9/11 Truth Movement and evidence for controlled demolitions

9/11 Truth Movement and evidence for controlled demolitions


Sept 11 2001: concerns about “controlled demolition” & “collusion”




just search

CIA Asset Susan Lindauer Blows The Whistle On 9/11 & Iraq,

Susan Lindauer, author of Extreme Prejudice, is the first CIA asset to have spoken out, under her own name and for the record, on Israeli complicity in 9/11, the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center,….


What is Building 7?

Building 7 was a 47-story skyscraper that was part of the World Trade Center complex. It would have been the tallest high-rise in 33 states. It collapsed at 5:20 pm on September 11, 2001. It was not hit by an airplane and suffered minimal damage compared to other buildings much closer to the Twin Towers.

Video compilation of Building 7‘s destruction (no sound):




W T C 7

Collapse Videos
Building Fires
Tidy Rubble Pile
Evidence Destruction
FEMA’s Folly
Collapse Cause
Building 7 was the third skyscraper to be reduced to rubble on September 11, 2001. According to the government, fires, primarily, leveled this building, but fires have never before or since destroyed a steel skyscraper.The teamthat investigated the collapse were kept away from the crime scene. By the time they published their inconclusive report in May, 2002, the evidence had been destroyed.Why did the government rapidly recycle the steel from the largest and most mysterious engineering failure in world history, and why has the media remained silent?
Building 7 going down
Halfway through Building 7’s 6.5-second plunge, streamers suggestive of demolition charges emerged from the facade.
The unexplained collapse of Building 7 is the tip of the iceberg
of unexplored issues of the September 11th attack.
9 1 1 R e s e a r c h examines those broader issues.


Scientific analysis of World Trade Center dust reveals
unexploded nano-engineered thermitic material

Read the article published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe



Videos Show Building 7’s Vertical Collapse

The survival of several video recordings of Building 7’s collapse, though of low resolution, allow study of the building’s motion and the time of collapse.

Each of the following videos shows the entire visible portion of the building falling with a vertical precision otherwise seen only in controlled demolition. Moreover, they show that the collapse took only about 6.5 seconds from start to finish. That rate of fall is within a second of the time it would take an object to fall from the building’s roof with no air resistance.

video broadcast by CBS – 1.4MB – mpeg
This 36-second video shows Building 7 from an elevated vantage point to the distant northeast.
CBS WTC 7 video
video from an NBC news camera – 1.5MB – mpeg
This 9-second video shows the Building 7 collapse from a vantage point about mile to the northeast on West Broadway.
Broadway WTC 7 video
video broadcast on CBS – 1.7MB – mpeg
This 9.6-second video shows the Building 7 collapse from a vantage point only about 1000 feet to the north.
West Street WTC 7 video

Video Credits

Thanks for Krsto Herenda for finding the CBS video, and to plaguepuppy for transcribing it to MPEG.




9/11 Truth Organization Unearths Striking Video Photo WTC Evidence
by Eli Rika
Global Research, November 14, 2010
.911truth.org/ – 2010-11-06
0diggsdigg StumbleUpon Submit 58Share
Over the last century, the most astounding historical discoveries of man-made artifacts have often been accomplished by well-funded, highly experienced researchers. From the excavation of King Tut’s tomb to the sighting of the sunken Titanic, stunning finds have required immense financial and human resources, as well as the leadership by distinguished. So, how did a mountain of never-before-seen footage used in NIST’s World Trade Center investigations get exposed to the light of day last month? Was it the work of a billionaire adventurer?
Not quite. You can thank an upstart non-profit, the International Center for 9/11 Studies http://www.ic911studies.org/ , whose efforts have at last borne fruit.
The International Center for 9/11 Studies was founded in 2008 by Director James Gourley http://911blogger.com/node/18196, a Texas lawyer who began questioning the events of 9/11 after watching a presentation given by David Ray Griffin on C-SPAN.
“I was just floored by what I was hearing,” Gourley explained, “and I’ve been looking into 9/11 ever since then.”
In order to encourage a better understanding of the 9/11 attacks and promote scientific study of these tragic events, Gourley assembled a small team of trusted colleagues, which includes physics instructor David Chandler http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ, activist Dr. Graeme MacQueen http://911blogger.com/node/22234, and Justin Keogh, the Center’s Chief Technical Officer. The Center has partnered with other key researchers in the past, including physicist Steven Jones http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMhl-S5MyAc&feature=related and chemist Niels Harrit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RNyaoYR3y0&feature=related.
Since its inception, the Center has contributed to groundbreaking work on the technical analysis of the WTC building destructions. Gