ….2.4: NIST WTC7 Misrepresentation
            ….2.5: NIST WTC2 Misrepresentation
            ….2.6: Bazant Misrepresentation of Collapse Progression
            ….2.7: Block Mechanics
            ….2.8: AE911T Misrepresentations of the Towers
            3: Toward Accurate Collapse Histories
            4: Reassessing the Question of Demolition
            5: Collapses Misrepresented as a False Choice
            Author’s Conclusions

            http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=277&MMN_position=560:560

            Believe me… there is much better research and science than David Chandler…

  27. James M

    Two planes and three buildings just doesn’t add up. There is no question in my mind that bld 7 was a demolition. The police and emergency personnel said this building is coming down 5 minutes before it came down while they were running away from it and the owner of the whole complex, Larry Silverstein, slipped up and admitted it during a PBS interview. He said “we decided to pull it” which is a term referring to the demolition of the building. That was a huge building and it fell at free fall speed for at least, I think, 3-4 seconds of the 7 seconds it took to fall. Go watch an Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth video, it is quite disturbing to say the least. The “official story” is pathetic, full of inconsistencies and outright lies. Cui bono?

  28. kenergy599

    There is more than enough evidence to show it was an inside job.
    Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell et al, are murderers.
    Obama and Holder are letting them walk free.

  29. William

    Come on people, get real please. Do you really think the goverment, which we all say can’t do anything right, could pull off a massive event like 9/11 which would take years to set up and complete it flawlessly. Do you realize how many people would have to be involved. Come on our goverment can’t even fill a pot hole effectively, is going to do this right with out a trace, just rumors of rumors of a rumor of someone is covering up something. How about this. George Bush was the pilot of both planes and at the last second before impact Scottie beamed him back to the class room. There discuss that one for a few years.

    • Henry

      William, the government didn’t pull it off flawlessly. That’s why there is so much compelling evidence that 9-11 was an inside job. Having said that, the government does do some things right…

      http://ae911truth.org
      http://911speakout.org
      http://911research.com

    • ben

      I would believe your “someone would have talked” theory if it hadn’t been the go-to excuse of the Catholic Church for hundreds of years.

      As a matter of policy the Church would dismiss out of hand accusations that they were conspiring to hide abuse by claiming such abuse would be impossible to hide because it would take many thousands to keep it all secret and who could keep such horrible things secret?

      So, I wish what you were saying was true, but the truth is, there are unspeakable secrets that are easily kept. Made easier by the fact that people, to their core, don’t want to believe such horrible things – and so it followed that the Church didn’t have to work hard to discredit its accusers as kooks. And that, in turn, would intimidate others from speaking up.

      • Scott

        Yeah, that “someone would’ve talked” argument doesn’t hold water. Do professionial hit men talk about their crimes openly? What happens to mobsters who rat out their ciminal bosses? They get whacked and thrown in a landfill. There are plenty of cold-blooded killers who know what happens when you don’t keep your mouth shut.

        Besides, who’s going to listen with an open ear? The MSM? They didn’t even mention Building 7, the numerous ground zero eyewitnesses who spoke of seeing and hearing explosives, the Mossad agents who were found with detonaters and explosive material in their van (remember the “dancing Palestinians”), Cheney’s stand-down order at the Pentagon, Bush’s bizarre lack of response upon hearing that a second tower was hit. The MSM also didn’t bother to explore the Bush-Bin Laden family connections, the obvious two hour stand-down in air defenses, the insider trading, the fact that no one was ever court-martialed for failure (many like General Myers were promoted in rank), the war games exercises that diverted NORAD from responding… If you’re waiting for the MSM to provide an open forum to firsthand witnesses; you’re never going to get it.

    • Radar

      Here’s one of the most amazingly massive secrets that was ever kept:

      When Vice President Harry Truman became US president on April 12, 1945 (upon the death of President Roosevelt), he had no knowledge of the Manhattan Project. The first information he had about what was going on came from Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson on April 25th.

      From his personal memoirs, here’s President Truman’s account of his first Cabinet meeting as president, April 12, 1945, the day of President Roosevelt’s death:

      “That first cabinet meeting was short, and when it adjourned, the members rose silently and made their way from the room–except for Secretary Stimson.

      He asked to speak to me about a most urgent matter. Stimson told me that he wanted me to know about an immense project that was underway–a project looking to the development of a new explosive of almost unbelievable destructive power. That was all he felt free to say at the time, and his statement left me puzzled. It was the first bit of information that had come to me about the atomic bomb, but he gave me no details…. The next day Jimmy Byrnes, who until shortly before had been Director of War Mobilization for President Roosevelt, came to see me, and even he told me a few details, though with great solemnity he said that we were perfecting an explosive great enough to destroy the whole world.”

      Source: Memoirs by Harry S. Truman, 1945: Year of Decisions (New York: Smithmark, 1995), pp. 10-11, published online by Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

  30. Rick

    Conspiracies are real. The US kills people everyday around the world. People need to look at the history of the world, and you will soon realize humans have done worse things (to other humans) then what happened on 9.11. So yes, to say the US GOV was not involved is very naive.

  31. Doug Cowlthorp

    Unfortunately it is people like William ,that believe everything the government says, that allow things like 911 and any number of Government/CIA operations to go on without ever questioning them. Every other month something comes out about how the CIA and other Government bodies where involved in some nefarious operation somehwere after telling the people for years that “Nothing here, just move on”. Can you find Area 51 on a map yet? That is so obiously located at Groom lake but still no one in the Government will admit it. The Government has many things going on around the world that very few people know about so you don’t need every police officer in on it to pull BIG things off. Just how I see it from another countries point of view.

  32. bean

    i’ll say this. if you believe our government orchestrated 9/11, then you have to the duty to remove that govt. by force. because if you think our govt. slaughtered or let others slaughter 3000 of our fellow citizens, and you do nothing except bitch on the internet? then you have already surrendered.
    ever seen someone whos been slashed with a razor knife? look it up. ever seen a tanker truck “melt” a bridge? look it up.how about the 80 year old woman that landed the cessna after her husband died in the seat? she had zero training, but landed the little plane. landed! not flew it into a building. and wtc7? how much crap do you think fell from the towers onto that roof? seems to me there was something about one of the jet engines in the basement? you want a real conspiracy? watch this. http://ncrenegade.com/editorial/ronald-reagan-knew-what-was-coming/

    • Nathan Hale

      Right, I should have walked into the Oval Office and made a citizens arrest.

    • Henry

      Bean, what do razor cuts have to do with the demolition of WTC7 and the towers? Please do some research. Also, your suggestion that I remove the government by force is even more far fetched that the government’s 9-11 “cave man” conspiracy theory!

      http://ae911truth.org
      http://911speakout.org
      http://911research.com

      • bean

        nathan, henry. imagine if our nations founders thought like you. man, what happened to this country?

        • bean

          greg, sorry dude. but like brad and brit……..

          • Greg

            Bean,
            I like them too!
            Greg

  33. randbo

    Insane-bldg 7 bottom 10 stories were heavily damaged from the other buildings collapse (original FEMA report was wrong). All these buildings were built to NYC code to collapse straight down. Bldg 7 also contained diesel generators and diesel fuel for emergency back up for the subways. Please people move on, we have serious problems facing our country that are real.

    • Henry

      Randbo, you are mistaken. The government’s “explanation” for WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop has changed, as lies often do to fit new evidence. NIST’s final report clearly states that neither structural damage from tower debris nor diesel fuel played a role in WTC7’s drop. It is now blamed on nothing but minor, ordinary office fires. And of course, none of the WTC buildings were “were built to NYC code to collapse straight down”. Please review the WTC7 free fall videos at this link for more information.

      http://911speakout.org

  34. Rod Cloutier

    Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth: 2 1/2 hours of evidence:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ

  35. Baja Bryan

    Greg,

    I commend you on addressing this subject which has significantly more questions than answers.

    It still amazes me that nobody seems to remember how Osama bin Laden’s family were urgently evacuated from the United States in the first days following the terrorist attacks during the no-fly period. Even though American airspace had been shut down the Bush administration allowed a jet to fly around the US picking up family members from 10 cities, including Los Angeles, Washington DC, Boston and Houston.And guess who picked up the tab???

    People need to wake the hell up and start practicing some objectivity or get prepared for the dark ages. I’m embarassed at how gulible folks have become.

  36. Baja Bryan

    Another great article on this subject.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15186

  37. Stephen Clifton

    Greg,
    I struggle with this one. The thought that our government could pull off an attack on it’s own people of this magnitude without any inside players coming forward about the consipiracy puts an awful lot of faith in the efficiency of the Federal Government. Think about it. Have you been to the DMV lately or dealt with a government organization at any level? I certainly wouldn’t put it past the Feds to let it happen and gain from it but to plan it is a stretch. Maybe explosives were put in WTC 7. Maybe Flight 93 was shot down. If it came out that these things actually happened I honestly would not have a problem with the act, just a problem with the lie. Maybe the “Let’s Roll” crew brought down the plane, maybe not. The end result is the same. Good people are dead and self serving “elected” (bought) officials are profiting from it.

    In two generations we have gone from being the most endeared nation in the world to the most reviled. More Americans than ever are on government assistance and millions in the world have died because of our endless wars, police actions or whatever else they want to call our military mobilizations. The real question you need to ask is after all of this does 911 truth really matter when we have committed thousands of 911s in other countries? Whether they planned it or covered up allowing it to happen we already know the “truth”. We are no longer “the good guys”.

    Steve

    P.S. Does anybody really buy that other countries hate us because of our freedom? If you believe that crap you should be deported. Not the Mexican trying to make a living. Sorry for the rant.

    • ben

      So, if the Gambinos shoot up a restaurant and a bunch of people get killed, you expect one of them to run to the police and rat on the family?

  38. larsolfen

    Jet fuel is, ostensibly, kerosene and not known to melt steel. The skill of the pentagon pilot is unsurpassed, why was he not flying for the saudi air force. Obvious false flag attacks to ramp up tyranny.

    • chowthen

      I was in the V4 division in the NAVY and I can tell you JP4 used in ship board aircraft has a flash point of 170 deg F and I do believe the land base aircraft uses JP5 which has a lower flash point which is a bit more volatile. Even so a crash exposing the fuel will cause the the fuel to burn if not the magnesium used in some parts of the aircraft will burn continuously. I have seen fire in the water after a jet crashed when I was in the NAVY.

  39. Tony

    The Shadow Government Is very calculating everything is for a greater purpose releasing Obama’s fake passport for example is to let us know we are now officially a New World Order, the highest office belongs to a non-American. 911 also served its purpose to usher in the destruction of our liberties but also it was done in a way to let us know they did it and they have no problem murdering innocent people….this creates a compliant acceptance of the totalitarian NWO control grid enforced by an illusion of power.
    Our only hope is if enough people do not comply pull your money out of their casino, do not vote, no taxes, cut-off your cable TV & eventually when censored your internet,Take your kids out of school a gather in small communities and establish trade outside the government even if it means prison or death.

  40. I1

    Building 7 reaching free fall acceleration has been acknowledged by NIST, and is irrefutable evidence of a controlled demolition. This fact alone is game over for the official story.

  41. Henry

    Thank you Greg for posting this! Very few people have the guts to question the government’s 9-11 conspiracy theory. Your honesty, integrity, and knowledge are greatly appreciated. There is absolutely no doubt that 9-11 was an inside job. The government’s “cave man” conspiracy theory is not only comically absurd, but it’s quite literally physically impossible. WTC7 crushed its way through thousands of tons of mostly undamaged steel columns at a rate that is indistinguishable from free fall – the same rate it would fall through air. That’s not possible unless all the columns lost all their strength instantly, totally, and simultaneously. Obviously, that can not be caused by the gradual heating of a few random floors and areas of the building. In fact, not even a raging inferno engulfing all floors and all areas of the building can cause that sort of failure. Highly refined military grade nanothermetic material that was used to demolish the buildings was discovered in steel and dust sample by a team of nine international scientists. Also, keep in mind that Flt77 which allegedly hit the Pentagon was tracked approaching the most secure and heavily guarded airspace on the planet almost an hour after the first tower was hit, yet not one interceptor jet managed to get airborne. And of course, the Bush regime vehemently opposed an investigation into 9-11 for well over a year, and also initially refused to testify before their own hand picked commission. When pressure finally convinced Bush and Cheney to testify, they insisted on testifying together, with their lawyers present, a one hour time limit, not under oath, and no transcript.
    There is an information war on this topic, and this war involves disinformation. We should reject anyone who pushes absurd theories such as no planes hit the towers, or that they were brought down by “space beams” or nuclear bombs. Here is a website with some excellent 10 minute videos analyzing the evidence proving demolition. It is produced by a physics teacher and an engineer, both of whom are very knowledgeable, credible and professional. Thanks again, Greg.

    http://911speakout.org

  42. Henry

    Greg, when you ask if we think “the 9/11 conspiracy theory is insane or insightful”, I think you should specify which one you’re referring to. ;-) The government’s conspiracy theory is insane, but the inside job conspiracy theory is backed by hard evidence and expert research. That’s why most supporters of the government’s conspiracy theory are *very* reluctant to discuss the evidence, while supporters of the inside job conspiracy theory are very open to discussing it. Also, my experience has shown me that almost all supporters of the government’s “cave man” conspiracy theory are very poorly informed and their beliefs are based primarily on blind faith and misconceptions…

  43. Ryan

    Building 7 was brought down on purpose. That’s the end of the Muslim conspiracy theory.

    Israelis were caught red handed filming the 1st plane strike and with bombs in vans on 911 > who did it.

    Two smoking guns, otherwise the perps would have been home free.

  44. Orangutan.

    9/11 is the lynchpin to this whole madness of the war on terror. The anthrax attacks in the weeks after need a bunch of scrutiny as well. Sent to the top Democrats and key media figures.

    Keep speaking the truth.

    http://www.911Blogger.com

    Thanks!

    • WhoWhatWhy

      Orangutan, thanks for bringing our article to people’s attention

  45. Mitch Bupp

    I don’t buy the “official story on 911 either. I have some experience in heavy construction and my whole problem is that when the planes impacted the side of the building that the support columns on the impact side would have suffered some damage and therefore those supports would have collapsed first which means that the building could not have pancaked the way it appears on video. I often wonder if a weapon of Tesla’s design could have been used after the planes impact…

    and yes, I believe that some parts of the government knew and let it happen for political convienence.

  46. striving4simple

    - go to the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth web site
    – go to the Evidence page
    – download the mpeg “PBS Footage of WTC1 Demolition”
    – watch it in slow motion
    – ask yourself questions like:
    Why is the right side of the building blowing outward in a wave that moving downward as fast as the falling debris (freefall)?
    Why is the corner of the building blowing outward – but at a different level and rate than the right side?
    How could there then be a symmetrical ‘pancake’ effect?
    If compressed air is supposed to be responsible for the blowing out (including a 600 ton chunk of debris that lodged in an adjacent building) but the air escapes when the side blew out – what is making the corner blow out?
    What are those small explosions that precede the downward wave?
    If the squib explosions are really just more compressed air and dust – shouldn’t dusty air continue to be vented out until progressive “pancaking” reaches that point?

    For more spirit punishment search online for footage of the Pentagon just, that is JUST, after it was ‘hit’ and ask:

    – what happened to the wings and engines?
    – why is there no corresponding damage to the face of the Pentagon from the wings and engines
    – why won’t the FBI release the video?
    – why doesn’t the eye witness testimony of the plane’s path match with the ‘official’ version

    – what happened to the Enron fraud case?

    – what happened at the Pentagon on Sept 10th that can’t be investigated because of what happened on Sept 11th

    – what happened to the precious metals? (estimates are between $300 Billion and $1,000 Billion of gold and silver)

    – why was there a very low amount of opium exported from Afghanistan in 1999 but by 2005 it was the highest ever?

    – what was Saddam Hussein planning to do that would challenge the Federal Reserve?

  47. Wheatcountry

    Greg, Maybe there was a conspiracy in the JFK assasination, maybe we really didn’t go to the moon, maybe little green men secretly run the government, I don’t know but would someone please pass the Fruit Loops.

    • Doug Cowlthorp

      Wheatcountry.
      Have you read the post prior to yours with an open mind or just willing to believe anything the Government tells you?

  48. mark

    Anybody who was taken the time to examine ALL of the evidence would know 911 was NOT what they told us it was. Unfortunately most Americans are to lazy or to busy watching football, to do their own research an look at ALL of the facts, none of which will be on the television or radio in this country. None of us with 25000 hours in 757’s could have pulled off a stunt like that.
    If you haven’t researched it for yourself..then don’t bother making any comments.

    Retired airline pilot

  49. Jim H

    OK People get back to work and move from there to your next shopping experience!!!

  50. gallenk

    Why that’s just insane. Period.

    Why on Earth would anyone assume physics should trump official pronouncements? The average person can’t comprehend unfamiliar & complicated concepts like … gravity. This is best left to the govt professionals, of whom we all know we can trust not to pull off huge moneymaking schemes for their corporate interests like this video implies.

  51. nik green

    Thank you so much, Greg for airing the topic of 9/11, that $multi-trillion controversy which will never go away until we get sensible answers grounded in hard science and a *truly* independent investigation, with full subpoena power.

    There are hundreds of other problems (besides the destruction of the World Trade Center) regarding the officially sanctioned conspiracy theory behind 9/11 which remain unknown to the public at large. One of the most significant of these being the bizarre non-response of the nation’s defenses, in their own front yard, while four large commercial planes, known to have been taken over in a hostile fashion, were flying unmolested over the most heavily policed and monitored skies on Earth. This inexplicable inaction continued even after the second plane impacted the South Tower and it was known to the entire world that the US was under attack.

    A little history might be useful here: On June 1, 2001, the following happened:

     Just two short months prior to 9/11, then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld oversaw a significant change to DoD procedures for dealing with hijacked aircraft, making it the personal responsibility of the Defense Secretary to issue intercept orders.

    As a direct result, commanders in the field were “stripped of all authority to act”.

    The document, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) was issued for the purpose of providing “guidance to the Deputy Director for Operations (DDO), National Military Command Center (NMCC), and operational commanders in the event of an aircraft piracy (hijacking) or request for destruction of derelict airborne objects.”

    The new instruction, signed by S.A. Fry (Vice Admiral, US Navy and Director, Joint Staff) superseded previous procedures. This document states that “In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval.”

    This is incredible. In other words, the scramble operating procedures/protocols which had worked 100% successfully for decades to deal with rogue airplanes were scrapped by Rumsfeld, and replaced with a protocol which failed *spectacularly* on September 11, 2001. Had the original procedures been left in place, the terrorists’ mission would have failed: NOT ONE of those hijacked planes would have made it anywhere near their targets, and the WTC would still be standing today. The 2,947 who died on the day, the 974 who have died from sicknesses contracted by inhalation of the toxic dust, 5500 US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan who were killed in an illegal war would still be alive, and the US economy would be $1.5 Trillion better off.

    Even more incredibly, the original scramble procedures were reinstated on September 12, 2001.

    When this kind of stuff happens, by stealth, out of the scrutiny of our elected representatives and the general public, It makes one wonder what is the point in even having a “department of defense”, let alone a department of “homeland security”.

    Thanks for you patriotism, Greg, as regards looking into 9/11. I wish your former employer, CNN (alongside the rest of the mainstream media) would display some similar spine; as a result, America (and the world) may be finally get this horrible episode completely solved and have some closure.

    • Bill

      Great comment, nik.

  52. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Mr. Hunter,

    As a reporter you would be well aware that you rely on accurate observations to inform your understanding of an event you (or anyone) witnesses.

    However, you should also be aware that our understanding of something is informed by our technical background, experience and powers of observation.

    One can’t understand what happened in NYC on 9/11 without a rather sophisticated understanding of the structures of the 3 towers. As much as I respected Peter Jennings, and other reporters (and anchors) who reported that the collapse of the towers LOOKED like a controlled demolition, frankly, they are speaking out of ignorance and don’t know what they were seeing.

    No one has seen a skyscraper collapse… certainly not of the mass of those towers. All collapses are not the same… a three story brick building does not collapse as a 110 steel frame long span light weight concrete floored tower would. Apples and oranges. Scale matters.

    The amount of misinformation being passed around about 9/11 is staggering… by NIST, and by the media and the ASCE, AIA and others and the truth movement.

    Building 7 is not a smoking gun for a CD because there is no evidence shown in the steel that there was explosives placed at 81 columns. There is no evidence available that 81 columns were cut with incendiary devices all at the same level. CD is speculation because a CD’ed building DOES collapse down… Where else would it go? And what WOULD a non CD collapse look like?

    Available evidence points to structural failures on the 6th and 7th floors above the Con Edison sub station which exploded at 8:46 AM (this is from a Con Edison report). The transformer explosions below the mech floors set off a chain of events which involved the burning of 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel on the 6th and 7th floors heating weakening to the point of failure the 3 transfer trusses and cantilever girders which supported the core from floor 8 and the row of columns on the north side just inside the curtain wall.

    When the trusses failed the core above dropped right through the sub station…. 8 floors (witness the East and West penthouse dropping BEFORE the curtain wall descends The curtain wall was then no longer attached to the steel frame which had just plunged to the ground with the floor attached. It then fell with no resistance 8 floors… at free fall acceleration until it hit the ground.

    Notice the north side of the building bowing inward as it descends (no glass breaking or window frame distortion…) evidence that there was *no building* behind the curtain wall.

    Of course someone could have CD’s the transfer trusses and the cantilever girders to produce what it took the diesel fires 8 hrs to do.

    Note the explosions Barry Jennings hear were from below the 8th floor and before 10 am… which were the transformers of the Con Ed sub station exploding. William Rodriguez heard a power transformer exploding at the moment of impact from the sub basement in tower one… caused by the plane striking the tower… setting off a high voltage spike which traveled upstream to the sub station under tower 7 blowing it out with explosive force.

    There is a real story here and it is the failure to expose defective designs which allowed those towers to collapse.

    If you would like to inform yourself about this and understand how 2 planes can destroy 3 towers please read:

    http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post19812.html#p19812

    I worked for the architects of those towers in 1970 and lived in NYC blocks from them for 20 years.

    Open your eyes, learn about the structure and engineering…

    • Doug Cowlthorp

      Any thoughts on no airplain parts being infront of the Pentagon immediatley after the impact? Lots of pictures that just show a small ( 16′ ish) whole and no wings, no engines, no tail section etc. etc. etc.

    • kawika

      Really?

      Please show me one picture of a fire at WTC7 beginning before 11 am.

      Please show me fires at the rear (north) of the WTC7, where the substation extended out into Barclay Street.

      Please show me any evidence that transformers explode. Don’t these systems have fuses to stop such failures?

      I read somewhere that the power remained on until just before collapse, so where is your transformer failure?

    • Mark Gobell

      Hi Jeffrey Orling RA

      For NIST’s official verdict on the alleged role of fuel oil in the destrution of WTC7 please see:

      NIST Report NCSTAR 1A – Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.

      Extract from Page Page xxxvi:

      “Within the building were emergency electric power generators, whose fuel supply tanks lay in and under the building.

      However, fuel oil fires did not play a role in the collapse of WTC7.”

      NIST Report NCSTAR 1A, Page xxxvi)

      http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610

    • Henry

      Jeffry, one need not sit through years of lectures and own a paper document to understand that free fall acceleration can only take place in the absence of resistance. In order for an object or structure to accelerate at the rate of free fall, *all* of its gravitational potential energy must be converted into downward motion. Obviously, that leaves no remaining energy to bend, crush, shear, and break thousands of tons of mostly cold, undamaged, and interconnected steel columns, which would have stopped the downward acceleration. A car will not accelerate down a very steep hill at the same rate on the open road as it will through a long row of parked cars, even if some of the parked cars are on fire. And of course, WTC7 not only dropped at a rate that is indistinguishable from free fall, but it did so with near perfect symmetry, which means the massive steel columns lost their strength instantly, totally, and simultaneously. Obviously, that sort of failure can not be accomplished through the gradual heating of a very small percentage of the columns. The only way such a failure can be produced is through an expertly executed controlled demolition, and the incendiary that was used in the demolition was discovered in steel and dust samples by a team of nine international scientists.

      http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html

    • Henry

      Jeffry, you are also quite mistaken about diesel fuel fires in WTC7. The government’s “explanation” for WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop has changed many times, as lies often do to fit new evidence. But in NIST’s final report, they clearly state that neither diesel fuel fires nor structural damage from tower debris played a role in WTC7’s sudden, free fall, and symmetric drop. This is now blamed on nothing but ordinary office fires.
      One reason that fires have *never* caused the collapse of a steel framed high rise is that as fires consume their fuel, they have to move to new location, so the steel rarely gets hot enough to fail. And of course, if some columns do weaken because of gradual heating, they will lose their strength very gradually, and the load will be transferred to other support columns. Steel framed high rise buildings are hurricane and earth quake resistant and built with incredible reserve strength. They’re not houses of cards that can suddenly disintegrate with the failure of a a few support columns.
      Also, there is plenty of evidence for incendiary devices, the most compelling of which is the eutectic steel that was documented by FEMA. Here’s hard proof that this evidence can not be explained by fires, either. The video is only 10 minutes long, and well worth the time of viewing it. It is from http://911speakout.org, and it was produced by a structural engineer named Jonathan Cole.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

    • callemasiseeum

      To Mr Orling,

      “One can’t understand what happened in NYC on 9/11 without a rather sophisticated understanding of the structures of the 3 towers. As much as I respected Peter Jennings, and other reporters (and anchors) who reported that the collapse of the towers LOOKED like a controlled demolition, frankly, they are speaking out of ignorance and don’t know what they were seeing.”

      Absolutely wrong, one needs only a remedial understanding of basic physics to render all 3 NIST reports as false. Anchors were describing what we were all seeing, they looked like demolitions to me too. If if looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. See CNBC’s Mark Haines call on 9/11 http://www.blinkx.com/watch-video/mark-haines-on-9-11-towers-collapse-cnbc-squawk-box/PIruyJqfYZa988upm4ZBqQ

      “No one has seen a skyscraper collapse… certainly not of the mass of those towers. All collapses are not the same… a three story brick building does not collapse as a 110 steel frame long span light weight concrete floored tower would. Apples and oranges. Scale matters.”

      No, it doesn’t matter. The laws of gravity and motion of falling objects are the same with a bullet, a bowling ball, or a building. (See Newton vs NIST http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tejFUDlV81w) There are many examples of skyscraper collapes and all are demolitions, none by fire. Comparison show many similarities. (see the duck)

      “Building 7 is not a smoking gun for a CD because there is no evidence shown in the steel that there was explosives placed at 81 columns”

      Yes there is plenty of evidence that this is the case. The building’s destruction exhibits 2.25 secs (over 105 ft), of absolute freefall. Not near freefall, but unfettered freefall. NIST’s calculation of this fact is with .01% of the ISO computed freefall for NYC. This can only be accomplished by cutting all 81 columns within fractions of a second of each other. Empirical evidence of columns being cut was published in the FEMA BPAT report in Appendix C which was not addressed in the NIST report. White smoke also begins to stream out dozens of upper story windows while the building is falling. This fact isn’t even mentioned in the NIST report let alone explained. There would be much more evidence as well, but all the steel was removed and no steel was examined or experiments conducted to support NIST’s conclusions. NIST refuses to release evidence they say supports their conclusions but absurdly claim “public saftey”.

      http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

      “Available evidence points to structural failures on the 6th and 7th floors above the Con Edison sub station which exploded at 8:46 AM (this is from a Con Edison report). The transformer explosions below the mech floors set off a chain of events which involved the burning of 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel on the 6th and 7th floors heating weakening to the point of failure the 3 transfer trusses and cantilever girders which supported the core from floor 8 and the row of columns on the north side just inside the curtain wall.”

      When the trusses failed the core above dropped right through the sub station…. 8 floors (witness the East and West penthouse dropping BEFORE the curtain wall descends The curtain wall was then no longer attached to the steel frame which had just plunged to the ground with the floor attached. It then fell with no resistance 8 floors… at free fall acceleration until it hit the ground.

      Notice the north side of the building bowing inward as it descends (no glass breaking or window frame distortion…) evidence that there was *no building* behind the curtain wall.

      Of course someone could have CD’s the transfer trusses and the cantilever girders to produce what it took the diesel fires 8 hrs to do.”

      The NIST report for WTC 7 concludes the cause for “collapse” was due to fire and fire alone. Not damage from WTC 1, not diesel fuel, not building design, and of course not explosives. And what you just described is simply laughable when compared to the video evidence. In NIST’s own report, photo evidence shows the fires were out on the floor they claim the collapse initiated. There is 0 evidence that 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel caught fire. The east penthouse falls nearly 7 seconds before the rest of the building and comes to rest. There is no mechanism afterward to bring the rest of the building down. The west penthouse doesn’t even pass the roofline and is clearly visible through the collapse, how can this be? If you are going to point to reports as well, please provide links. Google can’t seem to find it. As for 8 hours of uncontrolled fires what evidence is there that fire burned in this critical place for 8 hrs. Its well known that fire moves about, lasting about 20 minutes in any one location. NIST states this in their own report, but fails to explain how it could have lasted long enough to heat up a floor beam, which is studded to prevent shearing, to the point of failure. NIST does not explain how a single column failure brings an entire structure down. No one needs to be a structural engineer to understand redundancy and NIST does not (can not) explain why the buildings redundancy was compromised.

      Note the explosions Barry Jennings hear were from below the 8th floor and before 10 am… which were the transformers of the Con Ed sub station exploding. William Rodriguez heard a power transformer exploding at the moment of impact from the sub basement in tower one… caused by the plane striking the tower… setting off a high voltage spike which traveled upstream to the sub station under tower 7 blowing it out with explosive force.

      There is a real story here and it is the failure to expose defective designs which allowed those towers to collapse.

      If you would like to inform yourself about this and understand how 2 planes can destroy 3 towers please read:

      http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post19812.html#p19812

      To Mr. Hunter, you should inform yourself, but not with comment postings that just make stuff up. Barry Jennings is a tragic story and a highly respected journalist such as yourself could do his story justice and bring it to the mainstream. Thank you for posting this aticle and speaking out about what we all see and refuse to believe absurdities.

      “I worked for the architects of those towers in 1970 and lived in NYC blocks from them for 20 years.

      Open your eyes, learn about the structure and engineering…”

      Good advice for yourself, I hope I never have to walk into a building you designed.

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        The collapse we witnessed on the video was likely the shell – the curtain wall as the guts – the core and beams/ girders and perimeter columns just inside the curtain wall had collapsed down… 100 feet through the con ed sub station…. no columns there… no resistance.

        It’s odd that many will ridicule NIST when it suits them and cite them as bearers of truth when it suits them.

        NIST’s role was to support the official story which had already be the causus belli for new policies and wars.

        The collapse of bldg 7 was CORE led… at it most likely occurred by failures of the transfer trusses and the cantilever girders on the 6th and 7th floors. When those failed the core came down right through the con ed sub station. The design was literally like building a 40 story skyscraper on a bridge span.

        My theory asks that one look at the design and whether (I believe it makes sense) that the burning of thousands of gallons of fuel on the mech floors would eventually weaken some of the truss chords, fail the trusses and the core collapse down. I suppose it’s also possible to attack those trusses with bombs and incendiaries.

        Why wait until 5:20? It would take some massive bombs to blow those trusses and it would leave a audible signature… which as far as I can tell wasn’t there. Cutter devices would be silent.

        Regardless, once the trusses failed the core fell and it pulled away from the curtain wall which was connected to the steel frame with small steel angle clips and bolts. It’s not called a curtain wall for nothing… not much there.

        The east penthouse DOES descend right down through the height of the tower BEFORE the curtain wall does and this indicates that the east side of the core was totally gone by the time the curtain wall is seen to be dropping at FF. It also likely was separated at the 8th floor just above the mech floors where the transfer trusses were located hence the 100 feet of FF descent.

        What is clear, is that AE911T is completely wrong that all 81 columns were taken out over 8 stories to produce the 100 foot FF descent. They are correct that there was no resistance, but when the the huge column free sub station offered no axial resistance to the dropping core.

        My hunch is that NIST et al are covering for the engineers, architects, PANY and the NYC DOB, Con Ed for the flawed design which:

        Permitted a sky scraper to be built over a huge power sub station (these do explode occasionally) One did on the sub basement of tower 1 in 1992)

        Used a design few transfer trusses and cantilever girders to transfer axial loads from the core above

        Sited diesel fuel tanks above the sub station and in close proximity the mech equipment.

        enabled the loss of power to disable the sprinkler system

        I see this design as no different than the Pinto fuel tanks. Pintos were fine till rear ended and then they explode. WTC 7 was fine till the trusses were subject to 8 hours of fire.

        I’m leaning toward a cover up by NIST for the insane decision to build that building design above the sub station. None of the above even discussed this scenario … conveniently for them. Blame it on the fire caused by the debris falling from tower 1…

        Office fires had nothing to do with the failure of the critical steel members of the trusses.

        • Henry

          Jeffrey says:
          “The collapse we witnessed on the video was likely the shell – the curtain wall as the guts – the core and beams/ girders and perimeter columns just inside the curtain wall had collapsed down… 100 feet through the con ed sub station…. no columns there… no resistance.”

          Jeffrey, there was no “shell” or “curtain wall” around the perimeter of WTC7, just as the perimeter frames of the towers were not “skins”. In both cases, the exterior walls were made of steel columns that extended from bedrock to the roof. In order for the steel perimeter frame of WTC7 to suddenly drop at the rate of free fall with nearly perfect symmetry, all the massive steel support columns in the perimeter frame had to lose all their strength instantly, totally, and simultaneously. This absolutely cannot be accomplished by the gradual heating of a small number of columns. It can, however, be accomplished using the highly refined milit6ary grade nano thermetic materiel that was discovered in steel and dust samples by a team of nine international scientists. Also, office fires absolutely can not produce the molten and vaporized steel that is documented and analyzed in the video linked below. Can you imagine anything other than the nano thermetic material as the cause of this vaporized steel column? The video is from http://911speakout which is an excellent source of expert research.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

          • Jeffrey Orling RA

            Look up what the engineer Irwin Cantor, of B7 said caused the collapse. Diesel fires weakening the transfer trusses.

            But he said he had nothing to do with the decision to add the diesel generators to the mech floor… not his fault. Blame the decision to put the generators and the diesel there.

            Henry…

            Look up curtain wall. B7 had a curtain wall which was attached to the spandrel beams with clips and small bolts.

            The twins had a structural facade.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey, the exterior walls of WTC7 consisted of massive interconnected, reinforced highly resilient steel columns. They were load bearing walls. A curtain wall is a non load bearing wall. And again,office fires absolutely can not produce the molten and vaporized steel that is documented and analyzed in the video linked below. Can you imagine anything other than the nano thermetic material as the cause of this vaporized steel column? Diesel fuel has been ruled out as a possible cause. Please watch the video before replying.
            The video linked below is from http://911speakout which is an excellent source of expert research.

  53. dan

    Like statistics, you can take a set of circumstances and create a story that fits your position. I have seen bits of evidence suggesting that some or all of 9/11 was staged. On the other hand I find evidence suggesting otherwise.

    So many people – our people – died that day. I can’t believe that our own people, our own government, would do this. Say what you will about the venom in politics, our representatives are not evil people. Misguided, yes. Inept, too often.

    Think about it another way. How long does it take to get a signal light at that intersection in your town with the four-way stop? Suggesting that our government has the vision, planning, coordination, foresight, and capability to engineer all the events before, during, and after 9/11 are thoughts that belong in the Bizzaro universe.

    We got hit, hard, by people who we would never have thought could be capable of this act. That’s twice in our history that we’ve been caught by surprise with terrible consequences.

    • MasterLuke

      If you understand venom in politics [Lieing and corruption], if you understand our financial system will just bail ourselves out by printing money that could destroy the middle class, if you understand that in history there have been staged terrorist attacks [Germany], then you should understand that you should at least consider the possibility that 911 was staged. If you do not consider all options you may choose the wrong option. Rational decision making is taking the time to consider all options and making the best decision. This includes using group consideration. Greg isn’t attributing who is right or who is wrong hes just covering the whole story. This is something the mainstream media does not do.

    • Henry

      Dan, the U.S. terror attack on the people of Iraq was based on blatant lies, and it killed more of our own citizens than the 9-11 attacks. And of course, it killed hundreds of thousands innocent Iraqi civilians.
      Your argument that some guy living in cave thousands of mile away is better qualified to carry out an event like 9-11 than the U.S. military intelligence network doesn’t hold up, either.

    • callemasiseeum

      To Dan,

      You said: “Like statistics, you can take a set of circumstances and create a story that fits your position. I have seen bits of evidence suggesting that some or all of 9/11 was staged. On the other hand I find evidence suggesting otherwise.”

      This is true in many things, but consider this; ould covert operatives whose work involves subverting democratic governments abroad, tactics that include violent coups such as the one that brought down Chilean President Salvador Allende not use these same tactics at home to manipulate the political environment? Every myth has an element of truth which is why you see evidence both side. Only most of the truth that supports the official narrative is subjective truth that is difficult to measure.

      Our politicians are not elected as I am sure your are aware. Our “leaders” are bought and paid for then presented to the public with their life narratives re-scripted each election. Ultimately our choices come down to, as South Park quipped so poetically, a douche or a turd sandwich. Years of indoctrination and your own cognitive dissonance prevents you from seeing down the rabbit hole.

      As for what difference it makes, you have a good point. A recent Fox News poll showed nearly 80% of Americans do not believe Oswald acted alone and what difference does it make? Even if 80% of our elected official concur, they cannot say so aloud in public without massive retribution from establishment corporate owned media.

      But the truth must come out, it is inevitable and unstoppable. Besides, many of don’t just bitch on the internet, we write our elected officials, newspaper editors, and demonstrate in public. Maybe once your eyes open entirely, you will too. good luck my friend.

  54. Otter

    Greg –

    Looked through the repies and didn’t see this website cited.

    http://www.drjudywood.com/

    All seven WTC buildings, not just the high rises, were destroyed on 9/11. No other buildings surrounding the 9/11 complex were destroyed. These events and others, (i.e. 1400 cars parked at ground level within 1/2 mile of the WTC complex were destroyed on 9/11), need a better explaination than supplied by both the government and the truthers.

    • Henry

      Avoid Judy Wood. She has stated that no planes hit the towers, and that they were destroyed with some sort of magic space beam weapon. She has also attacked an insulted the most credible, professional and respected 9-11 truth researchers. Others to avoid include James Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds. To me they appear to fit the mold of disinformation agents. They are all very unprofessional and resort to very juvenile insult and attacks. Reject anyone who pushes nonsensical “theories” involving no planes hitting the towers, space beams, and/or nuclear bombs.

  55. chowthen

    As a stress engineer (not in real estate structure but in aerospace) I can surmise that this kind of building collapse can occur in 9/11 without the controlled demolition that the conspiracy theorist are spouting.

    It’s like building a stick model structure if you take out a stick close to the top the whole structure will collapse because the weight of the top will fall into the lower level akin to a controlled demolition where explosives are simultaneously exploded at the supports. It also has something to do with the way the building was built. I do believe reading at one time that the main support structure (post) of the world trade center was in the center and when it was hit it could have buckled or melted (if made of steel) because of the heat thereby collapsing the top falling to the lower level. Anyway, that my theory and if there are structural engineers out there experienced in building constructions tell me where I’m wrong.

    • Scott

      Hope I don’t fly on any aircraft you inspect. You’re argument is complete nonsense. Enormous steel framed buildings have to have their under-infrastructure destroyed for them to collapse at freefall. Buildings don’t collapse throught the point of most resistance, only to find no resistance. It’s the law of “Conservation of Momentum”. Say the steel on the top floor weakened and caused a pile-driver pancake collapse; at the minimum it would’ve take 1.5 minutes. These buildings collapsed in 11 and 12 seconds (8 seconds for WTC 7). There was absolutely no resistance to their collapse. Where was the pancaked steel in the aftermath? You need to look at some of the photos from that day, and you’ll see everything was pulverized. What happen to enormous vertical core columns that should’ve still been standing?

      If jet fuel is such an effective way to take down steel framed building, then why do demolition companies waste the time and expense to wire explosives and set up incendiaries? The reason they don’t, is because it can’t possibly work.

      Check out architects & engineers for 9-11 truth: http://www.ae911truth.org if you want a thorough explanation.

      • chowthen

        I didn’t say jet fuel will melt steel instantaneously but let the steel burn for an hour and it will melt. Have you ever seen a foundry or a metal smith? A charcoal fire will melt a steel if left for a while.

        BTW, if you fly Boeing Aircraft I’ve done analysis on most of them. So take Airbus.

        • Mark Gobell

          Chowthen

          But you do need to melt steel / iron to for independent laboratories to have molten iron which doesn’t melt until 2,800 deg F

          You also need to melt molybdenum for the USGS to have devoted serious study to molten moylbdenum which doesn’t melt until 4,753 deg F

          NIST claim max gas fire temperatures of 1,800 deg F.

          So, we have a mainstream scientific problem. No conspiracy nut job, tin foil hat weirdos needed.

          Mainstream science tells us we have a major problem with NIST’s official “scientific explanation” Chowthen.

          Please, take a look at these essays and follow the footnotes therein.

          (Some of the original footnote URLs are now in the web archive)

          Left-Leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do You Really Believe in Miracles?

          http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?aid=20039&context=va

          Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction

          http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

          I’d be interested in what you have to say in response to that essay, specifically the molten iroin and molybdenum.

          The science has won the day Chowthen, the arguments are over.

          We must push for a proper, independent investigation into the crime of the century.

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        The collapse of the twin towers was a multistage PROCESS… a progression of failures… there were several contribution factors / causes.

        1. Plane strikes damaged columns… and destroyed columns. When this happens to remaining columns take on the more load. your two legs share the weight of your body when you stand. Lift one foot and the remaining one supports your full weight

        2. Steel designs, columns and all components in a composite structure have a factor of safety…. they are “over designed” for the loads anticipated. The average FOS for the average steel member in a steel high rise is 1.42. This means it can support 42% more load than the anticipated design load. The average FOS of the twin tower steel was between 1.65 and 2 depending on what weight one uses and which column you examine. Different columns supported different loads. Some core columns supported 7 times the loads of other core columns.

        3. Heated steel is weaker than room temp steel. At about 600° the steel has lost more than 1/3 of its strength… the FOS has been reduced. It if was 2 at room temp… heated to 600° it drops to 1.33

        4. The initial mechanical damage did not reduce the aggregate FOS to below 1 and so the towers remained standing full height.

        5. Over time heat and possibly devices further reduced the FOS by weakening or removing columns.

        6. When the FOS dropped below 1 in the core, the remaining columns buckled instantly – they were loaded beyond their carrying capacity.

        7. When the core bucked at the elevation of the plan strike zone where the pane had destroyed some of the columns the floors above came down… very much like what happens in a controlled demolition where the columns at the bottom are *taken out* and gravity drives the floors above them down to the ground. The floors then crush themselves and the floors they impact. The collapsing mass will also break apart steel frames at their connections/splices… the weakest points.

        8. In both towers the descending mass of 16 floors in tower 1 and 32 in tower 2 came down on the undamaged top floor of the lower section. These floors were designed to support 58#/SF static load not 16 or 32 times this as dynamic load. The tens of thousands of tons mass crushed the rather weak 4″ no stone aggregate concrete floors and all the contents on them. These floors offered almost no resistance… and the floor collapse raced down through the tower at about 65 mph or 100 feet per second

        9. No columns in the lower section were crushed… no columns in the strike zone were crushed… no columns above the strike zone were crushed. The floors were crushed… the contents was crushed.

        10. The facade columns in pre fabricated 10’x36′ tall sections of 3 columns each required the floor system for stability. As the floors were destroyed the facade lost its stability. Not only that, the collapsing floor contents were pushing outward at the faced panels and bulged them, separated them from each other at their bolted connections.. some in individual panels.. some in multiple panels. They toppled away from the tower and fell as far as 450 feet depending on how high they were in the tower. The higher they were… the further away they landed.

        11. Many of the core columns below the strike zones survived the collapse of the floors. But they too required bracing for stability and the collapsing floors destroyed… actually ripped off most of the bracing from the core columns. They too were too unstable without bracing and toppled over and fell to the ground a few seconds after the floors had collapsed. Their collapse is described by Euler and is termed Euler buckling which explains that a steel column which has a slenderness ratio of over 120 will buckle from its own weight. The surviving core columns Euler buckled and broke apart at their connection splices and can be seen strewn around the site in their original 36′ length.

        12. The buildings were 96% air… there were no columns in the office areas and nothing to resist the floor collapses. The speed of decent is as predicted considering the momentum / energy of the falling debris and the strength (resistance of the 4″ thick lightweight concrete floors)

        13. The ejections of debris coming from the windows on each floor racing down just ahead of the collapse “front” was the floor contents.. gyp board walls, ceiling tile etc. which was forced out of the way at up to 400 MPH… some of it traveling 60′ in about .1 seconds from the core to the facade. Mega tornado force winds swept through each floor pushed by the plunging debris’ impacting the floor above… like a bellows forcing the contents though the 20″ wide windows.

        14. The mechanical destruction of up to 400,000 tons of material… much of it crushed to dist and grit… released enormous heat. Mechanical destruction… sanding, grinding, sawing, drilling and so forth all produce heat. The heat produced from the mechanical destruction drove the massive clouds of dust ladened air up and away from the collapse of all three towers. it also remained trapped in the huge heat sink of the debris pile which too months to cool.

        To understand how these towers were destroyed one needs to understand physics and carefully observe them coming down.

        Yes one could blow them up… but that’s not what happened… that’s not what is in the observables.

        • Henry

          Jeffry, you still seem to be missing the fact that free fall acceleration can only take place when there is no resistance. In order for an object to accelerate at the rate of free fall, *all* of its gravitational potential energy must be converted into downward acceleration, which leaves no energy available to bend crush, sheer and break thousands of tons of cold undamaged support columns, which would greatly reduce or stop the acceleration. When steel is gradually heated, it loses its strength very gradually, and most of the steel in WTC7 was never heated or damaged, so we can immediately rule out gradual, random heating a few columns as a cause WTC7’s sudden free fall and symmetric drop.
          Also, you are mistaken when you claim that fuel oil fires played a role in WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop. That theory was abandoned long ago. You are also mistaken when you claim that the exterior walls of WTC7 were “curtain walls”, which is a non supporting wall. The steel perimeter columns ran from bedrock to the roof. Also, how do you explain the vaporized steel documented in the link below? The highly refined military grade nano thermetic material discovered in steel and dust samples by a team of nine international scientists certainly explains it, but ordinary office fires can not? We really need to rely on hard evidence, science and physics to learn the truth.
          Tell us, if not the thermtic material that was discovered on steel and dust samples, what do you imagine caused the attack on the steel as documented in this video?

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

        • Henry

          Jeffrey speculated:

          “Many of the core columns below the strike zones survived the collapse of the floors. But they too required bracing for stability and the collapsing floors destroyed… actually ripped off most of the bracing from the core columns.”

          Jeffrey, since the floors were *outside* the central core structure, a broken truss connection could not possibly strip the bracing that was *inside* the massive central core structure. In case you’re not familiar with the core structures, here’s a link to some photos of their construction:

          http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/construction.html

          Furthermore, many of the floors had steel beams tying the perimeter frame to the core, as the trusses alone were not strong enough nor designed to transfer lateral wind loads from the exterior walls to the central core structure.

          http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/wtc-demolition.htm

          Also, careful analysis of WTC1’s demolition shows that the core failed first. We know this because the antenna was the first thing to drop during WTC1’s demolition. So obviously, it wasn’t “pancaking” floors that caused the massive core structure to disintegrate.

          http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/wtc1_close_frames.html

        • Henry

          Jeffrey speculated:

          “In both towers the descending mass of 16 floors in tower 1 and 32 in tower 2 came down on the undamaged top floor of the lower section. These floors were designed to support 58#/SF static load not 16 or 32 times this as dynamic load. The tens of thousands of tons mass crushed the rather weak 4″ no stone aggregate concrete floors and all the contents on them. These floors offered almost no resistance… and the floor collapse raced down through the tower at about 65 mph or 100 feet per second.”

          Jeffrey, the upper block didn’t settle on only the floors. Most of it settled on the undamaged massive central core structure and the high strength, fire resistant steel perimeter columns. Also, the speed of the descent wasn’t constant. Since the towers exploded through the path of most resistance about 68% of free fall, the speed was increasing steadily throughout the demolition. Please watch this video of WTC1 exploding. It shows massive explosions, some of them arcing *upwards* at the very beginning of the demolition.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

          Also, here’s a video proving that the upper block of WTC1 is actually exerting *less* force on the undamaged steel structure below while it’s accelerating downward than while it was static (at rest). Both videos are from http://911speakout

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

          It may be helpful for you to try to visualize WTC1’s destruction at about two thirds through its demolition. At this point, the upper two thirds of the tower are gone, and all that remains is the bottom third of the tower with nothing but dust and smoke above it. Keep in mind that the steel at the base of the towers was about ten times thicker, heavier, and stronger than the steel near the top. We know that the floors were pulverized into fine powder by the force of the explosions and there were no stacks of floors in the rubble, so obviously, they didn’t accumulate above the remaining bottom third of the building. Video evidence also shows that the steel columns that made up the perimeter frame were ejected at high speed by the force of the explosions, so they didn’t accumulate above the bottom third of the stub, either. So, what we have two thirds through the demolition, is the thickest, strongest, unheated, and undamaged portion of the tower’s hurricane and earthquake resistance frame with nothing above it. So how can it continue to explode and disintegrate at an ever faster rate? Demolition is the only possible explanation for this incredibly strong stub with nothing above it self destruct. Demolition is also the only thing that explains the molten metal, the squibs, the government’s vehement opposition to an investigation, and NIST’s lies, fraud, and cover-up.

    • Mark Gobell

      Chowthen

      You say:

      “Anyway, that my theory and if there are structural engineers out there experienced in building constructions tell me where I’m wrong.”

      Please see what the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truht have to say.

      http://www.ae911truth.org

  56. Pat Curley

    Greg, there are plenty of errors or lies in that Corbett Report video, which bombards you so quickly that it can be hard to spot the flaws. To take just one, the supposed “pink-haired stripper” is named Amanda Keller. She was interviewed by conspiracy theorist Daniel Hopsicker, who had her carefully talk about her boyfriend Mohamed. But Keller admitted years later that the Mohamed she dated was not Mohamed Atta. You can read the article here:

    http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20060910/NEWS/609100466

    Keller is also the source for the claims that the hijackers snorted cocaine. As for how the third skyscraper fell despite not being hit by a jet, I dunno, maybe, just possibly having two 110-story skyscrapers nearby collapsing and hitting it with flaming debris can be hazardous to a skyscraper’s health? Just a guess mind you, but it’s a whole lot more rational than claiming that it was destroyed in a controlled demolition which takes months of preparation (in an empty building) and requires miles of detonation cord and creates deafeningly loud explosions (which were not associated with the collapse of WTC 7).

    In short, this conspiracy theory is not just insane, it’s BS.

    • tanabear

      Exactly, there was another Mohammed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi who attended Huffman Aviation at the same time the “real” Mohammed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi did.

      Pat Curley; “I dunno, maybe, just possibly having two 110-story skyscrapers nearby collapsing and hitting it with flaming debris can be hazardous to a skyscraper’s health?”

      So what about World Trade Centers 3,4,5 and 6? They were closer to the Twin Towers and suffered more extensive damage than WTC7. WTC5 had more extensive fires compared to its size than WTC7. Yet, WTC7 was the one that collapsed. Besides, NIST’s Final report on WTC7 says that fires alone caused the collapsed of WTC7, the impact from the falling debris was not a factor.

    • Robert

      Hi Pat,

      Just for fun sometime, I suggest you go to http://patriotsquestion911.com/ and you will see a long list of highly educated professionals, including military, intelligence, pilots, engineers, etc. who don’t believe the government’s 9/11 story. Are these people (who are utterly ignored by our main stream media) all insane?

      • Pat Curley

        Let’s see, the very first person at the top of that list is Major General Albert Stubblebine, who attempted to learn how to walk through walls (unsuccessfully). He’s featured prominently in Jon Ronson’s book, The Men Who Stare At Goats, and is rather eccentric. Skipping down a couple we come to Captain Edgar Mitchell, a former astronaut who has become something of a spaceman, believing in remote healing and UFOs. At the top of the Artists & Entertainers list is Charlie Sheen. Seriously.

        • Robert

          Cherry picking much? How about all the others? You dismiss all of them by association with Charlie sheen. How about the 1600 architects and engineers, and all those airline pilots you trust to fly you places. Are they nuts too? Seriously.

          • Jeffrey Orling RA

            Robert,

            Having education and technical qualifications in one field, being intelligent does not mean that one can be an expert in another.

            9/11 was a complex event and included many technical components. All understanding begins with observation and is informed by scientific and technical knowledge and experience.

            All of us will come up with what appears to be a logical explanation for all observed phenomena. We simply don’t see something and declare I have no idea of what I saw or how to explain it. When that does happen people reach for their religious beliefs and attribute the observation to god or a “miracle”

            All people used to believe that the sun, moon and stars rose in the the sky in the East and set in the West and that all the “heavenly” bodies revolved around the earth and before that thought the earth was flat. This included very intelligent people such as Plato, Aristotle and so forth. Over time science has produced coherent explanations for the observed phenomena in the world around us.

            The understanding of the destruction of the world trade center involves beginning with careful observations and then applying physics and engineering laws and principles to inform and explain those observations.

            If one does not have the technical background or has not looked carefully and accurately describes the observations… they can ONLY COME UP WITH A CARTOON CONCEPTION… a Hollywood like understanding of the event. This is very understandable for a number of reasons.

            1. We get most of our information from TV and media. Media generally aims for the lowest common denominator.. usually driven by economic demands. This is the dumbing down process at work. And has turned news into what is called infotainment… with the emphasis on entertainment.

            2. We often think by using analogy. This too is understandable but contains traps. Looking like, behaving like is not BEING the same. The 9/11 truth movement is PARTICULARLY guilty of making this mistake in thinking and explaining the destruction of the WTC. A collapsing building looks like a CD. That does not mean it IS a CD. This might suggest CD but it requires PROOF and EVIDENCE.

            3. Reporters and anchors are not technical experts. They are news readers and infotainment delivery persons. Peter Jennings has no technical background in physics and his statement that the collapse of the towers looked like a CD was naive and simplistic though technically accurate. It may have looked LIKE… but it may not have BEEN.

            4. The destruction of the WTC was a mechanical event.. many of them… thousands of them… one leading to another… cause and effect. One should not skip over the many cause and effect processes in play and reduce the destruction to a single phrase CD. Here one minute and gone the next. This ignores the mechanisms of destruction which changed a building to a pile of rubble.

            5. A singular energetic device could destroy a massive structure in an instant… such as a huge bomb. This was not what we observed. Therefore the destruction involved multiple causes… or perhaps multiple bombs or devices to supply destructive energy. The proponents of CD have completely failed to explain the mechanisms of how those buildings would be demolished using explosives to produce the observables.

            6. CD proponents use *black box* thinking. The black box is CD and they don’t explain what’s inside. How the CD changed the standing towers into piles of rubble. That’s not only sloppy thinking, but it has fostered another dangerous approach.

            7. Means, motive and opportunity are not evidence of the mechanisms of destruction. Just because the DOD, the MIC, the Mosad, CIA and so forth had means motive and opportunity does not mean they were participants in the event. It is very irresponsible to make accusations based on means, motive and opportunity with direct vetted evidence of actual complicity in the event.

            8. Speculation is fine… theories are fine. But they must be supported by facts and observations, and science.

            9. Many of the websites that purport to provide evidence and science are conveying mis information and include inaccurate statements…even when they have many what appears to be experts supporting this mis information. People make mistakes and they do it all the time and are unaware of them.

            10. Most people become *invested* in their beliefs and statements and do not like to be proven wrong (ego, pride etc.). This causes them to seek others with like views rather than to examine their own statements and evolve their thinking. They double down and then begin to *cherry pick* the observations for what appears to support their conclusion or theories. AE911T is particularly guilty of this.

            11. Similar observations or phenomena can have very different causes. To determine the actual cause requires further investigation and corroboration. It is irresponsible to assert a cause without ruling out all other possible causes and this is something most people are too lazy to do or not competent to do and it allows them to believe what they want to believe about the observation (religious beliefs).

            12. 9/11 involve a fair amount of religious-like beliefs many posing as science… such as the statements by AE911T… even using engineers and scientists to make the false claims (whether they know or not is another question). This is the *appeal to authority* fallacy. Note the new AE911T which is this fallacy in spades *Experts Speak Out*… which attempts to persuade… but having *experts* opine on the matter.

            13. Facts and science requires no experts and speaks for itself.

    • Henry

      Pat Curly, demolition charges can be detonated by computer generated radio signals. No wires needed. Also, the incendiary that was discovered in steel and dust samples is highly a refined military grade nano thermetic material, and it can be tailored to cut through steel very quickly without loud explosions. Also, video evidence shows that WTC7 suffered no significant structural damage from tower debris, and NIST has finally admitted as much. WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop is officially attributed to nothing but ordinary office fires. Also, there were several steel framed buildings much closer to the towers than WTC7, and although they suffered more severe damage and fires than WTC7, they didn’t disintegrate into neat piles of cut steel columns in a matter of seconds. Here’s are some very good websites to learn more about the research and evidence that has been done by independent experts. The government’s 9-11 conspiracy theory is quite literally impossible.

      http://911speakout.org
      http://journalof911studies.com
      http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html

  57. sgt_doom

    Other People’s Money: 9/11

    When the BCCI investigation reached closer to President Geo. H.W. Bush’s White House back in the late ’80s, early ’90s, Bush appointed Robert Mueller III to be the chief of the DOJ’s Criminal Division to manage the BCCI probe — or more accurately, to deflect it away from the Bush administration and narrow the scope of the investigation.

    Four days prior to 9/11/01, President Geo. W. Bush appoints Robert Mueller III to be director of the FBI — perfect timing and what a pedigree Mueller possesses.*

    One day prior to 9/11/01, the Pentagon’s comptroller announces that $2.3 trillion cannot be accounted for.**

    Six to seven hours prior to the events of that 9/11 morning, sometime between 2:00 AM and 3:00 AM (EST) a group email is transmitted to the DIA’s financial management staff to attend an emergency meeting that very morning at their Pentagon offices — located at the Pentagon’s west wall.

    One staff member will fortuitously oversleep, viewing the email late and consequently arrive late — just in time to view from afar the plane crashing into the super-reinforced west wall, severely injuring or killing almost the entire financial management group of the DIA, and those computer systems involved with discovering said missing funds; apparently data backups aren’t the order of the day?

    That very same morning on 9/11/01, the National Reconnaissance Office’s (NRO) ops center would be evacuated due to an exercise simulating an attack by suicide aircraft flying into that facility. (Sound vaguely familiar?) Therefore, no one was on hand to manually task their recon satellites on the airspace above NYC and the Pentagon.

    Thanks to further expansion of the Web over the Internet (2003 – 2005), cached pages of dramatically increased data transmission and EFTs, originating from three firms residing in the two WTC towers to offshore locations, could be accessed.

    Shortly after 9/2001, in early 2002, an explosive growth occurs in offshore hedge funds.

    Background research on those unfortunate passengers aboard the involved airliners (victims who were certain to die that day) indicated that some of the pax fall into three unique groups, along with three unique individuals aboard.

    The three groups: (1) developers of remote piloting hardware and software; (2) individuals involved in the creation of a terrorist scenario remarkably similar to that which occurred on 9/11/01 (among that group of victims was an Israeli counterterrorist expert and one of the airliners’ pilots, a former career Naval officer); and, (3) some of the individuals involved with the investigation into Flight 800’s demise.

    The three individuals: (1) wife number three of the solicitor general, who would quickly move on to wife number four once the insurance settlement came through (death by opportunity?); (2) a lady attorney, rumored to be involved with a senior married partner of the conservative and politically-connected law firm which successfully defended Fox News on several cases of fictionalizing the news (death by opportunity?); and, (3) a physicist with the Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Directed Energy Section.

    [We are not suggesting any of these victims were aware of the events to transpire on 9/11 — this appears to be a highly compartmentalized operation.]

    Intensive pattern analysis, link analysis, and link and group analysis indicates the five principal players involved: the Blackstone Group, Veritas Capital, AIG, the office of the VP, and the office of the SecDef.

    Some time prior to 9/11/01, a financial news announcement would explain an investment by AIG in the Blackstone Group (source document of transaction, along with hard copy source documents of thousands of ongoing SEC investigations resided in the destroyed WTC Building 7 – no source docs, case closed!).

    The amount of AIG’s investment was approximately the final insurance payout amount to the property management/RE firm for the WTC destruction (classic paper money false transfer and money laundering scheme, relatively simple — for a far more circuitous, and commonplace, accounting scheme, please see Retirement Heist, by Ellen Schultz, p. 209 on “leveraged ESOPs”).

    The mortgage owner of record for WTC Building 7: the Blackstone Group.

    The firm awarded the $1 billion captive insurance fund management contract by Bush’s FEMA, for settlement with WTC victims’ families: the Blackstone Group.

    The firm which negotiated the largest and quickest real estate deal in NYC history, the WTC lease transfer from the Port Authority of NY and NJ to Silverstein Properties and Westfield America, Inc.: the Blackstone Group.

    During the week prior to 9/11/01, the fiber optic installation firm, EurekaGGN, installed dark fiber in the top floors of the two WTC towers (they had the contract for cabling the entire WTC), utilizing a method to pump the fiber optical cables through existing HVAC vents running beneath each floor.

    [To reiterate: the west wall of the Pentagon had been reinforced, according to Structure Magazine, which also posed the question as to why only one wall and a plane crashes into it. Fiber optic is being installed, but never verified as to being operational, in the WTC towers, and planes crash into them — access, access, access!]

    Technical details not widely known: two of the four airliners involved didn’t appear on the FAA Flight Registry which logs all commercial flights, per standard procedure, as they were reserved as DoD Special Charters, meaning that each plane must seat those reserved for DoD personnel, and must depart at the schedule time, but any remaining seats may be filled commercially.

    Aircraft pointedly flew to shadow zones – where radar coverage was obscured due to topography and ATCC limitations – where the transponders were then powered down – normally, they would have triggered ATCC radar indicators. (Highly doubtful those Saudi Arabian hijacker cutouts would have known these recondite details?); and recovered black box data, obtained through FOIA requests, give no indication of any hijacking taking place (and yes, there does exist a governmental database of black box hijacking data for comparison purposes).

    There were over 1,000 other “coincidences” which took place that morning, all tracking back to the five principal players.

    Recap: $2.3 trillion announced unaccounted, and DIA’s financial management group is almost entirely wiped out, along with involved computer systems, dramatically increased data transmissions and EFTs out of WTC towers in preceding 12 hours, and people and computer systems involved are killed and destroyed, with explosive growth in offshore hedge funds occurring shortly thereafter.

    Veritas Capital, owner of Raytheon subsidiary which employed those remote piloting hardware and software developers and subcontractors aboard some of those airliners involved in 9/11, and Veritas Capital makes some incredibly prescient defense industry investments shortly prior to 9/11/01.

    Increasing the awareness of evil….

    *Robert Mueller III, FBI director, is the grandnephew of Richard Bissell, one of the three top CIA types who President Kennedy fired. Mueller’s wife is the granddaughter of Charles Cabell, another of those three CIA people JFK had fired (the third was Allen Dulles, who would later manage the Warren Commission!

    **
    http://www.financial-edu.com/history-of-credit-derivatives.php
    2002

    -Rise of Hedge Funds: Number of funds increases from 4000 in 2002 managing $2 trillion to 8000+ managing $4 trillion. This creates intense demand for new structured products with higher yields.

  58. S. Robertson

    I have read a number of the comments here, and it is clear what is happening: Disinformation specialists are working very hard to protect the perpetrators of 9/11 (whoever they may be) by seeding the nation’s intellectual base with a “limited hangout” scenario, sets of half truths, and opposing speculatory explanations.

    This could easily be the result of the Obama Administration’s appointment of Cass Sunstein, the “regulatory czar”: Sunstein is currently Obama’s head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs where, among other things, he is responsible for “overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs.” In 2008, while at Harvard Law School, Sunstein co-wrote a truly pernicious paper proposing that the U.S. Government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites — as well as other activist groups — which advocate views that Sunstein deems “false conspiracy theories” about the Government. This would be designed to increase citizens’ faith in government officials and undermine the credibility of “conspiracists”.

    However, the real “conspiracy theorists” are those who are promoting the official tale of 9/11. Most of those who are actively skeptical, on account of a barrage of impossibilities, unlikelihoods, bizarre coincidences and outright proven bald-faced lies, are not advocating any “conspiracy theory” whatsoever, but merely asking a bunch of very awkward questions, dealing with a vast body of contrary material that the so-called 9/11 refused to examine. In a supposedly free society, anyone with the slightest pretense of patriotism is duty-bound to ask questions of their government, and the same goes with the media. Since 9/11, the media, not just the mainstream networks, but also the main “alternative media” portals on the internet have developed a taboo against anyone who raises “the wrong questions”.

    The extraordinary “Baghdad Bob” type of response to 9/11 on the part of the government and its lapdog media is reminiscent of what we might have expected in Soviet Russia, or even in Goebbels’ propaganda-laced Germany prior to the outbreak of WWII – conduct which is beyond the bizarre in a supposedly free republic under a Constitution which in turn guarantees the right to freedom of expression. While we were all in a state of shock and awe from seeing large commercial airplanes slamming into buildings in real time, we lost our sense of the rational. Regardless of whether this was a part of the intent on the part of the perps, 9/11 was a psychological hammer-blow from which we have never fully recovered. In our collective zeal to exonerate those to whom we turn for protection, and to demonize those against whom we have been indoctrinated for decades to unconditionally hate (namely Arabs and Muslims), we have lost the plot.

    *****

    As regards the 9/11 Commission, it was *not* what was promoted to the public, by a very long shot. Here are some facts and quote from Commission staff members:

    *In any historical “national tragedies”, it has been customary and appropriate to set up a full inquiry within days. This was the case with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, both Space Shuttle accidents and the Pearl harbor attack. In contrast, the Bush Administration refused to authorize any inquiry for 441 days, and to add insult to injury, taking the bizarre decision to appoint Henry Kissinger as Commission chairman. Citing conflict of interest factors, he stepped down rather than reveal his client list. It took the heroic actions of a group of bereaved family members to force the Bush Administration into a response. Once the inquiry was finally authorized, with extreme and inexplicable reluctance on the part of the Bush White House, they then promised it would be the fullest investigation “no stones to be left unturned”. Unfortunately for us all, according to numerous knowledgeable parties including a number of senior Commission members, this was a very long way from the case.

    *The Bush White House did everything in its power to derail the open inquiry. Then, when faced with its inevitability, “the president and his aides sought to limit its scope, its access and its funding”, according to the Commission’s co-chairs. It was also placed under severe time constraints.

    *John Farmer, the lead counsel to the Commission, claims in his forthcoming book that the greater part of the Commission’s findings “are untrue”. He also states: “The Commission’s co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”. Indeed, they said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements.

    *Tom Daschle has said that Vice President Cheney requested him that there be no investigation into the 9/11 attacks.

    John Farmer also said: “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. ”

    *9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”

    * Congressman Curt Weldon: (Re. 9/11 Commission) … there’s something very sinister going on here… something desperately wrong… This involved what is right now the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people”.
    * Senator Mark Dayton, Member, Senate Committee on Armed Services and Homeland Security: “[NORAD] lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 Commission…the most gross incompetence and dereliction of responsibility and negligence”.
    * Congressman Ron Paul, Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee: “…the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation”
    *9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”.

    *9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”,” and also “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.

    *The intimidation of witnesses in a criminal trial is a very serious offense. Throughout the 9/11 Commission hearings, Government “minders” aggressively intimidated Commission witnesses on a wholesale basis, with impunity.

    *CIA chief Tenet demonstrably lied to the Commissioners in closed session meetings.

    * Director of the FBI, Louis Freeh: “9/11 Commission] findings…. raises serious challenges to the commission’s credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself”

    *Despite the common awareness in the intelligence and law enforcement community that torture is a counterproductive method of obtaining useful information, much of the Commission’s “evidence” was extracted by torturing suspects.

    * Former VP Cheney most probably lied to the 9/11 Commission regarding his movements and whereabouts in the critical period of time shortly after the attacks started. The sworn testimony of former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta diametrically opposes what VP Cheney told the Commissioners in closed hearing. VP Cheney, as well as President Bush, refused to testify under oath.

    * An E-4B plane was seen by numerous witnesses (and filmed by CNN cameras), flying above the DC area *before* the Pentagon was hit. If the Government had the foreknowledge to have a E-4B lifted and arrival over the D.C. restricted air space at the time of the attack, then why did the 9/11 Commission leave this out of their final report?

    * After both President Bush and VP Cheney initially refused to testify to the Commission under oath, their testimony was secret, behind closed doors, no cameras or transcripts allowed, and no questions by reporters. Does “executive privilege” extend to this degree of obfuscation?

    *A document recently discovered in the National Archives shows that, in a memo to the 9/11 Commission’s chairman and vice-chairman on false statements made by NORAD and FAA officials about the failure of US air defenses, the commission’s Executive Director Philip Zelikow failed to mention the possibility of a criminal referral. This supports allegations that Zelikow “buried” the option of a criminal referral by the commission to the Justice Department for a perjury investigation. The document was found at the National Archives by HistoryCommons contributor paxvector and posted to the History Commons site at Scribd.
    * The overwhelming proportion of evidence, some 90% heard by the Commission was not included in the Commission’s final report; this report has been described as a classic example of “dry labbing”. In scientific circles this means “starting out with a theory, which you then prove by omitting all contrary material. The responsibility for this fiasco clearly fell with the Commission’s executive director, Philip Zelikow, a Bush White House official, who determined which material was to be published, and which was to be ignored and erased.

    * “We know we never have learned the truth, it’s as simple as that,” says Lorie Van Auken of East Brunswick, one of the most ardent supporters of the creation of the 9/11 commission in 2002. It was headed by former New Jersey governor Thomas H. Kean.
    “Members and staff of the 9/11 commission have said many of the questions raised by the attacks have never been answered.”

    *Both 9/11 Commission co-chairs Kean and Hamilton haves stated publicly that the 9/11 Commission was “deliberately set up to fail” by the Bush/Cheney White House. The 9/11 Commission Report is no better than a 571 page lie.

    In the light of this information, the 9/11 Commission was clearly at the very best, severely hobbled; at the worst, it was bogus, a complete failure, its conclusions worthless garbage: a national disgrace with treasonous implications. According to the latest polls, the nation is divided about 50:50 on either supporting a new, real, no-holds barred investigation with full subpoena powers… or to let the matter rest and “move on”. This latter group is clearly either unaware of the facts behind the 9/11 Commission’s failure, or do not want to know. America and the world deserves far better than to let the matter rest; we are now in the insane situation that the worst crime of our lifetime remains uninvestigated, unsolved, and unpunished. Our alleged representatives in Washington DC appear to have closed ranks in keeping this nasty chapter in our history secret.

    This goes way beyond the left-right paradigm. If the of millions of people asking the difficult questions are all “conspiracy theorists”, then the US Government shouldn’t have any difficulty addressing these questions and evidence. If they can’t, or won’t, then who are they protecting?

    • Henry

      Very, very well said, Mr. Robertson. Once a person looks at all the evidence with a rational, open mind, there can be no doubt that the 9-11 attacks were organized and carried out with the knowledge and assistance of top U.S. government personnel. The government’s conspiracy theory is not only packed with lies and contradictions, but it violates the fundamental principles of physics.

      http://911speakout.org
      http://journalof911studies.com
      http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html

    • Jeffrey Orling RA

      S Robertson,

      You are being fooled by the opportunists and those who are covering their butts and those of their friends.

      Regardless of who was actually behind 9/11 and carried it out… the notion of blow back is very real. The USA has created animosity around the world by its actions and policies and there are millions of disenfranchised people who seek to strike back at US hegemony. As they don’t have armies, they engage in terrorist tactics or insurgencies.

      Naomi Klein wrote a brilliant book – about disaster capitalism. In it she identifies how the powerful interest use ANY and ALL disasters, to their advantage… they act opportunistically to “make out” and further their economic interests which includes control and power of markets, labor and resources. They did it with Katrina, they did it with 9/11. Vulture capitalists are always waiting to take advantage of any situation.

      The MIC turned 911 into a party… they got enormous funding… and the DOD the go ahead to engage in several wars… their raison d’etre – war. This has led many to assert that the national security state cause 9/11 as a false flag… This certainly is a possible explanation… but where’s the proof? We see they benefited, but did they actually cause it? Would the fact that the MIC and the DOD have engaged in false flags events in the past be proof that 9/11 was a false flag. NO. It might be a basis for a close look. But this is no different than racial profiling. There must be a direct provable cause and effect… not innuendo or suggestion of connection.

      The MIC and the the DOD are lumbering bureaucracies and extremely inefficient and *sloppy*. The DOD is good at bombing the hell out of someplace… but rather incompetent in most other operations historically. The DOD was unable to win the Vietnam war… the most powerful military in the world fighting guerrillas. Or even Iraq and now Afghanistan… in over 10 years of fighting.

      The CIA has been unable to assassinate Castro or Chavez. These mega sized national security stare operations are rather incompetent.

      It seems unlikely that they could plan and execute 9/11 as a false flag. But they were sure fast on the draw to turn it into a new opportunity for war. And of course they had to clean up the record about their incompetence and so they used the lacky politicians to produce bogus official reports and their friends in the media to plant stories to drum up warn and anti Islamic sentiment for it in a nation of people who simply trusted the media and their government to give the the facts.

      But media and government realized almost a century ago that the people can be managed using the media… public relations, advertising, psychology. Read up on the work of Bernays, McLuhan, Lakoff, Chomsky, Hiyakawa and others. People now float on a sea of PR and marketing and well above the facts which lie under the surface of what they are told.

      The exact same level and type of marketing, PR and deception is at play in the truth movement.

      Is this the work of “Sunstein agents”.. or the work of egos and opportunists? Perhaps some of both.. but more like the latter than the former. The 9/11 truth movement has all the earmarks of cult like behavior… even if the movement asks some good questions. It’s now mostly driven by ego and religious like distrust of authority (of which their is more than adequate basis for)… and not by facts, science and rational thought.

      • Henry

        Jeffrey says:

        “The CIA has been unable to assassinate Castro or Chavez. These mega sized national security stare operations are rather incompetent. It seems unlikely that they could plan and execute 9/11 as a false flag.”

        But some guy living in a cave thousands of miles away without so much as a cell phone could pull it off – shut down NORAD and schedule war games to inhibit a response? Are you joking with us?
        The CIA and other shadow groups of the U.S. government have succeeded very well in many their endeavors and are quite competent indeed – probably more competent than any other military intelligence network on the planet.
        Regardless, we know that 9-11 was an inside job for many of the reasons cited in this discussion, but the irrefutable proof of demolition of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 is all the evidence required. The “official” 9-11 conspiracy theory is an impossible, ever changing, intelligence insulting pack of lies and contradictions. You are wasting your time (and ours) attempting to defend it.

        http://911speakout.org

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Henry,

          I didn’t say who or what was planned… that is what the consequences of the operation would be regardless of who did it or planned it.

          It is certainly conceivable to me that whomever decided to fly planes into the towers… they didn’t expect them to fall… they likley hoped for significant damage… they likely didn’t have any plans for B7 which came down as an *accident* and consequence of the sub station explosions and diesel fires which likely was not planned.

          The stand down looks like incompetence of lumbering bureaucracy to me not… perhaps orchestrated. I really can[‘t speculate about the planning and execution and have never said it was AQ and not some rogue intel operatives using terrorists as patsies in some way. That does not make it an *inside job* of the type implied by many.

          We can agree that NIST and FEMA and the 911 commission were cover ups of what actually happened. But that doesn’t tell us what was behind the cover up or what was covered up or why.

          There has been no accountability or justice and I, like others are calling for a complete new investigation and accountability and justice. Clearly there are heads in the national security state which should *roll* at the very least for dereliction of duties.

  59. sgt_doom

    Other People’s Money: 9/11

    When the BCCI investigation reached closer to President Geo. H.W. Bush’s White House back in the late ’80s, early ’90s, Bush appointed Robert Mueller III to be the chief of the DOJ’s Criminal Division to manage the BCCI probe — or more accurately, to deflect it away from the Bush administration and narrow the scope of the investigation. Four days prior to 9/11/01, President Geo. W. Bush appoints Robert Mueller III to be director of the FBI — perfect timing and what a pedigree Mueller possesses.*

    One day prior to 9/11/01, the Pentagon’s comptroller announces that $2.3 trillion cannot be accounted for.**

    Six to seven hours prior to the events of that 9/11 morning, sometime between 2:00 AM and 3:00 AM (EST) a group email is transmitted to the DIA’s Financial Management staff to attend an emergency meeting that very morning at their Pentagon offices — located at the Pentagon’s west wall. One staff member will fortuitously oversleep, viewing the email late and consequently arrive late — just in time to view from afar the plane crashing into the super-reinforced west wall, severely injuring or killing almost the entire financial management group of the DIA, and those computer systems involved with discovering said missing funds; apparently data backups aren’t the order of the day?

    That very same morning on 9/11/01, the National Reconnaissance Office’s (NRO) ops center would be evacuated due to an exercise simulating an attack by suicide aircraft flying into that facility. (Sound vaguely familiar?) Therefore, no one was on hand to manually task their recon satellites on the airspace above NYC and the Pentagon. Thanks to further expansion of the Web over the Internet (2003 – 2005), cached pages of dramatically increased data transmission and EFTs, originating from three firms residing in the two WTC towers to offshore locations, could be accessed.

    Shortly after 9/2001, in early 2002, an explosive growth occurs in offshore hedge funds.

    Background research on those unfortunate passengers aboard the involved airliners (victims who were certain to die that day) indicated that some of the pax fall into three unique groups, along with three unique individuals aboard.

    The three groups: (1) developers of remote piloting hardware and software; (2) individuals involved in the creation of a terrorist scenario remarkably similar to that which occurred on 9/11/01 (among that group of victims was an Israeli counterterrorist expert and one of the airliners’ pilots, a former career Naval officer); and, (3) some of the individuals involved with the investigation into Flight 800’s demise.

    The three individuals: (1) wife number three of the solicitor general, who would quickly move on to wife number four once the insurance settlement came through (death by opportunity?); (2) a lady attorney, rumored to be involved with a senior married partner of the conservative and politically-connected law firm which successfully defended Fox News on several cases of fictionalizing the news (death by opportunity?); and, (3) a physicist with the Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Directed Energy Section.

    [We are not suggesting any of these victims were aware of the events to transpire on 9/11 — this appears to be a highly compartmentalized operation.]

    Intensive pattern analysis, link analysis, and link and group analysis indicates the five principal players involved: the Blackstone Group, Veritas Capital, AIG, the office of the VP, and the office of the SecDef.

    Some time prior to 9/11/01, a financial news announcement would explain an investment by AIG in the Blackstone Group (source document of transaction, along with hard copy source documents of thousands of ongoing SEC investigations resided in the destroyed WTC Building 7 – no source docs, case closed!). The amount of AIG’s investment was approximately the final insurance payout amount to the property management/RE firm for the WTC destruction (classic paper money false transfer and money laundering scheme, relatively simple — for a far more circuitous, and commonplace, accounting scheme, please see Retirement Heist, by Ellen Schultz, p. 209 on “leveraged ESOPs”).

    The mortgage owner of record for WTC Building 7: the Blackstone Group.

    The firm awarded the $1 billion captive insurance fund management contract by Bush’s FEMA, for settlement with WTC victims’ families: the Blackstone Group.

    The firm which negotiated the largest and quickest real estate deal in NYC history, the WTC lease transfer from the Port Authority of NY and NJ to Silverstein Properties and Westfield America, Inc.: the Blackstone Group.

    During the week prior to 9/11/01, the fiber optic installation firm, EurekaGGN, installed dark fiber in the top floors of the two WTC towers (they had the contract for cabling the entire WTC), utilizing a method to pump the fiber optical cables through existing HVAC vents running beneath each floor.

    [To reiterate: the west wall of the Pentagon had been reinforced, according to Structure Magazine, which also posed the question as to why only one wall and a plane crashes into it. Fiber optic is being installed, but never verified as to being operational, in the WTC towers, and planes crash into them — access, access, access!]

    Technical details not widely known: two of the four airliners involved didn’t appear on the FAA Flight Registry which logs all commercial flights, per standard procedure, as they were reserved as DoD Special Charters, meaning that each plane must seat those reserved for DoD personnel, and must depart at the schedule time, but any remaining seats may be filled commercially.

    Aircraft pointedly flew to shadow zones – where radar coverage was obscured due to topography and ATCC limitations – where the transponders were then powered down – normally, they would have triggered ATCC radar indicators. (Highly doubtful those Saudi Arabian hijacker cutouts would have known these recondite details?); and recovered black box data, obtained through FOIA requests, give no indication of any hijacking taking place (and yes, there does exist a governmental database of black box hijacking data for comparison purposes).

    There were over 1,000 other “coincidences” which took place that morning, all tracking back to the five principal players.

    Recap: $2.3 trillion announced unaccounted, and DIA’s financial management group is almost entirely wiped out, along with involved computer systems, dramatically increased data transmissions and EFTs out of WTC towers in preceding 12 hours, and people and computer systems involved are killed and destroyed, with explosive growth in offshore hedge funds occurring shortly thereafter.

    Veritas Capital, purchaser and owner of former Raytheon subsidiary which employed those remote piloting hardware and software developers and subcontractors aboard some of those airliners involved in 9/11, and Veritas Capital makes some incredibly prescient defense industry investments shortly prior to 9/11/01.

    [Containment process: Immediately after the first Anthrax attack, DynCorp’s Dynport Vaccine Company was awarded an Anthrax government contract — therefore any possible future investigation would logically turn up Anthrax. Dynport Vaccine Company was located right by Ft. Detrick, probably point of origin of weaponized Anthrax, but Detrick didn’t possess the required lab equipment to weaponize, while Dynport did. (Dynport was owned by DynCorp, government contractor and private military company, later cited for human trafficking crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq — and was purchased by Veritas Capital, and later sold.)

    Recovered disk drives in WTC Towers were strangely — given their classified and sensitive nature — sent overseas to a German data recovery firm, Convar, recently purchased by Kroll (and not to the NSA as one would obviously assume???). A spokesman for Convar publicly stated that some data had been recovered, but said data and drives were delivered to the FBI HQ in D.C., where they promptly disappeared.]

    *Robert Mueller III, FBI director, is the grandnephew of Richard Bissell, one of the three top CIA types who President Kennedy fired. Mueller’s wife is the granddaughter of Charles Cabell, another of those three CIA people JFK had fired (the third was Allen Dulles, who would later manage the Warren Commission!

    ** http://www.financial-edu.com/history-of-credit-derivatives.php

    2002-Rise of Hedge Funds: Number of funds increases from 4000 in 2002 managing $2 trillion to 8000+ managing $4 trillion. This creates intense demand for new structured products with higher yields.

  60. Sirreal6

    I wish the credible people coming out weren’t “former this” or “former that” people. I mean, I’ll take what I can get but there must be people who aren’t former reporters for this or that outlet, former assist secretary of this or that agency etc etc…I guess I shouldn’t complain…working towards and achieving critical mass on this is getting tiring. aburdick3 at verizon dot net

  61. tanabear

    The Either/Or question has been answered in regards to 9/11. Simply stated, is the official explanation given for what happened on 9/11 true or false? The answer is that it is verifiably false. This is not a controversial position based on the science and evidence. It is no more of a scientific controversy than the question, is the Earth round or flat? Is it a heliocentric or geocentric Solar system? In short, it is a resolved scientific issue. However, 9/11 is a political controversy and for this reason the debate continues. People have a vested interest in promoting and maintaning a lie. Even though the Either/Or question has been answered there is much we do not know. This is not surprising as there has been no real investigation into 9/11, only various reports meant to bolster the official account.

    So how long can a known falsehood be perpetuated?

    • Jeffrey Orling RA

      The official story… as most official accounts about almost anything today… is neither accurate or truthful and usually presented to bolster the interests of the few and powerful.

      This doesn’t mean that all of the official account is false. This is not black and white. If the official story is “a lie” one can’t simply assert that the opposite is the truth.

      If NIST ignores CD and produces a flawed report… this doesn’t mean that the explanation for the destruction of the WTC was CD. It means that they produced a flawed report. They got it or a fair amount wrong.

      And that’s why a new and proper investigation is called for.. to get it right.

  62. AJ

    Greg – thanks for being one of the small handful of journalists to question the OCT.

    As someone who studied engineering and made a living in construction work, it is my considered opinion that all three towers were demolished by CD. There is no other way to explain the symmetrical collapse at free-fall speed unless the laws of physics were asleep that day. Frankly, none of the OCT holds up under any scrutiny.

    Kudos to you for daring to question what others cannot or will not.

  63. bill

    WOW! I’m very distrusting of governments in general but C’mon guys. The lack of critical thinking here is nothing short of stunning. An interesting thought, at least to me, crossed my mind reading the comments. I’ll bet the vast majority of you 9-11 conspiracy theorists are lap dogs for the theory of evolution too. Now admittedly that sounds real random, but don’t ya see the similarities? Tremendous, stupendous, down right embarassing leaps of faith, yeah faith, based on nothing more than wild baseless, factless, theories. It’s late and I’m tired from reading so much goofiness but I do have a simple question. Why would the government need or want to take down blg. 7 knowing they were gonna bring down the twin towers? I mean if you were them would you even bother? Good luck dealing with the real shit storm we are all gonna be dealing with, probably soon.

    • Henry

      Bill, when you say “conspiracy theorists”, are you referring to the “cave man” conspiracy theorists or the inside job conspiracy theorists?
      Judging by the words faith, baseless, fact-less, and goofiness, it seems obvious that you’re referring to the government’s physically impossible, intelligence insulting, evidence contradicting “cave man” conspiracy theory, but you should probably specify. ;-)

  64. MJ

    Greg,

    I too have found the collapse of WTC7 very problematic as did NIST because they did not release their WTC7 report’s draft for public comment until August of 2008 (about 3.5 years ago). When they did release it, NIST ended up being schooled by the public who had read the report and informed them of measured freefall (the measurement done by the public not NIST). This is not “almost” freefall but actual measured freefall! Following the public comment period NIST revised section 3.6 of their NCSTAR 1A. Anyone can go look at the original draft for public comment Aug 2008 pages 40 and 41 and clearly see the significant changes made to this section after editing and release in Oct 2008 Pages 44,45,46. They included the freefall calling it stage 2 of their collapse model, and if you read the report you find “Stage 2” equates to the initial descent of WTC7’s roofline.

    Greg, please let me know what you think of the observational summary below.

    a. In the video anyone can see the descent of WTC7 is sudden, uniform, symmetrical (I agree with you that it looks just like a controlled demolition).
    b. Combine “a” with NIST’s statement in revised NCSTAR 1A page 45 stating the descent of the roofline was “equivalent to the acceleration of gravity g.”. Note that is 2.25s of gravitational acceleration.
    c. Combine “a” & “b” with the fact that there were originally 58 perimeter columns in WTC7 and after the tower collapses damaged WTC7 and started the fires there were 52 perimeter columns remaining PLUS the 24 interior columns.

    The controversy surrounding building 7 can be summed up as:
    How does a building with 52 intact perimeter columns and 24 intact interior columns have a single column buckle and exhibit a sudden, global, symmetrical collapse with the roofline descending at gravitational acceleration from fire as NIST concludes?

    I think this NIST report stinks.
    The only thing I find worse than the report itself is the fact that they have been allowed to hide their data. Yes that is correct, unlike real science where data is to be made available for replication, NIST has made their global collapse model data secret for “Public Safety” reasons. That even stinks more than the report itself!

    • Greg

      MJ,
      I have read every comment, and it appears to me the folks that think the video is “insightful” and the governments “official” story is “insane” are winning the argument hands down with science, critical thinking and fact. The folks on the governments side look (to me) as losing the argument badly. I had no idea that this video would spark such a debate on the site. But 11 years after this tragedy, there are many open wounds and questions about what really happened. I think debate and critical thinking are good things for a free society!!! I thank all on both sides of this issue for commenting.
      Greg

      • Bill

        Well done, Greg!

        • Greg

          Thank you Bill.
          Greg

      • Henry

        Greg, one thing I notice time after time in these debates is that most followers of the government’s 9-11 conspiracy theory either avoid specific facts and details, or they get them wrong. As a reporter, I’m sure you know the importance of the details. Thanks again for opening up a discussion about this very important topic.
        Even if people have trouble with basic physics and concepts like free fall acceleration, it seems they would question why a known hijacked jet would be permitted to fly into the most heavily guarded and secure airspace on the planet almost hour after the first tower was hit and it was known that we were under attack. And why would the Bush regime oppose and obstruct an investigation into such a monumental security “failure” for well over a year? The “official” 9-11 conspiracy theory is not only physically impossible, but absurd on almost every level. The people who have benefited from it are also the prime suspects. 9-11-01 was “The New Pearl Harbor” desired by the PNAC neocons…

        • MJ

          I find this fact quite interesting too… and I have a relevant comparison.

          First lets set up the most forgiving view of events:

          1. terrorists slipped passed our security agencies and got into the country and onto the planes… lets just let this slide on past despite the budgets these agencies have to prevent this kind of attack.

          2. the first plane goes way off course for around a half hour before the first plane strikes the North Tower and then strikes the tower. Lets let this one slide because maybe people thought it was an accident.

          3. The second plane strikes the south tower about 15 minutes later… at 9:03AM but we’ll let that one slide because if they thought the first tower was an accident they would not be prepared for the second tower strike.

          However after the second tower was hit I think it was pretty clear to everyone everywhere in the world we were under attack.

          The Pentagon was struck a full 34 minutes later at 9:37AM.

          Now here is a comparison:

          Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack in the Early morning hours of a Sunday (Dec 7, 1941). Major General Walter Short and Admiral Husband Kimmel were brought up on dereliction of duty charges.

          This is the normal process for the military after such a massive failure.

          Question: Name the military or civilian authority held accountable for 9/11?

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        I am neither on the government side or the *official truth CD side*… they are as far as I can tell BOTH wrong! Neither of those accounts are based on the actual observable measurable data from the collapse of the building… or the actual engineering design and physics involved.

        Both are theories with cherry picked evidence. Both are riddled with sloppy thinking and abuse of science and physics.

        This debate is more like two idiots arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin…

        • Greg

          Jeffrey Orling RA,
          You said,”This debate is more like two idiots arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.” There are nearly 200 posted comments on this site on the 9/11 subject and I have read them all. The debate is not how you characterize it. You are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. Building 7 fell symmetrically and in free-fall. That means no support underneath. This is basic Sir Issac Newton principles–gravity. Also, two jets knocked down 3 buildings, This is not bowling. The nearly 200 comments with links and videos answer a lot of questions and also raise a few as well. Can you honestly say you have read all the comments? You said,”The 9/11 truth movement has all the earmarks of cult like behavior. . .” Really? Questioning the governments “official story” is cult behavior? I disagree. Please tell us all the “earmarks of cult behavior?”
          Greg

  65. norcar survivor

    Hi Greg
    My personal prospective on this has always been the Pentagon. We had over 4 different films of the first plane crashing into the world trade center without being aware of its’ coming, yet we had about an hours notice that one or two planes were headed for DC and not even 1 film of the plane on approach. There are more cameras in DC than anywhere in the US (not counting Hollywood)and yet not even one girl scout or boy scout was able to catch the plane on approach. Sure there is the blurry tape from the parking deck. Big Whuup. My next question is why these terrorist, after years of planning would hit the Pentagon in the one area that had been under construction for months? More than enough time to move some burned and damaged aircraft parts in among the wreckage of the destroyed section. Lastly, the damage area of the face of the Pentagon did not reflect the dalage pattern of an aircraft strike. Notice the width of the planes entry in the towers.There should have been 3 points of impact, 1 the fuselage and 2 where the engines would have hit the building. No Greg, I am not convinced that terrorist hit the Pentagon, therefore I must question the Trade Center as well as Bldg. #7.

  66. Avenging World

    Thanks for keeping this issue alive.
    The official story is not credible, and those maintaining it are less credible every day.
    This is only beginning.

  67. George P

    Hi Greg,
    Another great article. No one alive today will ever know really what happened that awful morning. Anyone who believes the government account is brain dead. I know is that we as a society have become less free to the point of oppression. We as a nation are bankrupt. So if the purpose of the attacks of 9/11 were to destroy the greatest nation on earth, I say they were sucessful. The enemy within!

    Almost 60 years later, we still don’t know the real story of the Kennedy assasination, Bobby Kennedy, MLK, Oklahoma City, Waco,and Ruby Ridge just to name a few of the older stories. These are some examples of incidents that had government investigations where the explanations didn’t quite line up with reality.

  68. 911Researcher

    HI Greg please take time to watch this documentary it is the most clinically damning fact based 9/11 Doc out there.

    http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=28820

    peace.

    • Greg

      911Researcher,
      Thank you for the comment and content.
      Greg

  69. impeach or anything

    To those who say nothing can be done…wrong… it is destroying the fabric of American society and something must be done.

    Demand impeachment or trials for Bush/cheney or a NEW investigation. Do it or lose the country to a cabal of corporatists who have hijacked America for it’s own purposes.

  70. Robert

    Greg thanks for having the courage to ask tough questions. That is what journalists once did in America. It’s heartwarming to know there are still a few around on the Internet. The founding fathers knew it was critical to a democracy. That makes you a true patriot.

    The use of the term “conspiracy theory” to discredit citizens who ask questions of their government began in the mid sixties, after a number of books came out questioning the Warren Commission Report. In 1977 a secret CIA document was revealed that shows the CIA was actively involved in the discrediting of anyone who might question the government’s version of the “lone nut” assassination story promoted by the Warren Commission. You can read the document yourself at http://mtracy9.tripod.com/cia_instructions.htm
    It was directed to all the CIA assets in our media. There were many. And I am sure there still are.

    So when someone calls you a “conspiracy theorist” to end any discussion of the facts, think of the brilliant CIA people who know how easy it is to silence dissenters in a “free” society. All you have to do is ridicule them.

    • Greg

      Thank you Robert. I learned a lot with all the commnets.
      Greg

    • ben

      “Someone would have talked”: On Believers and Questioners

      Person #1: [States a plausible theory concerning how the government may have conducted a nefarious operation and then lied to the public about it.]
      Person #2: That’s impossible. There would have to have been so many people involved. Someone would have talked.

      Who is right: Person #1 or Person #2?

      No matter how much research Person #1 does, he can never attain absolute certainty about his theory. Absolute certainty about empirical matters is impossible. See Rene Descartes, Meditations I. However, the difference between Person #1 and Person #2 is not in the truth-value of their respective beliefs, but rather their orientation towards truth itself.

      Person #2 is a Believer whereas Person #1 is a Questioner. Most Questioners used to be Believers; it is rare to find a Believer who used to be a Questioner.

      Questioners are a tortured lot. On one hand, they are constantly attempting to save Believers from their certainty in the “consensus opinion.” On the other hand, Questioners are constantly attempting to test those few beliefs that they have attained, which they acknowledge to have been imperfectly established. This is a never-ending task and the Questioners are never satisfied.

      Believers, by contrast, spend most of their time in blissful ignorance. They see the world as “given” and spend their time worrying about things like sports, interpersonal relationships or career advancement. While some Believers get their worldview from watching or reading the News, most get it by osmosis, by referring to what “most people think” as a guide.

      Believers and Questioners are fundamentally at odds. Questioners either view Believers as simpletons or (as stated above) as naive souls to be saved. While many Questioners find Believers boring or pathetic, Questioners do not usually hate Believers. However, Believers invariably detest Questioners. See Plato, The Trial of Socrates.

      The reason for Believer’s hate of the Questioner is based on the fact that the Questioner, simply by posing the question, succeeds in momentarily jolting the Believer out of his blissful ignorance. This momentary jolt is painful, of course, which causes the Believer to recoil at whatever idea the Questioner had momentarily created in his mind. The Believer’s salve is to reject that idea outright as preposterous. He will rely on any handy method to do so.

      The “someone would have talked” argument is a handy method that Believers use to get rid of an uncomfortable idea. If the “someone would have talked” phenomenon is as true as the law of gravity, then why, the Questioner asks, does the government go to the pains of conducting background checks? Why did no one talk about Operation Northwoods before it became declassified? Why does barely anyone talk about it now?

      The Questioner is relentless. If he goes too far, though, the Believer is going to have to rely on other means to get back to the blissful state to which he has become attached. When he fails to refute the Believer on his own, he will resort to others. He will turn to other Believers and say “Look at this guy! How crazy is he!?” The other Believers will be quick to rally around the irked Believer-cum-leader. Before you know it, the Questioner has become an outcast. Or worse.

      When the Believers are done with him, the Questioner will eventually become “no one.”

      This is the reason why the “someone would have talked” argument fails: because whoever talks is no longer someone worth being listened to, at least as far as the Believer is concerned.

      But I wouldn’t try to explain this to a Believer, if I were you.

      • Sean

        I love it! Thanks for posting this, ben.

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        Good analysis Ben… both the 9/11 truth advocates and the OCT advocates are *believers* according to your definition. Both are ignoring the science, the evidence, the observations when convenient to support their pre conceived strongly held beliefs.

        And that is my strongly held belief.

  71. Arius

    All this discussion to avoid admitting that Muslim terrorism brought down the buildings. Amazing.

    • Greg

      Arius,
      Please bring some facts to this discussion when you make such a sweeping statement.
      Greg

      • Arius

        I know facts, I am a scientist. Why is it that I am the only one that needs to bring facts when there are no facts in the other comments, only suppositions. Your reporting on financial issues is excellent. On the 911 attack you have gone off the rails.

        • Greg

          Arius,
          Read the comments, There are about 150. I read them all. Many who think this was a conspiracy about a controlled demolition brought facts, quoted scientific theory and brought video links and posted them on the site for all to see. Your comment was just that a comment without backing. If you are a scientist, please bring the scientific evidence that supports your claim. I am sure people here will review it and comment back. You say I have “gone off the rails” for merely offering an avenue for questioning the official government story on 9/11? Please prove it. Let all see your evidence and I will post it. Thank you for your comment and participation in this site.
          Greg

        • MJ

          Arius,

          My previous post was factual so why don’t you address it?
          It is based on observation (a key component of science) and the government’s own report on WTC7.

          a. In the video anyone can see the descent of WTC7 is sudden, uniform, symmetrical. If you have watched the videos you must agree that Building 7 (not struck by a plane) observationally looks like a controlled demolition. Correct?

          b. In the government’s report titled “Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7″ Oct 2008 on pages 44,45,46 you will find section 3.6 and specifically on page 45 you will find they have included stage 2 and stated that the measured rate of descent is “equivalent to the acceleration of gravity g.” for 2.25s.
          If you read this carefully you will see that stage 2 equates to the initial descent of the roofline we see in the video.

          c. The government’s report states that after the collapse of the towers there were several perimeter columns of WTC7 severed, fires were started and fire supression ceased due to a break in the city water main. This left the building with 52 of 56 perimeter columns and 24 interior columns.

          The controversy surrounding building 7 can be summed up as:
          How does a building with 52 intact perimeter columns and 24 intact interior columns have a single column buckle and exhibit a sudden, global, symmetrical collapse with the roofline descending at gravitational acceleration from fire as NIST concludes?

          Additionally, you have stated you are a scientist so I have a question also based in fact and related to science.

          Science has a process known as full disclosure in which all scientific data, methods etc are put forth so other scientists can replicate the experiment and get the same result. It is this replication that validates science. The “Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (Oct 2008) has many statements made in it that are supported by the government’s computer generated collapse model.

          Less than a year after the release of the report NIST’s director put out a “FINDING REGARDING PUBLIC SAFETY INFORMATION” in which he
          stated that the release of specific data on a building that no longer existed “might jeopardize public safety” therefore, NIST would not be releasing “All input and results files of the ANSYS 16-story collapse initiation model with detailed
          connection models that were used to analyze the structural response to thermal loads” as well as “All input files with connection material properties and all results files of the LS-DYNA
          47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures”. Basically, independent scientists do not get to look at the data for the computer generated collapse models because the data has been made secret.

          Here is the link: http://www.cryptome.org/nist070709.pdf

          To take this one step further let me note that the minor amount of information I have put here all comes from the government EXCEPT the observation from the video which any person can see looks like a controlled demolition. The link above is not a government website and I was suspicious back when I found this finding regarding public safety so I emailed Patrick Gallagher (the NIST director who put out the finding). I told him I thought it was fraudulent because it listed him as the director when at the time (2009)he was assistant director. He replied that the Finding was real, he had put it out and the director title was a mistake.

          As you stated you were a scientist what do you think of hiding the model data and the rest of the facts I have put forth here?

  72. Bill

    There’s a new book coming out that will shed some light on the issue. It is a memoir by Sibel Edmonds, titled “Classified Woman.” See e.g. http://www.classifiedwoman.com. In a late 2009 article in The American Conservative, Sibel tells some of her story, that is at http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/nov/01/00006/

    … it includes “So these conversations, between 1997 and 2001, had to do with a Central Asia operation that involved bin Laden. Not once did anybody use the word “al-Qaeda.” It was always “mujahideen,” always “bin Laden” and, in fact, not “bin Laden” but “bin Ladens” plural. There were several bin Ladens who were going on private jets to Azerbaijan and Tajikistan. The Turkish ambassador in Azerbaijan worked with them.

    There were bin Ladens, with the help of Pakistanis or Saudis, under our management. Marc Grossman was leading it, 100 percent, bringing people from East Turkestan into Kyrgyzstan, from Kyrgyzstan to Azerbaijan, from Azerbaijan some of them were being channeled to Chechnya, some of them were being channeled to Bosnia. From Turkey, they were putting all these bin Ladens on NATO planes. People and weapons went one way, drugs came back.”

  73. xxxxx

    It’s hard to believe the Pentagon has less security video, then a 7 eleven.

  74. Ambrose

    Greg,

    I hope I am not too late to join the discussion. If you do a Google search about 9/11, it shows 74,500,000 results. If you do a Google search about 9/11 Conspiracy, it shows 53,000,000 results. There are a lot of people around the world who believe the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory.

    When I first saw the Twin Towers collapsed, I told myself that it was a miracle – the towers didn’t fall on top of the surrounding buildings. But was it a miracle or just a controlled demolition? As time goes by, more and more people believe that it was a controlled demolition and the whole 9/11 attacks was a conspiracy.

    Among all the arguments that are for and against the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory, I found the NIST’s Pancaking Theory most amazing. If the Pancaking Theory worked for the WTC (WTC 1 and 2 were each 110 stories tall; WTC 7 was 47 stories tall), we can demolish any tall buildings by setting fire (with jet fuels, if you prefer) on the highest floors and let the “uncontrolled fire” work its magic. This method of “demolition without explosives” will put the commercial demolition companies out of business.

    For those who believe that the government would never hurt its own people, WAKE UP! Many governments around the world, including the U.S. government, kill their citizens for political gains. With the implementations of the Patriot Act, the NDAA and the NDRP, you are no longer protected under the Constitutions. The 9/11 disasters was the main excuse for the Patriot Act. Was that a coincidence? The President has gained more power today than any other Presidents in the U.S. History. Without any proof or fair trial, any of us can be detained indefinitely or killed by a drone. All of these are possible in the name of “Protecting National Security”.

    There were 2,996 people died and more than 6,000 injured in the 9/11 attacks. As of February 13, 2012, according to the U.S. Department of Defense, there were 4,408 total deaths and 31,922 wounded as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Based on the report from Congressional Research Service http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf), $806 billions was wasted in the Iraq War since 9/11. The U.S. government misled the American people into the Iraq War and caused the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers.

    I also believe that there might be disasters caused by the government unintentionally. Remember the TWA 800 disaster in 1996? Did a military missile shoot down TWA 800? Well, that’s another conspiracy that you can talk about. (http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/twa.php)

    Ambrose

    • Greg

      Ambrose,
      You are right on time anytime you wish to comment. Thank you.
      Greg

  75. Jan

    It is hard to wrap your mind around this. One part of me say no, we are the good guys. I think the American people are the good guys, but I am really beginning wonder about our government!

  76. Sean

    There’s a well known book called “The Grand Cheesboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives” written in 1997 by former national Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski.

    Brzezinski was NSA for Carter and was the principal architect of the policy that aligned the US and the Soviets on building a highway from Russia to Kabul, while simultanously funding the construction of the Pakistani Intelligence orgainazition (the ISI) via foreign aid to Egypt that was funneled to Pakistan. The ISI was used to build radical madrasas in Pakistan and Afghanistan as a means to radicalize the region and create resistance fighters against the expected Soviet invasion. USAID provided text books to the madrasas that used tanks, guns, bombs, and bodies as counting tools.

    The day after the highway was completed, Soviet tanks rolled into Afganistan and the Brzezinski doctrine was in full gear. Through CIA, the bin Laden family was utilized as key resources to lead the effort against the Russians, with supply lines and training coming from the Pakistani ISI.

    Also in 1979, Brzezinski was instrumental in the White House decision to replace the Shah of Iran with the current Islamic regime as part of his longer term plan to turn the area into a hotbed of islamic fundamentalism.

    If you skip a lot of other important activities, you get to 1997 when brzezinski published “The Grand Chessboard”. In the book he carefully details how Central Asia is the crossroads between Europe, Asia, and Africa, and that any single global superpower will need to establish dominance over this region to maintain global supremacy. Starting with Afghanistan. he lamented that the American people won’t agree to a pre-emptive military invasion without some catalyzing event from an external threat driving the population into supporting a long and broad military campaign.

    The seeds of the external threat – radical Islam – were planted with the assistance of Brzezinski himself in the late 1970’s. The catalyzing event took place on Sept. 11, 2001, and sent a US invasion force to Central Asia with broad popular support.

    The book includes maps, strategies, and policy recommendations to maintain a long war that is ultimately directed towards isolating Russia and China from the region and forcing them into a backseat role in geopolitics as western policy makers establish dominance over the global economy.

    FYI, the head of Pakistans ISI, General Mahmoud, was in Washington DC on the morning of 9/11 having breakfast with the heads of the US Senate and US Congressional Intelligence Committees. He met later in the week with Secretary of State Colin Powell. The FBI later acknowledged that $100,000 was wired to hijackers living in Florida by Gen. Mahmoud. With that evidence in hand, the 9/11 Commission stated that funding of the hijackers was of no consequence.

    Believe to disbelieve the facts about 9/11 at your own risk. This is our country, we deserve the truth, and we’ll continue to seek it out and bring it to light in spite of the naysayers who don’t understand that true patriotism means to challenge, question, and demand an honest government and the unmodified truth, no matter how difficult the challenge.

  77. Stone

    For those who are truly interested and not afraid to face the music, and who are able to set aside their various ready-made opinions (be they government, Popular Mechanics or otherwise certified) about happened on the terrible day of September 11, 2001, I am recommending the following materials.

    1) On the destruction of the three skyscrapers of the World Trade Center (WTC 1,2, and 7):

    The video lecture by AIA architect Richard Gage “9/11 Blueprint for Truth” (2008), available at the Web site of “Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth,” http://www.ae911truth.org.

    The video can also be purchased there. Incidentally, the organization Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth now has a membership of more than 1500 certified architects and engineers and thousand of supporters (all this information is available on its Web site).

    Steven Jones (physicist), “Why Indeed Did the WTC Collapse?” September 2006, available for free at http://www.journalof911studies.com.

    Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R.
    Larsen (an international team of scientists and engineers), “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” in the peer-reviewed publication “The Open Chemical Physics Journal” (2009), 2, available for free at http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM.

    If this paper is too long and technical, see Jim Hoffman’s “Thermitic Pyrotechnics in the WTC Made Simple,” April 26, 2009, at 911research.wtc7.net/essays.

    David Ray Griffin, “The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False” (Interlink Publishing, 2009)

    Graeme McQueen, “118 Witnesses: The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers,” Journal of 9/11 Studies 2, August 2006, http://www.journalof911studies.com.

    2) On the attack of the Pentagon:

    Jim Hoffman, “The Pentagon No-757-Crash Theory: Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics,” November 15 2004, and “The Pentagon Attack : What the Physical Evidence Shows,” March 26, 2006, both available for free at 911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html.

    Without in the least abandoning the dissident viewpoint on 9/11, Hoffman destroys all the accounts that claim that no 757-Boeing hit the Pentagon and shows that the Pentagon is the most divisive issue (first page of the first article) of the movement seeking to elucidate what happened on 9/11.

    (The overfly theory that has been been circulated for several years now is an attempt at rekindling the discarded 2003 theory of Dick Eastman, which Hoffman mentions on p. 3 of the first article.)

    The following two papers further strengthen Hoffman’s analysis:

    Frank Legge, “What Hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and Its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth,” Journal of 9/11 Studies 26, July 2009, http://www.journalof911studies.com

    Warren Stutt, “Flight AA77 : New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon,” Journal of 9/11 Studies 30, January 2011, http://www.journalof911studies.com

    3) Go to http://www.patriotsquestion911.com to see what dozens and dozens of professionals and academics (all identified by name and photograph, along with their credentials and academic affiliations), in many fields (scientific and other) have to say about what happened on 9/11.

    4) For a response to Popular Mechanics’ attack against alternative accounts of what happened on 9/11, see Jim Hoffman, “Popular Mechanics’ Assault on 9/11 Truth,” 6/15/05, http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/

    *****

    To be very brief, there were two attacks on 9/11:

    1) the hijacking of four airliners by 19 Muslim militants, the slamming of two of those into WTC 1 and 2 and of a third one into the Pentagon, while the fourth crashed over Pennsylvania;

    2) a second attack that consisted in hijacking the first hijacking, and, under cover of the first attack, in taking down by controlled demolition WTC 1, 2, and 7, and in neutralizing the defense apparatus of the Pentagon and paralyzing the customary aerial defenses of the continental United Sates.

    For an in-depth description and discussion of nearly all aspects of that day — including the air defense failures — and of the workings of the government’s investigations (those of the Joint Congressional Inquiry and of 9/11 Commission), see Paul Rea’s book “Mounting Evidence: Why We Need a New Investigation into 9/11″ (Bloomington: iUniverse, Inc., 2011).

    • Stone

      A small correction:

      ‘about happened on the terrible day of September 11′ in the first paragraph of my post should read ‘about what happened on the terrible day of September 11′.

      Sorry about that.

  78. Steve Walker

    Thanks for this article and the video Greg. You are a true American Hero. Take a look at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. They have over 1600 architects and engineers who have signed a petition calling for a new investigation into the controlled demolition of WTC 1, 2 and 7. Their latest video “9/11: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out” is free on youtube. Watch and listen to structural engineers, scientists, and even psychologist discuss the events of that fateful day. Take care on behalf of me and my family.

    • Greg

      Steve Walker,
      Thank you for your kind words. Please post the video you are asking folks to see. I will post it.
      Greg

  79. norcar survivor

    An interesting view of the future back then Greg.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2Trj_5J02k

    • Greg

      Good stuff NC! Thank you.
      Greg

  80. Steve Walker

    Here is the video I mentioned in an earlier comment in which Greg asked me to post. This video, professionally done by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, is probably the best documentary put out by the 9/11 Truth Movement. Listen to structural engineers, scientists, military, and even psychologists regarding the events of that fateful day. These are people, many whom are currently working and in the top of their fields, who have put their reputation on the line for the sake of getting to the truth.

    9/11: Explosive Evidence-Experts Speak Out: link below

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ

    • Greg

      Thank you Steve Walker!
      Greg

      • Chris Sarns

        Greg,

        The first casualty of the “War on Terror” was out 1st amendment right to question the government without being ridiculed and possibly losing our job.

        Thank you for daring to disturb the sound of silence. It’s gone on for far too long now.

        AE911Truth also released a 15 minute documentary on WTC 7, with long time 9/11 Truth advocate, Ed Asner narrating.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw

        NC, The video you posted contains altered footage of WTC 7. A well known video has been reversed so the east penthouse is on the west end. It pans down and when pans back up, the screenwall and west penthouse are photo-shopped out. The east penthouse collapsed before the screenwall and east penthouse. The “flashes” have been added.

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Chris,

          How much heat is produced when you mechanically destroy 200,000 tons of materials…. concrete, glass, wood… plastics… to sand or smaller size grains and dust?

          Most of Bldg 7’s contents.. concrete etc was rendered to sand size and smaller particles by the collapse (as in according to you and AE911T …. caused by controlled demolition)… how much heat was produced…. and where did it go?

          Let’s start there with science… Ask Dr. Kathy McGrabe, AE911T member, who is a materials scientist and expert in the video cited. She knows that when you mechanically destroy of change the form/structure of a material it requires energy and it releases energy… which is why machine shops are lubricating their cutters.

          How much heat was PRODUCED by the collapse of bldg 7?

  81. joe

    Does anyone honestly believe that the current Obama administration wouldn’t reveal a conspiracy (if indeed there was one) to further their own ends (i.e., Everything is George W. Bush’s fault)? That one fact alone is enough to debunk any conspiracy theory regarding 9/11.

    • Sean

      Joe, you are making a very naive assumption that Bush and Obama work for opposing globalist bankers.

      • Steve Walker

        That’s good. What many don’t realize is if the truth about 9/11 was acknowledged by the establishment, it would bring down both parties and the corporate controlled media. The truth is not good business for the globalist bankers and the military industrial complex. The truth is good for “we the people” and is essentil for the long term salvation of our republic.

    • Stone

      One problem with your suggestion is that what you claim to be a fact is plainly not so. Obama’s foreign policy and many aspects of Obama’s domestic policies (especially, the undivided support he gave to the banking cartel, both in the form of massive bail-outs and of his refusal to prosecute wrongdoers)are merely continuations of Bush’s own. Obama’s term so far is basically a Bush third term. Obama is nothing more than a servant of the military-industrial complex, its world wide bellicose activities and bullying of other nations, and its military bases spread all over the planet (more than 700 of them).

      Even if Obama were indeed a president with policies that are very different from those of his predecessor, that would still not necessarily mean that he and his administration would want to expose domestic wrongdoing in the events of 9/11. One does not entail the other: there is still a long way from one to the other, and all manner of reasons for not going there on the part of an administration. A good glance at the history of this country should already make anyone suspicious of your claim.

  82. MJ

    Michael Rudin of the BBC conducted this interview that has got to be one of the most clearly visible cases of media bias I have ever witnessed. In it Dr. Niels Harrit, Associate Professor Emeritus of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen, is subjected to the full wrath of Mr. Rudin. Despite of his attempts to find some flaw in Harrit’s reasoning, the retired professor cleans the floor with him.

    One of my favorite parts is when Rudin does not want to have the word “Freefall” used in the description of Building 7’s collapse and keeps trying to interject the word “ALMOST” in front of the word freefall. This starts at the 15:00 minute mark. Fast forward to that to get a gist of what the whole interview is like.

    Note: the Interview was from May 10, 2011.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT-pFzOo5YM&feature=youtu.be

    • Greg

      MJ,
      This is good!!! Thank you. Evewryone should see it!!
      Greg

    • Jeffrey Orling RA

      Niels Harrit is a retired organic chemist and not a physicist of a structural engineer.

      Free fall motion was detected. This only means that what you measured had nothing below it to resist the downward force of gravity.

      This does not mean the material which supported the facade/curtain wall was CD’ed… it only means that it was not connected to something which provided a load path for its mass (weight).

      And of course no on can seen inside the building through those windows of the curtain wall… to know what was there or whether there was anything there when it was falling downward. Many PRESUME that the *guts* of the building was still there and the curtain wall was still attached to the frame and the floors were still there. There is no evidence of this… it is an assumption.

      On the other hand there is reason to believe that the core, the steel frame and floors had ALREADY COLLAPSED by the time we are seeing the facade/curtain wall descend.

      Understanding the WTC events:

      0.1 Introduction

      1.0 Science vs subjective viewpoints

      2.0 World Trade Center collapses misrepresented
      ….2.1 Progressive Floor Collapse in the WTC Towers
      ….2.2 Purpose of the NIST Reports
      ….2.3 NIST WTC1 misrepresentation
      ….2.4 NIST WTC7 misrepresentation
      ….2.5 NIST WTC2 misrepresentation
      ….2.6 Bazant misrepresentation of collapse progression
      ….2.7 Block Mechanics
      ….2.8 AE911T misrepresentations

      3.0 Toward an Accurate History of the Collapses

      4.0 Reassessing the Question of Demolition

      5.0 Collapses misrepresented as a narrowed false choice

      found at http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post19825.html#p19825

      Conclusions

      • Greg

        Jeffrey Orling RA,

        On the subject of free fall you said, “This does not mean the material which supported the facade/curtain wall was CD’ed… it only means that it was not connected to something which provided a load path for its mass (weight).” So what disconnected the support for a 50 story building? Please explain this phenomenon.

        Greg

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Greg,

          What I am asking people to consider is basically two things:

          1. That what they see collapsing is likely ONLY the curtain wall. And that curtain wall had lost it’s support / connection to the frame – spandrel beams which connect one perimeter column to the next. The curtain wall is quite light compared to the frame.. and it is attached with relatively small angles (clips) and a few bolts. Since it’s quite light, the connections to the frame are quite light and not robust. People are ASSUMING they are seeing the BUILDING descend at FF when they are seeing only the curtain wall. The structure had likely collapsed an instant before leaving the curtain wall like hollow shell.

          What is the evidence of this?

          a. Both the East and West penthouse on the roof can be seen to descend BEFORE we see the FF descent of the curtain wall. They were atop the core and so if they dropped the dropped where the core would be supporting them. But how far did the drop? Careful observations show a moire pattern on the glass of the curtain wall … caused by a pressure pulse or some distortion of the steel frame… descending down the entire visible part of the tower… a very slight bulge detectable by the altered reflection of the glass. So the penthouses BOTH descend right down through the tower.. the core… BEFORE the curtain wall downward FF motion is seen. We can therefore assume that there was at least no core by the time the FF decent was occurring… and no core down through all visible floors. Look carefully at the videos.

          The core supported girders and girders beams…beams supported the slabs. The girders were connected to the 57 perimeter columns just inside the curtain wall. If the core was gone… the girders had no support on the core side. Could the 57 perimeter columns hold the girders, beams and floors with no core side support? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! The floors system then collapsed down and inward like water rushing down a drain when the stopper is pulled…

          The entire frame and floors plunged down right after the core collapsed. This process took only a few seconds. The massive frame and floor system broke away from the clips and bolts connecting the curtain wall. Chains break at the weakest link. The bolts and clips were really very puny compared to the moment connects of the steel frame. All connections failed… but when presented with sufficient force… such as when the dropped to the ground.

          b Inward bowing of the cutain wall on the North side. Look at the famous video of the collapse. The *building* is distorted in shape as it descends. It looks plastic or elastic somewhat. The north face is bowing inward. It can only bow inward if there is nothing behind it… no spandrels and columns in a rigid vertical plane. But perhaps the center is dipping? NOOOOOOOOOO if the center of the curtain wall dipped, it would cause the rectangular glass windows to become parallelograms and that’s impossible without them shattering… frames could distort but not the glass. There is no sign of extensive glass breaking in the center so the explanation is the facade bowed inward like a folding screen with many panels.

          2. The FF decent was only 2.25 seconds for 100 feet of travel measured from a single point on the roof. After 8 floors or 100 feet it meets resistance and slows. This means that the observable portion… 23 stories of height I believe… moved together… and perhaps some below where we can’t see in the video… If the curtain wall had lost support/connection at floor 8 it would be free to drop to the ground… 100 feet without resistance. Perhaps… a good hypothesis. Or it could have been disconnected at floor 17 and then dropped to floor 11 which was there to offer resistance and slow it for example. In that scenario similar to what AE911T claims… the entire 8 floors from say 11-17 was blown out and nothing there to resist the fall…. but at floor 11 there was something intact to slow the collapse. Or perhaps the first 8 floors were blown out and (after the core… remember the core went first).

          My theory asks that we look at the structure down there and especially at floors 7&7. These floors were mech floors… no offices… and there were no offices uses below them either. It was a huge largely OPEN .. like a cathedral… volume to house the Con Edison sub station. To support the core which was directly over the sub station the engineers designed several huge transfer trusses. The core was on what was effectively a bridge span. If the bridge span collapses… the core above it falls and falls right onto the largely open space of the sub station. Open in the sense that the columns from above would have to align with something which could support them… this was not there.

          This pretty much would explain how there was structurally nothing for about 8 floors…. if 6&7 collapsed down into the sub station… me thesis. And if they did… they would pull the facade free at 6&7 leaving nothing above floor 8 to hold the facade up.

          The very rapid sequence of failure would be:

          trusses and transfer girder on floor 6&7 fail
          floors 6&7 and the core above drops down through to the ground where the sub station was
          girders to the perimeter columns and those columns collapse inward from floor 8 (top of floor 7). Columns were in story lengths.
          floors and perimeter columns and spandrels from flr 8 to the roof plunge down and inward.
          curtain wall is the final part to come down

          The questions to probe… are what could have failed the transfer trusses and cantilever girders on floor 6&7?

          It could be bombs and incendiaries. Could it be other causes? Perhaps.

          I believe it might have been from 8 hours of weakening from diesel fueled fires.

          Also note that the weakening scenario is a process of erosion of strength and takes time. A bomb is an instantaneous event. A structure falls catastrophically when it has lost its reserve strength.. whatever that happens to be. Weakening is an erosion of the reserve strength.

          This could be cutting away at the steel cross section.. less steel = less strength.

          It could be removing some of the steel entirely… remaining steel now is using its reserve strength.

          It could be weakening of the steel from heat. Hot steel is weaker than cold steel

          It could be a combination of the above. We don’t know.

          We know that heat weakens steel.

          We don’t know how much heat was present. We can assume it was over 8 hrs.

          We don’t know precisely where the heat was applied to the structure.

          We do know that lots of diesel was consumed that day… though they claim it was not 20,000 gal. Even 3,000 – 4,000 gal contains a lot of calories.

          We have reports that the FDNY was not able to fight the fires and were concerned about whether the building would survive.

          We have studies that show the frame was distorted beginning to *stretch* more than a minute before motion detectable by the naked eye was observed. These studies are available at the 911 Free Forums. This means that parts of the frame had already failed and there was load redistribution to other members. This was the sign that the reserve strength of the frame was approaching its limit and was almost gone.

          Could a single blast be the straw that broke the camel’s back? Of course. Could the straw have been an exploding transformer? Perhaps.

          We don’t know.

          We know the structure. We have SOME observations to work with.

          The collapse of bldg7 is not a smoking gun for controlled demolition.

          Sorry for many many typos and abuse of the English language. There is no edit feature or preview. I am lazy.

          • Greg

            Jeffrey Orling RA,
            It looks like a CD to me and this building was at least 200 yards away from the towers. I do not we cannot see “behind the curtain” explanation. Lots of unanswered questions so we we need an independent investigation to settle the matter once and for all. Thank you for your comment even though we disagree.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey wrote:

            “We do know that lots of diesel was consumed that day… though they claim it was not 20,000 gal. Even 3,000 – 4,000 gal contains a lot of calories.”

            Jeffrey, neither NIST, nor any of the most credible, respected, and professional 9-11 researchers share your belief that diesel fuel fire played a role in WTC7’s sudden, free fall, and symmetric drop. I’m not aware of any evidence supporting your belief. What evidence do you have to support it? Also, to what do you attribute the damage to the steel column from WTC7 that’s documented in the video below?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

  83. Tom Spellman

    First Thank you for breaking the SILENCE I am 68 and one of the qustions of my life was HOW did the murder in Germany in the 1930’s start? How was it possible? And then 9-11 and the SILENCE and I had my answer. Why the SILENCE is the qustion now. It took me a year and a half to know that the official story was not true but did not understand the collapse of 3 buildings in NYC on 9-11-01 until Dr Steven Jones, after viewing the video of the collaspe of WTC 7, made his simple observation that random fires and random damage can NOT produce a symetrical event, . Once I heard that it all became clear. That is the way science is. It took me 3 more years before I came to realize that what has been called dust is really freshly produced POWDER and that quanity of POWDER can ouly be produced by explosives in the less than 15 seconds that it took for each of the towers to collapse.

    You have contacts you know how they think. How do we (you) reach them. That is the question.

    Again Thank you !!!!!!!!! Just a little passion Peace Tom Spellman

    • Greg

      Thank you Tom for your comment. There are many unanswered legitimate questions based in scientific theory and fact.
      Greg

  84. Henry

    Greg, here is one of my favorite sources for information regarding the building demolitions. Both David Chandler (physics teacher) and Jonathan Cole (engineer) have produced some excellent 10 minute videos. The WTC7 free fall videos not only document free fall, but show NIST finally acknowledging it. All of Jon Cole’s thermate video and his eutectic steel video are a couple of my favorites. This is irrefutable proof of demolition. Thanks again for taking on this topic!
    Henry

    http://911speakout.org

      • Henry

        Dave, you’ve confused the towers with WTC7. The towers collapsed at about 68% of free fall, but WTC7 did, in fact, accelerate at a rate that is indistinguishable from free fall. That fact is no longer disputed, as it’s been documented via video evidence and after years of denial, even NIST has acknowledged it. Obviously, it’s impossible for a structure to bend, buckle, break, and shear its way through thousands of tons of undamaged steel columns at the same rate it would fall through air unless the integrity of the all the support columns was removed through precisely timed demolition.
        Think of it this way. Take two cars and let them both coast down a very steep hill. One is on the open road and the other has to crush its way through a long row of parked cars. Obviously, the car on the open road will accelerate much faster than the one that has to crush its way through a row of cars. This is true even of some of the cars are on fire. Acceleration that is indistinguishable from free fall can only take place in the absence of measurable resistance. If an object or structure has to crush its way through another object of similar mass and strength as itself, obviously the resistance will be *very* high.

        http://911speakout.org

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Henry,

          The twins did NOT collapse at 68% FF.. the collapse is NOT even accelerating. The collapse beginning accelerated to about 100feet per second and remains at this rate of speed (65 mph)

          The speed has been measured precisely in the sections where it can be clocked. We can’t see or time the entire event.

          And the columns came down several seconds AFTER the floors.

          We do know the top of tower 1 took 3.75 seconds to *disappear*… collapse onto the plane strike zone at about floor 95 or so. Then there is some acceleration and the speed settles into 65 mph.

          Where is you citation for 68% FF?

          You can’t treat this as black box… with 2 data points .. start an stop and assume continuous acceleration.

          When I drive from NY to Boston my speed and acceleration changes. I can give an average speed for the journey or assume it was a constant acceleration from start to finish.

          Your statement is silly and not backed by any data.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey, I posted the link documenting the acceleration of the towers. It is on http://911speakout.org See “North Tower Acceleration.”

            You claim that pancaking floors raced ahead of the exploding canopy in WTC2 and produced “400mph mega force tornado winds”. That’s pure speculation and conjecture with no supporting evidence – and of course, it doesn’t explain the explosive disintegration of the steel perimeter frame, or the massive central core structure. Also, the floors were converted into fine powder during the demolition, which is why there no floor in the rubble, so that rules out your pancaking floor theory anyway. Speculation can be fun, but let’s focus on hard evidence and what has been proved. Tell us what, if not the highly refined military grade nano thermetic material that was discovered in steel and dust samples, what you believe could have caused the damage to a steel column that’s documented in the video below. Please watch he entire ten minute video before replying, as it’s clear from many of your comments that you have done little actual research on this topic, and are arriving at most of your beliefs based on speculation. The video is from http://911speakout.org which is an excellent source of peer reviewed, expert, detailed research and analysis with no speculation.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

  85. Ryan

    It wasn’t until the last few weeks i even knew of all the proof towards the 9/11 conspiracy. Only me starting to work third shift and having a lot of free time, did my mind wonder and i started looking into the Zodiac murders and the MLK and Kennedy assassinations. Then my mind wondered further and i started reading into 9/11. At first i started reading how it was actually missles hitting the towers and not planes, I of course think this is ridiculous. But everything else i read did make sense and i came up with what i think most likely happened. i work as a criminal analyst and prior military member (don’t use these credentials of thinking im any kind of professional on the matter). I think the BA (Bush Administration) learned of a terrorist plot that was planning to highjack two planes and run them into the towers. With this knowledge the BA developed a plan to use this to thier benefit to start a conflict in the middle east and hide the fact 2.3 trillion was missing. They first made a list of everyone who will have to be involved with this operation, they then found the best way to pay everyone off (if they didn’t just kill them) would be to steal the gold located under the towers the terrorist are going to hit. Then insure the buildings and milk off the money that would bring in as well. They had to be sure the tower would fall to hide evidence so as a precaution they added some demolitions to the building. They then probably figured to get rid of the auditors investigaing the missing 2.3 trillion dollars and gain sympathy points from the nation, they would need another plane to take the auditors out as well. Being out of the question to ram a full-sized plane into the building, they decided to use a missle or small plane that has the accuracy to the squaremeter to take out the portion of the building that they could easily have them arranged to be in. Unlike New York the DOD has control over nearly all the Surveillance/video cameras to hide the footage of the Pentagon. The BA also determined that terrorist just hitting a small part of the pentagon would arise some questions so to throw them off they also arranged for the plane in Pennsylvainia to be shot down or EMP’ed to crash. Once the intelligence (from wiretaps from FBI, CIA,or whoever) was coming in that the terrorist were planning to attack the WTC’s soon the BA made all the final adjustments of installing demolitions, getting insurance for buildings,ect. Once the first tower was hit, the BA knew it could then attack the Pentagon and shoot down the plane over Pennsylvania (probably explains why they got attacked over a half hour after the WTC attacks).
    This is just what i think:
    i beleive planes hit both the WTC’s, demolitions were in place in case the buildings didn’t fall on their own. I beleive the Pentagon was hit by a small plane or missle, and that the plane in Pennsylvania was shot down or EMPed.
    None of this matters though because
    1. We will never have a ‘Trayvon Martin March'(i have nothing against Trayvon) for this incident because people are either to lazy, ignorant to the matter,or just dont care to gather that many people. 2.News will always use the excuse “don’t want to offend the families of 9-11″ (i have never had someone real close to me die, so i don’t know if it would bother me that people keep bringing it up, but i do know if anyone took my wife or kid away from me i would flip the world over looking for answers for everyone even remotely involved.)
    3.Government is stubborn, unless we have evidence we can throw in thier face (documents of conversation/plans or a confession) they will never have a reason to incriminate themselves until they are long gone.
    So you tell me whats the next move, just a response to this post?

    • Greg

      Ryan,
      Yes, but at least information and folks with questions about the official story are not going away. Thank you for your comment and analysis.
      Greg

  86. Dave

    I fully believe the gov’t was complicit it turning the other way and allowing the attacks to happen, but I do not believe in any controleld demolition theories.

    It, IMO, stretches the bounds of credulity to think that anyone could have secretly installed the explosives necessary for such a job, and then successfully cover it up for over a decade without making many, many people “disappear.”

    I would refer you to debunking911.com. I particularly like this quote: “The Bush Administration, who failed at everything they ever did. Yet all of them and the people below are helping him cover up the largest mass murder in US history…”

    and:

    “What a real conspiracy looks like. Real conspiracies have very few players and even then, they are usually exposed. Enron, Watergate, Iran/Contra and the rest have few people involved and someone always comes out to blow the whistle.”

    The evidence for a conspiracy to use 9/11 to invade Iraq is significant. While there is not one shred of evidence the government blew up the World Trade Center, there is evidence that they used the tragedy to remove Saddam Hussein using poor WMD evidence.”

    • Chris Sarns

      Dave,

      The “debunking” sites you have listed are a lot of denial, personal attacks and “debunking” theories that the Truth Movement also finds unbelievable. David Ray Griffin wrote a book called “Debunking 911 Debunking” that exposes the double talk of these so called “Debunking” sites.

      Kevin Ryan wrote a about how it was possible to rig the buildings for demolition without the tenants knowing.
      http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090713033854249
      http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090813150853871
      http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090813150853871

      Any crime planned and carried out by two or more people is a conspiracy and you have no idea how many conspiracies have been kept secret. Even when a major conspiracy is revealed, the corporate controlled media does not report it so most Americans don’t know about it. For instance, a jury found James Earl Ray innocent in the assassination of Martin Luther King and that the plot to murder King involved J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, Richard Helms and the CIA, the military, the local Memphis police, and organized crime figures from New Orleans and Memphis.
      http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/MLKactOstate.html

      In politics, conspiracies are the rule, not the exception.

      • Dave

        Well, as is most often the case in “discussions” such as these, we can all throw around websites and articles full of self-professed experts claiming some corner on the truth.

        At the end of the day, is it possible for 9/11 to have been some massive gov’t conspiracy? Maybe. I suppose it could be possible. However plausibility is certainly not on your side.

        So, instead of basically accusing many people in our gov’t to be mass-murderers (given, some of them involved in our questionable military activities are) for an attack with little or no political value that couldn’t have been gained with a smaller op, I will defer to Occam’s Razor.

        • Henry

          Dave, the fact is, the government’s massive 9-11 conspiracy theory is quite literally physically impossible. The inside job theory, while certainly very disturbing is neither impossible, nor implausible.

          http://911research.com
          http://911speakout.org

  87. Bobby

    The war on terror is a FRAUD:
    http://shorttext.com/6MZ72fz

    Extra info material..

    http://shortText.com/LGUfwF

    Why the 9/11 view of Popular Mechanics is a fraud
    http://www.sureynot.com/v/117/why-the-9/11-view-of-popular-mechanics-is-a-fraud.html
    Info:
    http://www.911popularmechanics.com

  88. SAO

    It was obvious from day one of 9/11 that the “official” story was fabricated. People need to wake up to the fact that people within the US government attacked their own country. It is very obvious. There is a great deal of info out there and people should do their own research. There needs to be a full nonpartisan investigation.

  89. Big Al

    I keep coming back to

    Molybdenum spherule in the USGS data set
    • Molybdenum melts at 2,623 °C
    • Fires in the WTC buildings (maximum 1,100 °C)

    Why so hot?

    http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

    Great source – http://www.journalof911studies.com/

  90. grandma caesar

    anyone who can look at the collapse of wtc7, and still believe it was caused by fire (as nist reports) is an idiot.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWv9K1D1WY0

    we are missing key evidence in all locations.

    we are told a plane hit the pentagon. but we’re not shown a plane. we are told a plane crashed in shanksville. but we’re not shown a plane. we are told the twin towers “pancaked”. but we are not shown the two piles of 110 “pancaked” floors. of all the pix and videos made that day, not one supports the official conspiracy theory. go to google images, look for yourself. you’ll find one picture of one shred of aluminum on the pentagon lawn, you can’t even tell how big it is. all other pix of airplane debris (and there certainly aren’t many!) don’t have the pentagon or shanksville in the pic. and the twin towers—just watch any of the vids for yourself. clearly the buildings are turning to dust as they are falling.

    and we’re told wtc7 “collapsed” when it is obvious to anyone not hypnotized by “our” media that it was brought down by controlled demolition.

    the media and the government are lying to us. here is a tidy, concise video. (3:54) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWv9K1D1WY0

    and i don’t believe our government blew up the buildings. there were several in power who are complicit, but 9/11 stinks of mossad.

  91. Robert E. Salt

    I was working on the 27th floor of the north Tower near the northern windows on 9/11. I can tell you for a fact a plane never hit the building that day. There were simultaneous explosions above and below us. One carved out the hole in the building. The one in the basement made the building sway to the south.

    • Greg

      Robert E. Salt,
      Of course the FBI never talked you you. Thank you for you eye witness account on that tragic day!!!
      Greg

    • Jeffrey Orling RA

      I’d like to talk to you and I live and work in NYC. You can contact me as jsandero@gmail.com.

    • Henry

      Robert, a plane definitely hit the north tower. Such a bizarre claim requires you to produce the following:

      1. Hard evidence proving that all the photos and videos from a variety of vantage points and sources showing a plane hitting WTC1 were faked.

      2. Hard evidence proving that the hundreds of people who saw, heard, and felt the impact are either delusional or were hired by the government as actors.

      3.Hard evidence proving that the plane shaped hole in WTC1 at the exact location and angle where a plane was seen, heard, and filmed hitting it was made by something other than the plane. Since the perimeter columns are bent inward at the impact site, whatever made the hole impacted from the outside.

      4. Hard evidence proving that the piece of landing gear from a 757 that struck and injured a woman on the ground was planted and the woman was injured by something else.

      Please don’t make wild claims that are soundly contradicted by the evidence. It’s hard enough to get followers of the official conspiracy theory to believe that things that have been proven, like the demolition of the towers and WTC7!

  92. George Too

    Greg,
    I am not one to buy into conspiracy theories. Again, I have not had much time to research much lately. I spent some time just looking at the Pentagon hit on 911. I do not know why I did not pay more attention to this at the time. Forget the lack of wreckage, supposed video showing no plane as I cannot verify it was not alter, or the ballistic principles of momentum of two massive engines on the 757.
    At the expense of sounding like a kook, I have just two questions. (1) Why were they unable to recover and identify a single body from the 757? Human remains were pulled from the WTC and identified for months. (2) Where is the black box from the 757? They are built to survive fires and have been recovered from 8,000 feet of water and bad fiery crashes.
    I am not offering an explanation for these massive anomalies. I am still asking questions.
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec01/forensics.html

  93. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Greg,

    First… thank you for providing this forum to discuss the matter of the destruction of the WTC. One thing I can agree with most posting here is that we were told a story which does not stand up to scrutiny.

    Second, I have read all the comments here, and have been reading and viewing almost everything I can about the WTC and 9/11. I participate(d) in several online discussion forums and signed a petition calling for a new investigation.

    3. I was a volunteer with AE911T and served for a brief period as one of the directs on their board in 2009.

    4. I have been engaged in independent research for the last three years and have produced scores of slides, charts, calculation and analyses concerning mostly the collapse of the twin towers. In the last year I have turned my attention to Bldg 7.

    5. People can hold any opinion or belief they want… informed by any manner. People can not have their own facts, their own science, their own data. A debate does no end by declaring we agree to disagree.

    6. I have presented numerous technical facts in this discussion about the collapse of bldg 7. I explained how the appearance of the 2.25 second free fall MIGHT have taken place. No one has refuted this explanation. This doesn’t make my the3sis correct, but it has not been shown to be flawed. Disagreeing is not a demonstration of error.

    7. I don’t know how many of those who commented here or referred to other links have actually done any actual research, or number crunching, studied and are familiar with the structure and engineering and physics. But I have read categorical statements… without support, such as only explosions could produce the dust that was created on 9/11. I have spent 3 years doing research and you have my email and if you request it I can send you some of my work as PDFs.

    8. We all saw the Challenger explode on TV. But it took a careful investigation to determine what made it explode… and the sequence of events and conditions which led to that explosion. While it looked like a bomb, we learned that the explosions was caused by a leaking o-ring which didn’t seal properly because of the below spec ambient temperature at launch. It looked like a bomb… but it was caused by a leaking seal.

    9. I mentioned the concept of progressive failure… or cascading failures. This can occur in all sorts system with inter-related parts. You can set up 1 million dominos and toppple them all by tippling the first one with the gentlest tap… but be unable to even pick up the million dominos. You could have a set of 100 dominos each a few percent larger … not too much so that the next smaller one could not tip it over. The 100th domino could be as tall as house or even a sky scraper and you could topple them all… by gently pushing the first small domino into the second slightly larger domino.

    10. Buildings are complex systems and their structures have hundred if not thousands of steel beams and columns and 10 many more connections and bolts and wells and so forth. About 15 years ago the bride span of i95 over the Miamus River in CT collapsed from a progressive failure … one rusted weakened connect became the straw that broke the camel’s back and a huge section of one side collapsed.

    “Causes

    The collapse was caused by the failure of two pin and hanger assemblies that held the deck in place on the outer side of the bridge. The hanger on the inside part of the expansion joint at the southeast corner was forced from the pin that was holding it, and the load was shifted to the only other pin in the joint. The problem was caused by rust formation within the bearing on the pin, exerting a tremendous force on the hanger. The extra load on the remaining pin started a fatigue crack at a sharp corner on the pin. When it failed catastrophically, the deck was supported at just three corners. When two heavy trucks and a car entered the section, the remaining expansion joint failed, and the deck crashed into the river below.

    The ensuing investigation cited corrosion from water buildup due to inadequate drainage as a cause. During road mending some 10 years before, the highway drains had been deliberately blocked and the crew failed to unblock them when the road work was completed. Rainwater leaked down through the pin bearings, causing them to rust. The outer bearings were fracture-critical and non-redundant, a design flaw of this particular type of structure. The bearings were difficult to inspect close-up, although traces of rust could be seen near the affected bearings.”

    Notice the words “design flaw”.

    The collapses of all three towers were possible because of “design flaws”. Of course you could lace them with explosives and blow them up. But that is likely not what happened. There is no evidence of multiple explosions destroying the frames, all the connections and all the concrete and contents. As I noted in my comments above it is possible to use explosives or incendiaries to work on the “Achilles Heel” of the structure and kick off a total destruction. But my point is that this too should not be possible and would not have been possible for almost all other high rises… because they were very different structural designs. YES even bldg 7 was a radical design and no like any old high rise or Las Vegas hotel we see being brought down by controlled demolition.

    11. Not the very different nature of the collapse of the twins and bldg 7. Everyone can see they look very different. Yet both produced the same type of destruction of the concrete and contents. Bldg 7 looks like the bottom was taken out and the top came crashing down. The twins look like they are being destroyed sequentially from top to bottom from the plane strike zones. While I don’t believe there were explosives charges through the twin towers’ height… build 7 clearly shows no signs of explosions in the descending upper 30 something stories we can see. Yet at the end there were few to no concrete slabs and the same pile of dust.. the same huge expanding clouds at the end. Different processes produced almost identical results.

    12. There were many unusual things about the WTC on 9/11. One was that when the plane struck tower one, the Con Ed 13kv feeders began to fail… I think 8 of them or more. And these failures spread around lower Manhattan… and they did effect the sub station in bldg 7. No plane hit bldg 7 but it lost some of its feeder at 8:46am. Con Ed was able to re route power for a while but eventually all power to the WTC was lost.

    13. Bldg 7 was precisely 342 away from tower 1. However the collapse of tower 1 did not lead to the collapse of Bldg 7. DeutcheBank was only 250 feet from tower 2, and had much more extensive mechanical damage from the collapse but did not have the fires or the fuel or the transfer trusses or a con ed sub station below it.

    14. Perhaps the collapse of these three towers was related to their unique structural designs? Isn’t this something that bears scrutiny? Aside from noting that the columns at the base of the twins were massive (they’d have to be to support 110 floors above them… ) where was the discussion about how flimsy the floor system was and down spec’d to support 58 psf instead of the NYC code of 100 psf? Could this have played a part in the collapse and destruction of the floors? Did the frame come apart so easily because it was bolted together like an erector set with few welds?

    15. Ive studied the details of the structure of the twin towers and will debate and discuss the collapse/destruction with anyone… NIST, Leslie Roberston, or Richard Gage.

    16. I assure you and others that anyone who was tasked to destroy those towers (if that was the case) studied the structure and knew exactly how to make them come down as they did. I have studied them and can tell you how to do it… and it doesn’t take the massive amounts of explosives that AE911T and most others claim it would to have the towers come down “through the path of most resistance”… which of course is not what happened. The path of most resistance would be to crush the columns. But they columns were not crushed… not even buckled… they broke apart at their connections… and toppled over. The floors crushed one another in a vertical avalanche and the towers were 96% air and the height of the floors stacked up one atop the other would be only 36′ tall (4″ slabs./.. 3 slabs per foot… 110/3 = 36′ But they crushed up and became dust and sand and spread about and some was carried aloft some settled into the basements and the pile was notably small for what appears to have been a huge volume. But it was 96% air!

    One needs to approach the event with a technical background in engineering and physics. It’s that simple.

    • Greg

      Jeffrey Orling RA
      Thank you for your hard work and participation on this 9/11 post.
      Greg

      • ben

        The towers are 96% air! Hey I’m made of a similar percentage of water, that’s why I sometimes splash apart.

        If you feel an unsettling creepy weakness, an untruthful and dull ring to the comments supporting the science of the 911 Report, it is only because the longing for the truth, by a shill, is very difficult to ape.

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Ben,

          Please, I provided a fact. The towers are mostly air. Most buildings are mostly air.

          The concrete stacked up from a twin tower is 36′ tall x 208 x 208 feet. that’s a fact. If it’s crushed and pulverized and disbursed it would be much much lower and obviously wider.

          Argue the science… don’t make ad homs.

          • ben

            I took and passed a physics class that was rated one of the top ten most demanding college classes in America. I know what your posts amount to.

          • ben

            Meh, not my strongest comeback.

    • Henry

      Jeffrey, you still seem to be missing the fact that free fall acceleration can only take place when there is no measurable resistance. Also there was not “the appearance” of free fall acceleration, there was *actual* free fall acceleration. WTC7’s roof suddenly dropped through the hurricane and earthquake resistant steel frame, the path of most resistance, at the same rate it would have fallen through air. A robust, resilient steel frame that moments ago could have supported several times the weight of the building was somehow reduced to the integrity of air in an instant. When steel is gradually heated, it loses its strength very gradually, and most of the steel in WTC7 was never heated, so we can immediately rule out office fires and the gradual, random heating a few columns as the cause of WTC7′s sudden, free fall, and symmetric drop. That is a physical impossibility.
      In order for an object to accelerate at the rate of free fall, *all* of its gravitational potential energy must be converted into downward acceleration, which leaves no energy available to bend, buckle, crush, sheer, and break thousands of tons of cold undamaged support columns, which would greatly reduce or stop the acceleration. So obviously, some force other than gravity destroyed all the support columns in an instant.
      Also, you are mistaken when you claim that 8 hours of fuel oil fires played a role in WTC7′s free fall and symmetric drop. That theory was abandoned long ago, as there is no evidence supporting it. Even NIST finally dumped it, and now blames WTC7’s drop on nothing but ordinary office fires.
      Finally, how do you explain the vaporized steel documented in the video linked below? The highly refined military grade nano thermetic material discovered in steel and dust samples by a team of nine international scientists certainly explains it, but ordinary office fires can’t. We really need to approach this with an evidence based and technical method and rely on hard evidence, science and physics to learn the truth. Speculation can be fun, but without evidence, it doesn’t carry much weight.
      Tell us, if not the thermtic material that was discovered in steel and dust samples, what do you imagine caused the attack on the steel as documented in this video?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        Henry,

        There was FF for 100 feet. In fact careful measurements so that there was FASTER than FF for a few brief instants! Not impossible.

        The free fall occurred… I believe because:

        1. The core dropped at the mech floors which were 6&7… when the transfer trusses and the cantilever girders gave way. I think from cooking by burning diesel fuel for 9 hrs… but maybe someone blew up the trusses and the girders at 5:20.

        I haven’t abandoned this fuel fires theory. NIST has because they want to avoid the fact that the design was screwed up. NIST lied and said that B& was a typical high rise frame. It was anything but typical.

        There were likely several causes of the eutectic burning. First you need to locate/identify where the eutectic steel came from in the frame. I’ll bet it was from floors 6,7 or below. Diesel AND GWB contain sulfur.

        “Eutectic is a word which is used in reference to a mixture which contains two or more components in proportions which allow them to solidify at the same temperature. The point at which the components start to solidify is known as the eutectic point. Eutectics have a number of applications, most particularly in the field of metalworking, where they are popular in the form of alloys used for things such as soldering and casting.”

        The mechanical destruction of hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete and building contents produces enormous and in some case concentrated heat… This also could involve the mixing od aluminum, iron, sulfer and water to produce a *natural thermitic reaction* heat giving off… not nano thermite.

        This heat explains the creation of the hot billowing clouds… the high heat of the debris pile, and even red hot steel and possible molten metal at the bottom of the pile.

        2. When the trusses went the entire first 8 floors of structure collapsed with it. Nothing was left to support the columns of the top 41 floors. The structure pulled away from the curtain wall in the instant before we see the 2.25 sec collapse of THE CURTAIN wall…. and fell down inside to the ground.

        • Henry

          Jeffrey speculated:
          “There were likely several causes of the eutectic burning. First you need to locate/identify where the eutectic steel came from in the frame. I’ll bet it was from floors 6,7 or below. Diesel AND GWB contain sulfur.”

          Jeffrey, please watch the entire ten minute video before replying, as it’s clear from many of your comments that you have done little actual research on this topic, and are arriving at most of your beliefs based on speculation. Sulfur from diesel fuel is ruled out as a possible cause through real world experimentation. The video is from http://911speakout.org which is an excellent source of peer reviewed, expert, detailed research and analysis with no speculation.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

          • Jeffrey Orling RA

            Henry,

            I have watched virtually every video related to 9/11. I personally know most of the researchers and even shared a hotel suite with Jon Cole… who made several of the videos you cite.

            You make a lot of factually incorrect statements.

            What is your background? Are you a scientist? an engineer?

            I think your enthusiasm is great and you’ve watched a lot of 9/11 truth material. Unfortunately, a lot of it is simply incorrect.

            I think you should spend some time reading the 911 Free Forums. You’ll definitely learn something. I did.

            I am not going to waste time arguing about science and engineering… settled principles.

            I’ve spent perhaps 50% of my time for more than 2 years doing fundamental research about the twin towers. I worked for the architects who designed them! And in 1970 when they were being built. I know Richard Roth… I know Richard Gage. I’d like to know who you are… and what are your academic and professional qualifications.

            You are 100% wrong about the curtain wall of building 7. If you don’t understand how they were built you can’t possible understand how they could come apart… aside from exploding them.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey says:
            “I have watched virtually every video related to 9/11. I personally know most of the researchers and even shared a hotel suite with Jon Cole… who made several of the videos you cite.”

            If that’s true, you would have known that Jon Cole used diesel fuel in his research attempting to duplicate the eutectic steel, and proved that diesel fuel was not a cause of the vaporization that we see in steel samples from WTC7. Yet, you still speculated that diesel fuel was the cause.
            Since we know that office fires can’t cause that sort of attack on steel, to what do you attribute it?
            Defending the official conspiracy theory is an impossible task, as that theory is quite literally impossible, and contradicts not only the evidence, but the fundamental principles of physics. That’s why you’re forced to resort to wild conjecture that’s contradicted by real world evidence, expert research, and basic physics. The steel perimeter frame of WTC7 was a load bearing wall, not a “curtain wall”, the floors in the towers didn’t pancake and produce “400mph mega force tornado winds”, and diesel fuel can not vaporize structural steel. Let’s focus on the facts, evidence, and expert research and avoid speculation and conjecture. Tell us what you imagine caused the eutectic steel analyzed below. We know that the thermetic material discovered in steel and dust samples would cause it. Can you suggest an alternative cause using real world research and evidence rather than simply unsupported speculation and conjecture?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

    • Steve Walker

      This is total disinformation. All one has to do is watch David Chandler’s YouTube video titled: “north tower exploding” You can see the obvious explosions running down the corner of the building well before the destruction wave. There is no pile driver, it turned into dust. The north tower destruction was very explosive. Large beams being thrown out laterally at 60 to 90 miles per hour and landing 200 yards away. This is not gravity at work, this is explosives.

      You write: “But they columns were not crushed… not even buckled… they broke apart at their connections…and toppled over” Knowone is saying the columns were crushed. Your trying to build straw man arguments. Your writting is contradictory and confusing.

      • Henry

        Well said, Steve. Jeffrey is ignoring the real world evidence and expert research and relying on speculation. Problem is, almost all of his speculation has been ruled out by the evidence and research. WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop is irrefutable proof of controlled demolition, as it can only take place when *all* supporting structures are destroyed instantly, totally, and simultaneously. The gradual weakening of a small number of steel support columns due to gradual heating obviously can not produce the instant and total failure of all the support columns. The two are entirely different events.

        http://911speakout.org

        • Jeffrey Orling RA

          Henry,
          You don’t know what you are talking about again. Look up cascading failures… and how they manifest rapid onset and total failure.

          You don’t understand physics or engineering or know much about the structure of those buildings.

          That’s a fact.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey says:

            “You don’t know what you are talking about again. Look up cascading failures… and how they manifest rapid onset and total failure.”

            Jeffrey, I, along with many others in this thread, have posted the evidence and expert research proving WTC7’s demolition, and I’m sure you agree that the instant, total, and simultaneous failure of all the support columns can be achieved through demolition.
            If you believe there’s another way to achieve the free fall and symmetric drop of a hurricane and earth quake resistant steel framed highrise, it’s up to you to provide evidence and research to support your belief. We know that random, limited office fires can’t produce that sort of instant and total failure, so what else is there? I’m not going to look it up for you. I’ve been researching this for many years, and have been unable to find any cause or examples for this sort of failure other than an expertly executed controlled demolition. If you imagine there’s another possible cause, please post your evidence and research. And again, wild, unsupported conjecture does not qualify as evidence or expert research.

  94. Radar

    Greg,

    You’re a man of tremendous courage.

    The questions you’ve asked, here, lead down a rabbit hole that, for those of us who have simply been researching all of this for a few years longer, appears endless.

    As you move down it with us, take a few breaks if you have to (most of us have; this stuff is soul-shattering), but never give up, never give in, and never stop asking the questions.

    We have to help each other along; we have to wake everyone up.

    Thanks for all you do.

    • Greg

      Thank you Radar.
      Greg

    • Jeffrey Orling RA

      I think many who call themselves researchers are being a bit loose with the term… they are followers, readers and so forth… not doing fundamental scientific research.

      the destruction of the WTC was a technical event…

      Please cite the fundamental scientific research you and others have been doing… and who has vetted, verified, tested, modeled mathematically or repeated their results?

  95. Verifiable Evidence

    What is surprising, is how any intelligent person who is aware of the “official” lies about the ‘Gulf Of Tonkin’ non-incident, the “official” lies about WMDs in Iraq and the “official” lies about connections between Iraq and 9/11, which were used to wage illegal wars of aggression resulting in the murder of millions of innocent men, women and children, could still believe the “official” lies about 9/11.

    Cognitive dissonance can be very difficult to overcome for some people, but there is overwhelming irrefutable and verifiable evidence that both the twin towers and building 7 (which was not hit by a plane and was located over 100 yards from the twin towers) were brought down by controlled demolitions. I would recommend watching the following short video by physicist David Chandler, where he clearly and concisely explains how he forced the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to admit that building 7 came down at free-fall acceleration for the first 2.25 seconds. I would also recommend reading David Chandler’s article below about the physics involved in the acceleration of the North tower as it came down. Simply put, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE for the twin towers and building 7 to have come down the way that they did without the use of precisely timed pre-planted explosives.

    NIST Forced To Admit Free-Fall Of WTC 7:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw

    The Physics Of The North Tower Destruction:
    http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/ChandlerDownwardAccelerationOfWTC1.pdf

    In April, 2009, a peer-reviewed scientific journal article was published in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal, which presented evidence of the presence of military grade state-of-the-art nanothermite sol gel explosives in all of the dust samples that have been analyzed from the World Trade Center building rubble. This scientific study was conducted by an international team of 9 scientists and their findings have been independently corroborated by Mark Basile, a chemical engineer in New Hampshire.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZNQq7XBLwc

    To this date, there has been absolutely no peer-reviewed rebuttal to these findings and 1000s of others in the scientific community have critically examined these results and are in agreement that nanothermite explosives and explosive residues were indeed present in large quantities throughout the World Trade Center dust. You’re not going to hear about this in the corporate-controlled propaganda machine that is the mainstream media, which is why these findings are being directly presented to other scientists at universities throughout the world.

    See the links to this peer-reviewed scientific journal article as well an article about the development of nanothermite explosives (also known as superthermite) by the US military in ‘Technology Review’.

    http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

    http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/14105/?a=f

    “Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project leader in the Explosives Science and Technology group at Los Alamos.

    “The advantage (of using nanometals) is in how fast you can get their energy out,” Son says.

    Son says that the chemical reactions of superthermites are faster and therefore release greater amounts of energy more rapidly.

    “Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times,” Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave.

    See the following links to chemist Kevin Ryan’s latest nanothermite experiment where he synthesizes nanothermite and then detonates it to demonstrate its explosiveness. He then demonstrates that the detonation products match those found in the World Trade Center dust samples. Also see civil engineer Jon Cole’s latest thermate (thermite with sulfur added to it) experiments demonstrating that thermate could have been used in conjunction with nanothermite to cut the steel columns in the twin towers and building 7.

    Kevin Ryan’s Experiments With Nanothermite:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O66UyGNrmSI

    Jon Cole’s Experiments With Thermate:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g&feature=related

    I would also highly recommend watching the following 5 short video presentations by physicist David Chandler of the destruction of the WTC twin towers. Chandler provides a detailed analysis of explosive squibs, secondary explosions of laterally ejected debris and cutter charge explosions during the demolitions of the twin towers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xvw0_i1rGns

    http://www.911docs.net/cutter_charges_wtc.php

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DChR1XcYhlw

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnR4A4zb8B0&feature=related

    The following recently released Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) footage of New York city firefighter eyewitness testimony on 9/11 of multiple secondary explosions within the twin towers had been initially withheld by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) until they were threatened with a lawsuit for refusing to comply with the FOIA request.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO1ps1mzU8o&feature=player_embedded

    The following testimony by 2 other New York city firefighter eyewitnesses further confirms that explosives were used to bring down the World Trade Center twin towers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx-k71UEBWE&feature=related

    I would also recommend watching chemist Kevin Ryan’s meticulous presentations about why the NIST reports on both the twin towers and WTC 7 are false. He completely dissects the NIST reports point-by-point and demonstrates that NIST committed fraud in order to cover up the obvious use of explosives.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/DK1Ryan#p/u/3/ArnYryJqCwU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8wOXv2gAKg

    I would also recommend reading about Operation Northwoods, which was a classified US government false flag proposal which was presented to and rejected by JFK just one year before he was assassinated. The existence of the Operation Northwoods proposal was not made public until 40 years later.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

    A person would have to be either extremely naive, in denial or dishonest to not be willing to acknowledge that false flags have been the Modus Operandi of the powers that be. The false flag events of 9/11 are just one example in a long line of false flag events that have been used to bring countries to war.

    The treason and fraud based Department of Homeland Security, the horribly misnamed “Patriot Act” and the recent treasonous NDAA that was signed by Obama on New Year’s Eve, should all be immediately abolished and the real terrorists in the transnational corporatocracy shadow government need to be arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned so that they can no longer prey on, maim or kill the other 99% of the world’s population.

    • Henry

      Excellent post, VE. It’s obvious that you have studied this material in detail and know the relevant facts. I’ve repeatedly found that defenders of the “official” conspiracy theory tend to rely on speculation and conjecture, usually involving scenarios that have been thoroughly disproved by evidence and research. Your comments are well referenced, which is typically the case among those of us who reject the government’s impossible 9-11 conspiracy theory. Thanks for your contribution.

      http://911speakout.org
      http://911research.com
      http://journalof911studies.com

  96. Jeffrey Orling RA

    VE, What is surprising, is how any intelligent person who is aware of the “official” lies about the ‘Gulf Of Tonkin’ non-incident, the “official” lies about WMDs in Iraq and the “official” lies about connections between Iraq and 9/11, which were used to wage illegal wars of aggression resulting in the murder of millions of innocent men, women and children, could still believe the “official” lies about 9/11.

    Government is always lying and secretive…. kinda. Sometimes they do not lie. Just because they lied about Tonkin etc. does not mean that a gov 20 or 30 yrs later with different personal is going to commit the same lies or types of lies. They may, but there is no certainty they will.

    Cognitive dissonance can be very difficult to overcome for some people, but there is overwhelming irrefutable and verifiable evidence that both the twin towers and building 7 (which was not hit by a plane and was located over 100 yards from the twin towers) were brought down by controlled demolitions.

    Not true. This is speculation… the so called evidence of CD. There is engineering basis and physics to explain how the collapse could take place without CD.

    I would recommend watching the following short video by physicist David Chandler, where he clearly and concisely explains how he forced the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to admit that building 7 came down at free-fall acceleration for the first 2.25 seconds.

    He did do that. But he is wrong about why it came down as it did… kinda. No not all 81 columns over 8 floors were made to disappear in a CD instant to allow that collapse. He and AE911T are all wet about that.

    I would also recommend reading David Chandler’s article below about the physics involved in the acceleration of the North tower as it came down.

    David Chandler is wrong… flat out wrong.

    Simply put, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE for the twin towers and building 7 to have come down the way that they did without the use of precisely timed pre-planted explosives.

    This is not true… if you read the 9/11 free forums you can learn how it was possible and likely happened for the buildings to collapse without devices.

    NIST Forced To Admit Free-Fall Of WTC 7:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw

    The Physics Of The North Tower Destruction:
    http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/ChandlerDownwardAccelerationOfWTC1.pdf

    NIST was wrong and likely covering up for the bizarre design decisions (professional negligence???) it took them years to produce a fire caused collapse at column 79 and a FEA animation which does not match the observables. TOTAL rubbish. That does not mean it was CD… That is a huge leap my friend.

    In April, 2009, a peer-reviewed scientific journal article was published in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal, which presented evidence of the presence of military grade state-of-the-art nanothermite sol gel explosives in all of the dust samples that have been analyzed from the World Trade Center building rubble. This scientific study was conducted by an international team of 9 scientists and their findings have been independently corroborated by Mark Basile, a chemical engineer in New Hampshire.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZNQq7XBLwc

    This study has been questioned and now another more recent study has found no nano thermite.

    To this date, there has been absolutely no peer-reviewed rebuttal to these findings and 1000s of others in the scientific community have critically examined these results and are in agreement that nanothermite explosives and explosive residues were indeed present in large quantities throughout the World Trade Center dust.

    Millet has produced a study which refutes the Harrit paper.

    You’re not going to hear about this in the corporate-controlled propaganda machine that is the mainstream media, which is why these findings are being directly presented to other scientists at universities throughout the world.

    See the links to this peer-reviewed scientific journal article as well an article about the development of nanothermite explosives (also known as superthermite) by the US military in ‘Technology Review’.

    http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

    http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/14105/?a=f

    “Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project leader in the Explosives Science and Technology group at Los Alamos.

    “The advantage (of using nanometals) is in how fast you can get their energy out,” Son says.

    Son says that the chemical reactions of superthermites are faster and therefore release greater amounts of energy more rapidly.

    “Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times,” Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave.

    See the following links to chemist Kevin Ryan’s latest nanothermite experiment where he synthesizes nanothermite and then detonates it to demonstrate its explosiveness.

    He doesn’t synthesis nano thermite. He makes THERMITE… easy to make and could have been produced BY and from the towers collapsing materials… just like Kevin Ryan did….

    Aluminum powder
    Iron powder
    sulfur
    water
    mix it up add
    heat… Voila!

    He then demonstrates that the detonation products match those found in the World Trade Center dust samples. Also see civil engineer Jon Cole’s latest thermate (thermite with sulfur added to it) experiments demonstrating that thermate could have been used in conjunction with nanothermite to cut the steel columns in the twin towers and building 7.

    There is no evidence of any cut columns. Cole or Ryan of AE911T doesn’t show a single one except the diagonal cut column which was done during clean up… caught in a deception Professor Jones.

    Kevin Ryan’s Experiments With Nanothermite:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O66UyGNrmSI

    Jon Cole’s Experiments With Thermate:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g&feature=related

    I would also highly recommend watching the following 5 short video presentations by physicist David Chandler of the destruction of the WTC twin towers. Chandler provides a detailed analysis of explosive squibs, secondary explosions of laterally ejected debris and cutter charge explosions during the demolitions of the twin towers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xvw0_i1rGns

    http://www.911docs.net/cutter_charges_wtc.php

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DChR1XcYhlw

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnR4A4zb8B0&feature=related

    The squibs are over pressure which was forcing building contents out through and breaking the windows… too few to be CD sqibbs… there were 47 core columns and 236 facade columns… how many squids were there?

    The following recently released Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) footage of New York city firefighter eyewitness testimony on 9/11 of multiple secondary explosions within the twin towers had been initially withheld by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) until they were threatened with a lawsuit for refusing to comply with the FOIA request.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO1ps1mzU8o&feature=player_embedded

    The following testimony by 2 other New York city firefighter eyewitnesses further confirms that explosives were used to bring down the World Trade Center twin towers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx-k71UEBWE&feature=related

    Of course things were exploding in the towers. Electrical sub stations exploded in the sub basement in 1992… and many on 9/11.

    Can you tell the difference between a bomb and a power transformer explosion? Can a fire fighter? What’s the difference in the sound? Willy Rodriguez said explosion…not bomb. He said to me.. directly.

    I would also recommend watching chemist Kevin Ryan’s meticulous presentations about why the NIST reports on both the twin towers and WTC 7 are false. He completely dissects the NIST reports point-by-point

    and demonstrates that NIST committed fraud in order to cover up the obvious use of explosives.

    That’s an assumption. You don’t know what they are covering up. You think you do, but you are likely wrong.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/DK1Ryan#p/u/3/ArnYryJqCwU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8wOXv2gAKg

    I would also recommend reading about Operation Northwoods, which was a classified US government false flag proposal which was presented to and rejected by JFK just one year before he was assassinated. The existence of the Operation Northwoods proposal was not made public until 40 years later.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

    A person would have to be either extremely naive, in denial or dishonest to not be willing to acknowledge that false flags have been the Modus Operandi of the powers that be. The false flag events of 9/11 are just one example in a long line of false flag events that have been used to bring countries to war.

    One false flag does not mean another. One cannot deny that terrorism exists… Look at the Palestinian struggle… look at the Mumby bombings. You are making assumptions my friend. You have not PROVEN anything.

    The treason and fraud based Department of Homeland Security, the horribly misnamed “Patriot Act” and the recent treasonous NDAA that was signed by Obama on New Year’s Eve, should all be immediately abolished and the real terrorists in the transnational corporatocracy shadow government need to be arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned so that they can no longer prey on, maim or kill the other 99% of the world’s population.

    We can agree that the USAPatriot act is an abomination as are many of the official US policies and practices… and the same applies to transnational corporations in many cases. But there is no proof that either CAUSES 9/11 though BOTH BENEFITED and advanced their hegomonic agendas – read the Shock Doctrine – the rise of disaster capitalism by Naomi Klien

    http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine

    • Henry

      Jeffrey, I’m tempted to wonder if you’ve ever watched a video of the tower demolitions. We don’t need to rely on the testimony of the dozens of eyewitnesses who saw, heard, and felt explosions. All we need to do is review videos of the demolitions. When we do that, we see multiple, massive, synchronized explosions just below the exploding/mushrooming canopy of debris that was expelled for hundreds of feet upwards and outwards in all directions from the towers. Since gravity experts its force downwards towards the earth, we can immediately rule out a gravitational “collapse” as a cause of these massive, upwards aching explosions seen during both tower demolitions.
      Here’s a very good analysis of the North tower’s demolition. The video is from http://911speakout.org

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        Expelled hundreds of feet upwards? OPEN YOUR EYES… the tower is collapsing down at 65 mph and the lighter than air dust and expulsions lag behind and APPEAR to be going upward. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF UPWARD EJECTA…

  97. Henry

    Jeffrey speculated:

    “The squibs are over pressure which was forcing building contents out through and breaking the windows…”

    That theory has also been proven to contradict the evidence, and for several reasons.
    First, no source of this incredible over pressure has been identified. We know it wasn’t “pancaking” floors as you and government hired “researchers” have speculated, because the concrete was pulverized into fine powder and spread all over Manhattan by the force of the demolition, and no remnants of “pancaking” floors were found in the rubble.
    Second, even if there had been remnants of “pancaking” floors in the rubble, the only way they could work as pistons and compress air, is the floors fell as intact units and didn’t break up or fall in sections. That wold require all the truss mounting points to break away at exactly the same instant all the way around the perimeter frame, and all the way around the central core structure. If a floor broke up, the air would escape upwards. In WTC2, only one corner of the building was damaged by impact and fire, and at the opposite corner, there was no damage or fire, so there was no reason for all the truss connections to fail at exactly the same instant.
    Third, since the squibs were observed over a hundred feet below the exploding canopy, somehow this air pressure would have to pass directly through a dozen or so intact floors.
    Fourth, even if the vast open office spaces had somehow become pressurized with hundreds or thousands of PSI of pressure, that would have caused rows of windows to blow out, but what we see are tightly focused explosions. It is quite literally impossible for air pressure to remain tightly focused as it moves through a large open office space. The only plausible cause for these explosions is mistimed detonations. I suggest you read Kevin Ryan’s excellent paper explaining why these explosions could not have been caused by some as yet unexplained source of extremely high air pressure.

    http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/Ryan_HVBD.pdf

    • Verifiable Evidence

      Excellent response Henry. There is no other rational explanation for the observed tightly-focused squibs many stories below the demolition wave other than mistimed explosions. Such squibs are routinely witnessed in other documented controlled demolitions and that is clearly what was observed in the demolitions of the twin towers on 9/11. Kevin Ryan’s article that you referenced does a thorough job debunking the air pressure claims made by Jeffrey and other defenders of the ludicrous “official” story.

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        The ejections coincide with the cooridor location and the elevator pits/ shafts

        Debris that feel into those shafts had no resistance and dropped at your familiar free fall so it was ahead of the slower 65 mph floor collapse. When it hit the floors of the pits it was forced laterally and was essentially directed by the corridors.

        Note the location on the facade where these ejections emerge aligns precisely opposite the corridors in the core…

        Ryan is full of hot air on this.

        The collapsing floor rubble was tens and even hundreds of thousands of tons. It was essentially caged by the exterior walls of the tower… which also with closed windows was like closed tube… with the windows being the weak part of the container/cage.

        Each floor contained 18,00 cubic yards of air… ya know the stuff we breathe… and when the mass of debris came down… at 65 mph or 100 feet per second or about 10 feet per .1 seconds all the 18,000 cu yards was either compressed like it would in in an engine cylinder or escape through…. the path of least resistance… the windows.

        Why at those elevations… study the elevator shafts… they were in different lengths… the local ones.

        In so doing all the 18,000 cubic yards moved out of the way… in .1 seconds… The volume was a like a square doughnut. The air in the center (near the core) moved to the facade either 35 feet or 60 feet. The air mid was between core and facade moved 17.5 feet or
        30 feet in the same .1 seconds. That means that the air near the core was moving at 60′ in .1 seconds over 400 MPH. The air on the short span side at the core moved at a but over half that speed and the air midway would move at half those speeds… 200+ on the long span side and 100+ on the short span side.

        It need have been a pancake so to speak…intact floor plate like a cylinder head… the compacted mass of debris pushed the air out of the way and was not transparent letting air escape upwards.

        In fact when you observe the collapse you see the clear column of air pulled down from above the towers by the low pressure of the collapsing descending floors. The dusty dirty air pushed outward can be seen like a column next to where the tower had stood and it is then disbursed by the prevailing NW wind that day… to the SE.

        OPEN YOUR EYES… LOOK

        OPEN YOUR PHYSICS TEXT BOOKS

        Where is the evidence in the pike of the tens of thousands of explosives which supposedly DIDN’T misfire but blasted the columns apart. Show a blown up column.. 1,786 columns per tower. Where is one which shows signs of explosions? They are all laying about many mangled from dropping to the ground.

        You are seeing what you WANT to see now what is there to see.

        • Verifiable Evidence

          There are many would-be whistleblowers who were directly involved in compartmentalized Continuity Of Government (COG) exercises, which included planting explosives in the WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 buildings as well as simulating flying planes into those same 3 buildings in the months before 9/11. On 9/11, the plane that was intended to hit WTC7 never made it to its target and the explosions that eyewitness Barry Jennings witnessed in WTC7 (BEFORE either of the twin towers came down) were pre-demolition charges being set off in that building. Barry Jennings died under mysterious circumstances just 2 days before NIST publicly released its blatantly fraudulent final report on the destruction of WTC7.

          Barry Jenning’s Eyewitness Testimony About Explosions In WTC7:

          http://barryjenningsmystery.blogspot.com/

          After 9/11, several of those COG exercise participants that approached their “superiors” (with questions about the connections between their COG exercises and the exact events happening on 9/11) were suicided shortly there after. Those who are still alive live in fear and their communications are monitored continuously. These people will only go public with what they know after the proper Enhanced Whistleblower Protection legislation has been passed and is in place, including private full-time security to protect them from being assassinated.

  98. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Henry,

    You need to look at some work that has been done… what you call evidence and research… by other scientists and researchers besides what I would call the mainstream 9/11 truth researchers. There’s a small cabal (my word) and it’s like an echo chamber.

    But there is research which contradicts and *debunks* to use a common work in 9/11 research… much of the work of Chandler, Cole, Jones etc. I don’t think you are familiar with this and you need to do some reading because there is much better science being done (I question if Chandler or Cole et al can even be called scientists).

    But… read the work on the 911 Free Forum… and then comment. I HAVE read and seen all the work by the aforementioned. Now it’s your turn to expose yourself to the research I am referring to.

    Thank you.

    • Henry

      Jeffry says:

      “Henry, You need to look at some work that has been done… what you call evidence and research… by other scientists and researchers besides what I would call the mainstream 9/11 truth researchers.”

      I’ve looked at the research from proponents of the government’s conspiracy theory as well as research from people who reject it. I’ve consistently found that defenders of the government’s conspiracy theory tend to rely on wild conjecture, like 400mph mega force tornado winds, eight hour fuel oil fires, pancaking floors racing through the towers, etc.. They also tend to avoid addressing specific evidence and details such as the vaporized steel I’ve repeatedly asked you to address, so there is very little accurate, evidence based research to read from them.
      We know that the highly refined military grade nano thermetic material discovered in steel and dust samples by a team of nine international scientists can produce the eutectic steel analyzed in the video linked below, and real world research and experimentation proves that it could not have been caused by the ordinary office fires in WTC7. So, what else do you imagine could have caused it? Fuel oil has been ruled out as a source for the sulfur, which was an odd suggestion anyway. There is no evidence that fuel oil was ignited in WTC7, and of course, furnaces that burn fuel oil don’t vaporize when they’re operated, and they burn with an optimum fuel air mixture. If not the nano thermetic material, to what do you attribute the attack on this steel column in WTC7? Why not address it here rather than move to an obscure forum that few people will see?
      Here’s the link again. It’s from http://911speakout.org

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        But have you read the work published at the 911 Free Forums:

        http://the911forum.freeforums.org/index.php

        This is not NIST or FEMA or OCT reverb… On that site you can read critiques of all *research*… and plenty of scientific analysis.

        I think you need to spend a few hours at least reading some of discussions there.

        Let us know what you think of the site.

  99. kawika

    Come on, Greg!

    Please do something more than post articles. Your connections at CNN could be an invaluable tool for connecting the dots so many of us have assembled.

    Once a few of them begin to connect the rest will follow.

    Can you verify the camera position and direction of the low-flier in the CNN video of evacuation at the WH on 9/11? A two minute phone call to/from the videographer would be enough. An opportunity to review CNN video archives would be an extraordinary benefit to 9/11 research.

  100. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Henry:

    You are 100% wrong about B7 having a structural facade

    I never said that diesel was the sole cause of the eutectic burning. I said that the elements required for eutectic burning were present in the building’s material and that I believe said eutectic effects happened POST collapse under/in the hot debris pile. For example the *meteor* was RESULT not a cause. It shows enormous heat and pressure produced it… get it… RESULT not cause.

    I completely understand and explained a mechanism for FF in B7 which did not require the simultaneous destruction of all 81 columns on 8 floors to create no resistance for 100 feet. I repeat the sequence I proposed:

    1. transfer trusses and cantilever girders fail (cause doesn’t matter in this explanation)
    2. Core (all 24 columns above them) plunger 8 stories down through the sub station… probably close to ff as there was no axial support or resistance below them.
    3. girders and beams and floor system outside the core… 57 columns just inside the perimeter, spandral beams connecting the 57 columns collapse inward and down into the same void.
    4 (could be simultaneous with 2) the perimeter columns from flrs 1-8 collapse when the transfer truss drop through the sub station… there is essentially no columns below floor 8
    5. the facade with no support whatsoever.. drops… 8 floors at FF and then slows when it hits the ground.

    Ben,

    You have less qualifications and understanding of physics than either David Chandler, high school physics teacher or Jon Cole, sanitary engineer. I suggest you read this thread at the 911 free forums:

    http://the911forum.freeforums.org/smart-idiots-t525.html

    It’s very long and you can skip parts… but there are some real gems within it. Read the quotes of Feyman and Einstein and other physicists about observation and science.

    Jon Cole, admitted to me about, after I explained to him how the *spire* collapsed that he had forgotten Euler buckling… how strange for someone who presents himself as a civil engineer. He’s never retracted his comment that the spire was taken down by explosions at the conclusion of the event… explosions no one witnessed. The spire weighed over 1,073 tons… but it was standing partially above the debris pile at the end… (so much for evidence of exploding the *Spire*.

    This is an example of one of your *scientists* making *evidence* up out of whole cloth to conform to his explosive controlled demolition theory. Caught red hand making up stuff.

    Better to have said nothing and wait for someone to explain what happened.

    And this is how most of the evidence for explosive controlled demolition is… made up or cherry picked to support a pre determined conclusion… ignoring other observations or science.

    It’s very sloppy thinking even though it looks like logic and science.

    I am still waiting for Chris Sarns the self declared expert on B7 to tell me how much heat would be produced in the crushing or pulverization of 50,000 tons of concrete. Perhaps Ben or Henry can do the calculation…

    You do accept that mechanical destruction produces/releases heat from friction etc…. don’t you?

    • Henry

      Jeffrey says:

      “I never said that diesel was the sole cause of the eutectic burning. I said that the elements required for eutectic burning were present in the building’s material and that I believe said eutectic effects happened POST collapse under/in the hot debris pile.”

      Actually, Jeff, you did say that diesel fuel was the likely source of the sulfur, which was puzzling because you also said that you’ve watched every video ever made about 9-11. Jon Cole clearly proved that diesel fuel was not the source of the sulfur or the a cause of the extreme high temperature inter-granular melting of the steel. His research also proved that building materials weren’t the source of the sulfur. Apparently, the only 9-11 video you haven’t seen is the one I’ve asked you to watch about six times. Obviously, the only plausible cause for this extreme high temperature attack on the steel is the highly refined military grade nano thermetic material discovered in steel and dust samples – more evidence that you’re forced to ignore in your futile defense of the government’s impossible 9-11 conspiracy theory.
      Your various conjecture scenarios about how WTC7’s massive, hurricane and earth quake resistant, highly resilient, redundant steel frame might have crushed itself have one thing in common – they all require an *enormous* amount of energy. However, in order for an object to accelerate at a rate that is indistinguishable from free fall, *all* of its gravitational potential energy *must* be converted into motion. That leaves *no* gravitational energy to bend, shear, break, and crush thousands of tons of cold, undamaged structural steel. Even NIST (before being forced to acknowledge free fall) stated that free fall can only take place when there is *no* structural support. This is *precisely* why free fall is irrefutable proof of controlled demolition. This is high school physics at the most fundamental level and really a very simple concept. It’s really quite an incredible thing to watch you attempt to deny it.

      It’s true that you frequent 9-11 discussions as “SanderO”, isn’t it? Is it also true that you’ve been banned from posting at 9-11 blogger? 9-11 Blogger is another very highly respected and credible 9-11 truth group. I notice that you’ve also attacked David Chandler, Richard Gage, and now Jon Cole – more of the most credible professional and respected 9-11 researchers. All of your claims against demolition have been proven to contradict the evidence, expert research, and/or the principles of physics. You are attempting to defend what is quite clearly impossible. Tough job….

      http://911speakout.org
      http://911research.com

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        hahahaha,

        I am not attacking any individual, but criticizing their work.. poorly done and wrong.

        There are many decent people who have been banned from the highly censored 911 Blogger run by Justin Keogh who was a fellow board member of mine at AE911T and who with Jon Cole… another board member engineered my expulsion from the board by having a secret board meeting, adapting new by laws which permitted expulsion of a board member for no cause with a simple majority and brought on a new board member Kevin Ryan whose first vote was my expulsion. That was quite telling.

        Both Cole and Keogh, Sarns and others objected the the fact that I suggested that the group use the term *engineered destruction* and not controlled demolition. For this I considered a spy, a paid shill from CIA, and cognitive infiltrator and worse.

        And of course I was barred from Blogger the censored site for the same cabal of *911 truth leaders*… Gage, Jones, Cole, Chandler… Legge et al. I have little respect for that site… at least as a free speech zone. Highly censored. Among the banned are Barrie Zwicker, Craig Ranke, Also Marquis and many others who have done excellent research into the events of 911… and none of the banned are given reason for these banning. Lovely.

        Henry I don’t know who you are, or your qualifications and technical background… my impression is you are a parrot who has had the wool pulled over his eyes by what amounts to junk science.

        I suggest that you bring your science and engineering ideas to the 911 Free Forum and see how that plays. Your citations are mostly not credible… the vast 911 truth echo chamber.

        • Henry

          Jeffrey says:

          “For this I considered a spy, a paid shill from CIA, and cognitive infiltrator and worse.”

          Well, your attacks on legitimate, credible, and professional researchers, your nonsensical disinformation, and your refusal to defend your bizarre claims or address specific questions do seem to fit the behavior of a disinformation shill. I’m glad that 911blogger doesn’t tolerate nonsense and disinformation. Most forums have guidelines that members are required to honor.

          Jeff also said:

          “Your citations are mostly not credible…”

          So Jeff, you’ve made up a lot of stuff that contradicts the evidence and expert research, and I’ve quoted some of it and provided evidence showing where and why your claims are in error.
          Where do you imagine that I or any of the research I’ve cited is in error? Please be specific. Quote something I’ve posted, and then provide evidence explaining why you believe it’s in error. *Simply* saying that you think I’m wrong up doesn’t carry much weight with those of us who rely on evidence, research, and the scientific method…

  101. Jeffrey Orling RA

    One last point Henry, Ben et al. I have been protesting the US government as an activist for 40 years. I have been arrested doing so. I have directly lobbied the NYC City Council members face to face meetings to press for a new investigation. I have signed several petitions calling for one and have attended many 9/11 conferences and seminars and met and spoken with many 9/11 truth leaders.

    I became an independent researcher because I saw that there were some very bad errors, sloppy thinking and wrong headed conclusions.

    I urge others to inform, educate and think for themselves whenever possible. 9/11 was a technical matter with political results… We know someone did it… and we know we were lied to about what happened. But we can figure out some of it from the public record.

    We don’t have to, nor should we make stuff up.

    • Henry

      Jeffrey says:

      “We don’t have to, nor should we make stuff up.”

      Wow. Absolutely priceless. This reminds me of listening to Bush or Obama telling us how we must not tolerate governments that use violence to achieve their political goals.
      Tell us more about your gravity made “400mph mega force tornado winds”, Jeff. Again, just wow…

      • Jeffrey Orling RA

        OK genius…

        You can explain and show the calculations for what speeds the air withing the towers would have to move if they came down at 68% free fall or whatever speed you choose.

        Look at the video… you see a column of air where there 15 seconds before was a tower.

        208 x 208 x 1362 = 2,182,000 cubic yards of air

        Show us the calculations for the velocity that air moved to be replaced by *clean air*.

        It’s past time for you to parrot truther sites… please produce the calcs of the air speeds that day associated with the destruction/collapse of the twin towers.

        Thanks.

        • Henry

          Jeffrey asked:

          “You can explain and show the calculations for what speeds the air withing the towers would have to move if they came down at 68% free fall or whatever speed you choose.
          Show us the calculations for the velocity that air moved to be replaced by *clean air*.”

          Jeffrey, you’re still not making any sense. The towers were about 200 feet across. Covering 200 feet in 15 seconds works out to 13.3 feet per second, or about 10 miles per hour, not 400mph.
          So, a gentle 10mph breeze would replace the entire volume of air in one tower in about 15 seconds. But your question was very silly and irrelevant, anyway. It makes no sense and has nothing to with your nonsensical assertion. If you’re going to claim that “400mph mega force tornado winds” caused the massive synchronized explosions observed hundreds of feet below the exploding canopy, it’s up to you to provide evidence for your claim. By the way, you never provided any evidence for your imaginary eight hour fuel oil fires in WTC7, either. You just keep making stuff up.
          Here’s hard evidence backed by facts and professional research proving that the explosive squibs were not caused by pancaking floors or your imaginary, on existent, 400 mph winds. They were caused by mistimed detonations during the demolition. If you disagree, tell us where you believe the author and I are in error. Please be specific provide links to research and evidence rather than just make more stuff up.

          We know that“pancaking” floors didn’t compress large volumes of air as you and government hired “researchers” have speculated, because the concrete was pulverized into fine powder and spread all over Manhattan by the force of the demolition, and no remnants of “pancaking” floors were found in the rubble.
          Second, even if there had been remnants of “pancaking” floors in the rubble, the only way they could work as pistons and compress air, is the floors fell as intact units and didn’t break up or fall in sections. That wold require all the truss mounting points to break away at exactly the same instant all the way around the perimeter frame, and all the way around the central core structure. If a floor broke up, the air would escape upwards. In WTC2, only one corner of the building was damaged by impact and fire, and at the opposite corner, there was no damage or fire, so there was no reason for all the truss connections to fail at exactly the same instant.
          Third, since the squibs were observed over a hundred feet below the exploding canopy, somehow this air pressure would have to pass directly through a dozen or so intact floors.
          Fourth, even if the vast open office spaces had somehow become pressurized with hundreds or thousands of PSI of pressure, that would have caused rows of windows to blow out, but what we see are tightly focused explosions. It is quite literally impossible for air pressure to remain tightly focused as it moves through a large open office space. The only plausible cause for these explosions is mistimed detonations. I suggest you read Kevin Ryan’s excellent paper explaining why these explosions could not have been caused by some as yet unexplained source of extremely high air pressure.

          http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/Ryan_HVBD.pdf

          • Jeffrey Orling RA

            Jeffrey, you’re still not making any sense. The towers were about 200 feet across. Covering 200 feet in 15 seconds works out to 13.3 feet per second, or about 10 miles per hour, not 400mph.

            The collapse or destruction progressed down at 65 mph. That’s 100 feet per second… this means that in .1 seconds about 10 feet “were destroyed”… a floor is 12 feet so let’s round it to make the math simple for this message… let’s call it 1 floor is destroyed in each .1 second.

            There was lots of material at the end… including dust, sand and grit and soil like material… it did not all float away over Manhattan… none made it to canal street! I digress…

            So in .1 seconds the air which was on each floor was pushed away by the falling *debris*. You don’t think that canopy of *dust* was 400,000 tons do you?.

            I think it 100% logical that the air on each floor was pushed out of the way in ,1 seconds… all 18,000 cubic yards per floor. Didn’t have to be intact slabs… even moderately compacted rubble still would displace the air. If you do the math and figure how far and fast the air at the core of each floor had to move to get out of the facade… it comes to 400mph for the long span side and 230 or so for the short span side.

            You do agree that there was a clean air where the tower stood immediately after the collapse and THEN the billowing dust filled clouds rose up and moved outward.

            So, a gentle 10mph breeze would replace the entire volume of air in one tower in about 15 seconds.

            True.. but the air on each floor was blasted out in .1 seconds each.

            But your question was very silly and irrelevant, anyway. It makes no sense and has nothing to with your nonsensical assertion. If you’re going to claim that “400mph mega force tornado winds” caused the massive synchronized explosions observed hundreds of feet below the exploding canopy, it’s up to you to provide evidence for your claim. By the way, you never provided any evidence for your imaginary eight hour fuel oil fires in WTC7, either. You just keep making stuff up.
            Here’s hard evidence backed by facts and professional research proving that the explosive squibs were not caused by pancaking floors or your imaginary, on existent, 400 mph winds. They were caused by mistimed detonations during the demolition. If you disagree, tell us where you believe the author and I are in error. Please be specific provide links to research and evidence rather than just make more stuff up.

            We know that“pancaking” floors didn’t compress large volumes of air as you and government hired “researchers” have speculated, because the concrete was pulverized into fine powder and spread all over Manhattan by the force of the demolition, and no remnants of “pancaking” floors were found in the rubble.
            Second, even if there had been remnants of “pancaking” floors in the rubble, the only way they could work as pistons and compress air, is the floors fell as intact units and didn’t break up or fall in sections.

            Not true at all. The mechanism was probably quite complex. The descending mass of tens of thousands of tons of rubble hit each floor. When it did… the floor which was intact… was busted from the truss seats and likely shattered to thousands of chunks as it was driven down 12 feet push the air away… and becoming the leading edge of the vertical avalanche.

            Try dropping a bag of plates 100 times from 12′ onto a concrete floor and see how many plates are left… You’ll find all tiny fragments, shards and dust. There’s a scale experiment… to help you understand why there were no slabs left and lots of dust.

            That wold require all the truss mounting points to break away at exactly the same instant (by the way did you read the study done which examined those truss seats?… and the type of damage they show?…. mostly all bent downward…. what say you?

            … all the way around the perimeter frame, and all the way around the central core structure. If a floor broke up, the air would escape upwards.

            floors were not breaking as uniform plates…but large regions were breaking… you can see it in the uneven crush fronts with some 20 stories ahead of others (the corners I believe) LOOK

            Not if there was a plug of 60,000 tons of debris pushing down at 65 mph… try pissing into the wind and see what happens…

            In WTC2, only one corner of the building was damaged by impact and fire, and at the opposite corner, there was no damage or fire, so there was no reason for all the truss connections to fail at exactly the same instant.

            Nothing to do with impact from the plane. The collapse was a floor collapse contained more or less by the facade which acted like a chute… pour a few tons of sand into a tall stack cardboard containers taped together… observe the bottoms break to let the sand drop down.

            Third, since the squibs were observed over a hundred feet below the exploding canopy, somehow this air pressure would have to pass directly through a dozen or so intact floors.

            These were from the *free falling* air inside the shafts… no floors to slow it down… the crush front had to bust through the floors and it was slowed to 65 mph… hit the elevator pit… and was forced laterally likely down open corridors which directed it like a jet at the facade…. all the *squibs* were opposite corridors in the core.

            Fourth, even if the vast open office spaces had somehow become pressurized with hundreds or thousands of PSI of pressure, that would have caused rows of windows to blow out,

            Which is exactly what you see… one floor below the crush front.

            but what we see are tightly focused explosions. It is quite literally impossible for air pressure to remain tightly focused as it moves through a large open office space.

            Why is that? If I had an compressed air hose and aimed it in an open office it would disturb the air and the contents it was directed at.

            The only plausible cause for these explosions is mistimed detonations.

            Not it isn’t…Even Niels Harrit admitted to me in NYC in ’09 that the source / cause of those *squibs* could not be determined except that the were gas (air) filled with dust and debris

            I suggest you read Kevin Ryan’s excellent paper explaining why these explosions could not have been caused by some as yet unexplained source of extremely high air pressure.

            OK I will, but it’s probably wrong.

          • Henry

            Jeffrey imagined:

            “The descending mass of tens of thousands of tons of rubble hit each floor.”

            You’re still making stuff up, and it’s still contradicted by the research and evidence. The floors were pulverized into fine power and spread all over Manhattan by the heat and force of the explosions, so they certainly were not part of this massive rubble pile. The perimeter columns were ejected laterally for hundreds of feet in all direction from the force of the demolition, so they weren’t part of it either. That leaves the cores, which remained standing for a few seconds after the rest of the towers had been demolished, so that’s not part of it either. When you make stuff up without doing any research or thinking, you and your “theories” lose credibility.

            Jeffrey erred again when he made up the following:

            “The collapse or destruction progressed down at 65 mph.”

            Wrong. The demolition of the towers produced constant downward acceleration, not constant speed. Major difference. Again, this is high school physics at its most basic level.

            Jeffrey got even sillier with this “analogy”:

            “The collapse was a floor collapse contained more or less by the facade which acted like a chute… pour a few tons of sand into a tall stack cardboard containers taped together… observe the bottoms break to let the sand drop down.”

            The fire resistant, high strength steel columns in the perimeter frame was not a “facade”, and the towers were constructed with steel, not cardboard. Your futile and desperate attempts to defend the governments impossible, intelligence insulting fairy tale are becoming sillier by the post. By the way, you said, “one last point” about a week ago. Nothing you’ve written here is credible or believable.
            Have you read Kevin Ryan’s paper yet? You said it’s probably wrong, but again, you’re making stuff up with no evidence or research behind it. Here’s hard evidence backed by facts and professional research proving that the explosive squibs were not caused by pancaking floors or your imaginary, on existent, 400 mph winds. They were caused by mistimed detonations during the demolition. If you disagree, tell us where you believe the author and I are in error. Please be specific provide links to research and evidence rather than just make more stuff up.

            http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/Ryan_HVBD.pdf

  102. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Guys…

    You can’t analyze impressions… You have to analyze data. You can’t make up your own visual record… like Judy Wood does when she asks where did the towers go and claims they were “dustified” and most of it is lying about the site.

  103. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Henry states his belief:

    “You’re still making stuff up, and it’s still contradicted by the research and evidence. The floors were pulverized into fine power and spread all over Manhattan by the heat and force of the explosions, so they certainly were not part of this massive rubble pile. ”

    The concrete and other materials on them were indeed crushed and pulverized and a great deal of it was carried aloft AFTER the collapse by the billowing clouds which emerged post collapse.

    If the several hundred thousands of tons of these materials were pulverized in mid air to dust… are you telling us that the air in and close to the towers supported this dust and then transported it *all over Manhattan*? I think YOU are making stuff up because it shows you have looked at the towers coming down.

    What you do see.. take another look at the vids… is (let’s use tower 1):

    1. the top section collapses down to the plane strike region… about 16 floors. As it does it breaks apart and materials are ejected and fall outside the foot print… lots of dust is created and it forms what becomes the top of a free falling descending canopy surrounding the towers to about 150 feet away from the face. When it first starts to descend there is a huge flash of flames and outpouring or thick black smoke at the level of the plane strike (flr 95 or so). This appears to be from some sort of over pressure inside the tower.

    2. the lower section begins to come apart at the top.. flr 95 or so and the facade panels begin to peel off… in sheets of varying sizes.

    3. Some ejecta is seen emerging from the floors where there are elevator pits opposite the corridor locations on the facade.. well ahead to the collapsing floors which are slowed for an instant as the each floor offers some resistance to the falling mass.

    4. Energetic puffs of materials are ejected from each floor in many adjacent windows as the collapsing floors descend inside the facade. These ejections are just ahead of the collapsing *front* Not heavy steel sections emerge with these ejections.

    5. Large assembles can be seen which fall outside the descending canopy. They are toppling over from vertical to horizontal indicative of an impulse applied to their top before the bottom or release of the top from the structure before the bottom.

    6. The free falling debris (heavier than air) ejected through the windows races ahead of the slowed floor collapse and obscures vision of the collapse and ejections through the windows at about the 50th floor.

    7. when the collapse has ended a clear column of air is observed where the tower stood with some air born dust remaining to the SE which is quickly dispersed and consumed within the large billowing clouds of hot air and dust (pulverized building contents) which emerge at the base of the collapse. This is common to all three collapses.

    8. The prevailing NW winds of the day drive most of the dust to the SE where it settles in varying thickness as far away as Brooklyn, but less than an inch as close as Broadway.. one block to the East of the collapses.

    9. There was virtually no material exploded or ejected vertically upward. As the tower collapsed the air born dust give the appearance that it was shot up. But this is an illusion as the tower collapsed and pulled a negative pressure behind it like water plunging down a drain.

    Understanding is informed by careful accurate observations.

  104. Henry

    Jeffrey, why do you refuse read, learn, and get informed? You’re still making stuff up, and it’s still contradicted by the evidence and expert research. Here are a few errors from your post above:

    “The concrete and other materials on them were indeed crushed and pulverized and a great deal of it was carried aloft AFTER the collapse by the billowing clouds which emerged post collapse.”

    Concrete floors can not crash to the ground and then magically convert themselves into airborne powder AFTER the collapse. The concrete was pulverized during the demolitions by the heat and pressure of the detonations. This is observed in all videos of the demolitions.

    “2. the lower section begins to come apart at the top.. flr 95 or so and the facade panels begin to peel off…”

    The fire resistant, high strength steel columns and spandrel plates in the perimeter frame was not a “facade”. It made up the only exterior load bearing walls. It’s really quite comical to watch you try to tell us that hundreds of highly qualified, credible, professional experts and their research are all wrong when you clearly have not even a fundamental understanding or knowledge of the towers’ construction or the basic principles of steel framed high rise engineering. As always, here’s hard proof:

    http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html

    “4. Energetic puffs of materials are ejected from each floor in many adjacent windows as the collapsing floors descend inside the facade.”

    There were no “puffs”. There were multiple, massive, synchronized, house sized explosions traveling down all fours sides of the towers just ahead of the exploding canopy. At least watch a video of the demolition before you post again. Here’s one analyzed by a credible, professional expert. Watch “North Tower Explodes” on:
    http://911speakout.org

    “Understanding is informed by careful accurate observations.”

    That’s why I provide links to accurate observations done by professionals in my replies while you provide little but wild conjecture that’s contradicted by the evidence and expert research. That reminds me, you said Kevin Ryan is probably wrong, but have yet to cite any errors in his research paper proving that these explosions could only have been caused by mistimed detonations. When do you think you’ll be able to address the “informed, careful and accurate observations” in his research and tell us where and why, exactly, you think he’s wrong?

    http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/Ryan_HVBD.pdf

    • Jeffrey Orling RA

      Henry,

      I am completely familiar with all the material you cite. I am a licensed architect in NYC working since 1970 which was for the architects of the WTC.

      I assure you I know more than you and most the experts you cite about the structure of the 3 towers.

      Everyone makes mistakes are we are all misled at times. We all rely on experts and the media (and government) to tell us the truth. This is not always the case. The same caveat applies to the 911 truth movement experts.

      Have you forgotten how Prof Jones presented a photo of the diagonal cut column as proof that thermate cutter charges were used… It turned out he hadn’t checked the provenance of the photo which was taken of a core column which survived the collapse and was cut by lances in the clean up process. JONES LIED and MISLED… or simply didn’t do his homework and made a mistake.

      You, of course have not read anything at the 911 Free Forums and are what I would call willfully ignorant. You choose to not learn or consider anything which undermines your BELIEFS and cling to what you belief is sound scientific research.

      I challenge you to become a member at the 911 FF and present some of your irrefutable evidence… such as stated in the above and defend your position and *facts* with the scientists and engineers who are members there. The 911 FF is not a OCT site. It is a civilized environment for engineers, scientists and researchers to discuss 911. NO BS is accepted.

      Kevin Ryan is wrong about nano thermite… wrong about the *speed of collapse*… and other things.

      I worked on high rise buildings! You are really speculating about my knowledge and professional qualifications and off the mark. On the other hand… I can tell you in no uncertain terms that you don’t know boo about the structure of bldg 7 which had a curtain wall and 57 perimeter columns just inside the curtain wall with structural spandrel beams supported the curtain wall. I’ve been licensed to practice architecture in NYS since 1982 probably since before you were born. Kindly don’t lecture me about my own profession and tell me to accept a high school physics teacher as an *expert* about steel framed high rise buildings.

      • Henry

        Jeffrey, since you can’t cite any errors in Kevin Ryan’s paper, why did you say he was probably wrong? Probably for the same reason you said there were 8 hour fuel oil fires in WTC7, and “400 mph mega force tornado winds” in the towers – you’re just making up stupid stuff in a desperate and futile attempt to defend the government’s impossible, intelligence, insulting cave man conspiracy theory. The job you’ve taken on is impossible, since, as we can all see, the evidence and research contradict all the stuff you make up.

        http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/Ryan_HVBD.pdf

  105. psikeyhackr

    After TEN YEARS the problem is all of the people who claim to understand physics. Even if airliners did destroy WTC 1 & 2 how could it be analyzed without accurate data on the towers. Even the NIST admitted in three places in their report that they needed the weight distribution of the towers to analyze the impacts. It is called the Conservation of Momentum. That would apply to a straight down collapse also.

    Suppose we had the north tower intact and then removed 5 stories, 91 through 95. That would leave a 60 foot gap with 15 stories in the air without support. They would fall. They would take 1.9 seconds to hit the top of the lower 90 stories and be traveling at 42 mph or 62 ft/sec.

    Those 90 stories would be 1080 feet tall. If the falling 15 stories could maintain a constant velocity while crushing six times as many stories as themselves even though they had to be stronger and heavier then the falling 15 stories then it would take 17.4 seconds to destroy 90 stories. This would yield a total of 19.3 seconds to destroy the north tower.

    But Dr. Sunder of the NIST told NPR in a podcast the the north tower collapse in 11 seconds.

    Now why are we supposed to believe that was possible when the physics profession has not demanded and provided accurate data on the distributions of steel and concrete down the north tower?

    9/11 is the biggest farce of physics in human history. Why should we care what they say about Cold Fusion?

    http://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/1276.html

    • Jeffrey Orling

      The time of collapse is rather indeterminate. We have clocked the descent destruction quite accurately of the upper stories above the plane strike zone in tower 1 and it took 3.75 seconds.. that 16 or so stories.

      The collapse progression then seems to accelerate….again and the collapse front progression where it could be traced was a constant 65 mph. It of course may have been accelerating and the slow down at each floor for an instant and accelerate again etc. It’s virtually impossible to trace this motion and so the average can be taken at any two fairly well separated points and it was found to be a steady 65 mph in those visible regions. It was NOT accelerating or slowing down. So if it was average of 100 feet per sec (65 mph) then that part of the collapse should have taken (94 x 12= 1,128ft or about 11.25 seconds… plus the 3.75 and we have 14 seconds… FF would have been about 9 secs so it was not FF acceleration. Why is it unreasonable that it took 14 seconds?

      • psikeyhackr

        Here is a computer program computing a collapse based on nothing but the conservation of momentum.

        http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=64306&sid=309eb17c20e04a76b15e23fb01ec6341#64306

        The program simulate 109 masses floating in the air, 12 feet apart. The top 14 are dropped on the rest and the conservation of momentum is used to compute the velocities after impacts. If all of the masses are equal the collapse takes 12 seconds. If the lower masses are heavier the conservation of momentum slows the collapse down even more.

        So how can a top down collapse destroy real supports in addition to overcoming the conservation of momentum to come down in less than triple free fall time.

  106. emily

    i still cant believe it took ten years to rebuild the world trade center its so upsetting even when you think about it.

    • Robert E. Salt

      It took ten years to rebuild the WTC because the site is contaminated. The silly square pools that now occupy the footprint of the Towers are there to deal with this problem. The weapon that was used to turn the buildings to dust contaminated the site.

  107. Charles

    Its always great to see conspiracy news!

  108. Robert E. Salt

    You have your facts wrong. As someone who was working on the north side of the north Tower I can tell you for a fact a plane never hit that building that day. If a new weapon didn’t turn these buildings to dust, then a sudden infestation of starving, steel eating termites must have devoured each building in ten seconds.

  109. Robert E. Salt

    Scroll 2/3 down this site and you can read about the holographic projectors for the military that created the images of planes that you thought you saw on 9/11. FYI Planes don’t just dissolve into steel buildings.

    http://thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/02files/World_Trade_001.html

  110. mark

    Where to begin….there are easy answers for many of the questions that the believer’s of the official story are asking. One that is very often raised is how could this vast conspiracy be kept quiet….too many people would have to be in on it and someone would talk. Many people have talked, but some people won’t listen. There are fbi, cia, bush cabinet members, 5 star generals, employees in the pentagon and many others that have told about things they were aware of. The best way to explain why more people don’t come forward, is to ask would you come forward if you heard rumors of threats, some have lost their jobs and careers, some have perished under suspicious circumstances. I’ve never heard anyone mention what I believe is the main reason that the media and /or high ranking gov’t officials won’t speak out in favor of a new investigation. Remember what took place right after 9/11? The anthrax letters. We were all wondering what’s going on …..what’s next? The anthrax letters were mailed to 2 offices; I think these 2 were chosen for a special reason. Who would the perp’s be most concerned with controlling/silencing after these attacks. # 1…The media…..#2…the congress!. Why? Because they have the ability to spread the truth to everyone and the power to do something about it. So, the logical choice to send the message to be quiet would be a top national news figure ( Tom Brokaw ), and the democratic leader that could launch an investigation….(Tom Daschle). suppose you were Peter Jennings or Dan Rather, and Tom Brokaw was sent an anthrax letter……it never occurred to the average person but if you’re in the main stream media, you would realize immediately that you risk your life by saying/doing anything. The same with Daschle, his anthrax letter was a message to all congressmen/women……it was that easy to silence the entire media and all of congress. Even if a particular person felt brave and patriotic, he/she would be risking all family members well-being, and that would deter anyone. After the entire media and congress was silenced and followed along with the official story,the rest of the country falls in line because we all want to believe in our gov’t to begin with.The average joe’s that know what really happened ( us ) have little power or media access, and the media constantly smears all the ‘crazy conspiracy nuts’ and that’s how we got where we are today. Any official story believers care to challenge this reasoning? I can’t prove it of course but just like many other unbelievable coincidences surrounding this tragedy, the fact that a left-wing tv newsman and the top democrat in the congress were chosen for anthrax letters falls right in line with logic. Daschle also said that Cheney and GWB both pressured him directly,they called him several times, to stop talking about an investigation into 9/11. Cheney was asked about Daschle’s claim that he was pressured and Cheney denied it. Why would Daschle lie………about this event especially? Verification came when no investigation took place for a few years, and only then because of pressure from family members of 9/11 victims. I ask, can anyone who supports Bush/Cheney in this matter explain to me why they only agreed to testify if it could be done together, in private, no video or audio allowed and not under oath. There is no explanation for that, and would you or me or anyone be given the same consideration? Of course not, and this is the biggest tragedy that this country ever faced, yet our president and v. president refused to tell the american people what we have a right to know.I could go on forever; anyone who believes the official story , in my opinion, is either very naive or can’t accept that our gov’t would do this to us. There is precedence for this however, in the 1960’s a military general drew up a plan to fake an attack against a commercial airliner as part of a plot to gain public supoport to invade Cuba. This is fact, nobody disputes that this plan was presented to Pres. Kennedy, but he refused it and fired the general. That proves that our military was considering a 9/11 type event so why is it hard to imagine that it went down this time? ……….Getting tired,…. signing off but leaving you with one more thing….I believe a nuclear device was installed under the twin towers and bldg. 7 when they were built. It was required that a plan was presented (to new york officials)that explained how these tall bldgs. could be brought down without damaging surrounding structures before permission was granted to build them. Think about it, someday they would need to be demolished , but Manhattan would be in shambles without a way to convince officials how they could be demolished. There is no conventional method, and since only the twins and bldg. 7 plus the Sears Tower ( in Chicago ) present that predicament, a plan was drawn up and accepted to place a nuclear device under those 4 bldgs. ( remember, on 9/11, they announced that the Sears Tower was being evacuated but no other bldgs. in any other city…………….why?………….nuclear devices under these 4 only and the perps knew that 3 were going to fall that day…….the 3 buildings were brought down by these nuclear explosions from deep under the bldgs. Explain a lot doesn’t it? Only nuclear could make steel turn to dust, only nuclear is hot enough to burn under the pile for months, and when the devices were detonated, that explains the rumbling just before the collapses and the seeming foreknowledge of Giuliani and others. They pushed the button and dropped them….research it….it’s all there…….

  111. Gene

    Where are the people who got on the planes ? Secretly escorted from the planes and wisked away on buses from the taxiway? Sears Tower is 3 buildings in one.One strike will not bring the Sears Tower down. WTC buildings were built to withstand 707 crashing into it,They were struck by 767 which hold another 980 gallons of jet fuel. Weren’t towers heated by natural gas?

  112. Robert E. Salt

    The two biggest misconceptions regarding the 9/11 massacre can be summed up in two words “planes” and “collapses.” Several firemen in stairwell B within the central core of WTC-1 would not have survived if 100+ floors had collapsed on them. If you watch a closeup video with audio of either Tower, it will sound like a waterfall or sand being poured rather than the thunderous roar of a 110 story building collapsing. Those of us waiting for a ferry outdoors a half mile away didn’t know that the south Tower had “collapsed” until someone arrived and told us. This event provided a unique opportunity for the terrorists to conduct further tests of a new weapon as all seven buildings were destroyed. The Towers were a top down destruction. Building 7 was a bottom up destruction. Building 6 was the most telling. The exterior remained intact while the inner core was hollowed out from top to basement. The southern half of Building 4 was destroyed while the northern half stood, much like the building in Oklahoma City. The northern face of the Bankers Trust building was gouged for several floors. The building was repaired, but had to be taken down at a later date because of contamination. The molecular dissociation of matter continues for a prolonged period after the weapon is used. BTW There were no planes, only special effects.

  113. heating services

    I rarely write comments, but I glanced through a few comments on
    9/11 Conspiracy Theory-Insane or Insightful? | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog. I actually do have a couple of questions for you if you
    do not mind. Is it only me or do a few of the remarks look
    as if they are left by brain dead folks? :-P And, if you
    are writing at other places, I’d like to follow everything new you have to post. Could you list of all of your shared pages like your linkedin profile, Facebook page or twitter feed?

    • Greg

      heating services,
      Everything I do is put on the USAWatchdog.com site first and foremost. Thank you for your support.
      Greg

  114. Robert E, Salt

    Here’s an interesting site. It belongs to Craig McKee of Channel 12 in Milwaukee. I made some good comments. When I got into the truth about 9/11 on 8/28, a team of disinformation people led by hybridrogue1 began hacking my computers. Why aren’t real witnesses interviewed on TV like William Rodriguez, April Gallop or myself? They only have hired actors posing as witnesses.

    https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2012/08/26/lone-nut-scenario-implanted-in-colorado-shooting-holmes-convicted-by-media/

  115. Robert E, Salt

    Disinformation people invite all 9/11 theories as long as they’re not factual. The fact is the planes we saw hit the Towers were special effects. Special effects belong in the movies not on the six o’clock news. We’ve lost a lot of news anchors over the last few years including Peter Jennings, Charlie Gibson, Tom Brokaw, Katie Couric and others. Not everyone is comfortable lying to their countrymen like DS.

  116. Robert E, Salt

    When it comes down to it, the only evidence we have that there were jet airliner attacks on 9/11 are the fake videos and the fake witnesses. Experts tell us that the engine found at Murray and Church Streets were not from the planes in question. The passport found on the street had been placed there. News rooms run with whatever story comes from what they believe to be a reliable source. We know preparations were made beforehand because a BBC reporter announced the demise of Building 7 a half hour before it happened. It’s difficult for people to believe the Towers had turned to dust because no one had ever seen anything like this before. There were people trapped on floors who were unable to jump. Both towers and their contents were turned to dust and spread over lower Manhattan, the bay and the rivers. Check out the second video on this website, and then the first. Keep in mind that there were firemen on the bottom four floors of stairwell B of the north Tower who survived without a scratch. All stairwells were within the inner core of the building.

    http://nomoregames.net/

  117. Robert E, Salt

    The most believable lies are told by those who believe it themselves. This is why Colin Powell told us about weapons of mass destruction. It was really the President’s job to tell us.

  118. Henry

    After reading the most recent posts, I would like to mention that all legitimate 9-11 truth researchers reject claims of no planes hitting the towers as disinformation, and I agree with them 100%. The same is true for claims that the towers were brought down by “space beams” or nuclear bombs.
    WTC7’s free fall and symmetric drop and the explosive demolitions of the towers are explained by the highly refined military grade nano thermitic material that was discovered in steel and dust samples by a team of nine international scientists.

    http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html

  119. Quade

    I think I might know why 9/11 happened and why there were clearly staged aspects. Its so simple but so well hidden. To see how it was hidden, think of the movie “The Matrix”: What if Neo never left the Matrix? What if the Red-pill reality was fake but kept him from questioning reality by showing him some flaws and evils of his former world.
    What if the 2 main assumptions – Inside job or terrorists – were both wrong and fabricated albeit by different means? One was based on a script and the other on evidence and narrative. But what if the evidence and assumptions of the conspiracy theory were used to create a false narrative of “evil Bush Haliburton etc” backed up by tons of evidence that was intentionally allowed to exist? The ability to co-opt both narratives and make them too complex for the individual to recognize would be a work of genius.

    Here’s what I think really happened and why: Our currency is based on the Petrodollar and there are various outside forces would love to harm it. We also had the Taliban stopping the Opium production; a key strategic asset for weakening Russia and Iran. We also needed a military presence in the middle east as a deterrence and to take out Saddam who was threatening USD-based petrodollar.

    If we couldn’t complete those goals, other nations could have destroyed our currency and financial power while strengthened our enemies. Like in the film Watchmen, we needed “The greatest practical joke in human history”; An event so backwards in its nature, yet so audacious in its display, that it was instantly believed: the idea that Muslim Terrorists, who wish harm on the United States, would come all the way over here to commit an atrocity which would warrant the militarization of a location where the very Achilles heel of our nation, the petrodollar, resides and protect it from harm while giving us the opportunity to knock out Saddam and his Euro-oil program after taking out the Taliban and restoring the Opium production. Those suspected terrorists, rather than mortally wounding our nation, gave us the unimpeded right to secure our greatest vulnerabilities.

    The secrecy of this operation, akin to that of the conspiracy in Watchmen, has been protected by cleaver planning using full spectrum dominance. The truth is still hidden from the masses and will remain so until the cloudy nature of the world is cleared up and emotions about that day no longer run hot.

    Imagine the surprise for both the Russians and Iranians, who assumed we had an unfixable weakness, when such an impossible action gave us the power and support to save our nation.

    9/11 was an inside job but it was done for our sake and its cost in lives have been miniscule in comparison to the costs of the strategic and monetary problems it solved; problems who’s prices are too high to fathom.

  120. Robert E. Salt

    Take a look at the remains of Building 4. The south side is completely gone and the north side is still standing. What kind of magical explosives can do this? None! Could this be the result of some kind of new weapon? Now take a look at the remains of the Oklahoma City building. Same thing! Take a closer look at the Towers being destroyed. How much solid debris do you see hitting the ground? Not much! hmmm

  121. Robert E. Salt

    Consider the tail section of a 757. The vertical piece is 44.5 feet high extending well above the rest of the craft. The video shows the “plane” entering WTC-2 on an angle. Dividing 44.5 by root 2 gives more than a 31 foot vertical height for this piece at a 45 degree angle. This aluminum piece would have to cut through three floors of four inch thick concrete not to mention the steel columns. Boeing must be using a secret ingredient to make aluminum this strong to do all this incredible slicing. Methinks the general population has been watching too much TV and going to too many movies to buy into this. Could we be surrendering our freedoms to the real terrorists in order to protect ourselves from make believe terrorists? And what about all the mass shootings around the country? It all seems very suspicious.

  122. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Looks like is not IS… That is not a fact. MJ your reasoning is flawed.

    Symmetry is not a signature of ONLY controlled demolition. The form of collapse is predictable from the mass distribution and nature of the structure and the connections of the frame.

    Just because NIST got the explanation of the collapse wrong… it doesn’t mean that the collapse was CD. Very poor thinking there MJ.

    That’s called a leap of faith.

    “A leap of faith, in its most commonly used meaning, is the act of believing in or accepting something intangible or unprovable, or without empirical evidence.[1] It is an act commonly associated with religious belief as many religions consider faith to be an essential element of piety.”

  123. Henry

    Jeffrey, free fall proves that there was no measurable resistance, and symmetry proves that all the support columns lost all their strength instantly, totally, and simultaneously. The gradual heating of a small number of columns on a few floors can’t possibly cause that sort of failure. Free fall is irrefutable proof of controlled demolition, as is the vaporized steel documented below. Office fires can’t vaporize steel columns, either. Also, the steel framed exterior walls of WTC7 were not “curtain walls”, nor were there diesel fuel fires in WTC7. Please get informed.

    http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html

  124. Henry

    Wrong link, my bad. Here’s the link to the vaporized steel.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

  125. Jeffrey Orling RA

    Henry,

    You are mis informed about several things. What is your profession, by the way?

    Look at this video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

    You can see that it is taken post collapse of tower 1… probably around mid day. At several times in the video you see EXTENSIVE fires burning on floors 6&7 .. the entire floors are aflame and pouring out very thick black smoke. That’s the color of diesel and oil fires. This was going on early in the day… and the smoke was pouring out the south side as the north side was to windward and had the massive intake grilles. Fresh air was being sucked into from the north grilles and fanning the flames and smoke is pouring out the south side, LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK open your eyes.

    B7 had a curtain wall. Look it up. Learn what a curtain wall is… a spandrel beam and how the curtain walls are attached to the frame.

    The core of the twins had floors in them supported on steel beams which was the inside the core bracing. When THOSE floors collapsed they ripped off the bracing and so the core lost most of its bracing and stability. You can see the columns standing up to 50 or more stories AFTER the floors and the facade had collapsed with no bracing except a few pairs in rows 500 and 600.

    If you don’t open your eyes you cannot see.

    Do some research Henry… not just parrot 9/11 web sites.

  126. Henry

    Jeffrey says: “Henry, you are mis informed about several things.”

    I’m most certainly not wrong that the free fall and symmetric drop of a hurricane and earthquake resistant steel framed high rise can only take place when there is no structural support below it, and only those of us who cite the evidence for controlled demolition have explained how all the support columns in WTC7 could have been destroyed instantly, totally, and simultaneously. Certainly, the gradual, random, weakening of a few columns do to gradual random heating can’t cause the instant total and simultaneous failure of all the columns.
    Again, if not the highly refined military grade nano thermetic material that was discovered in steel and dust samples, what do you imagine was the cause of this molten and vaporized steel? Diesel fuel has been ruled out as a possible cause.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw

Leave A Reply

Please Note: All comments are moderated and manually reviewed for spam. In turn, your comment may take up to 24 hours to be posted. USAWatchdog.com also reserves the right to edit comments for grammar and spelling errors.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *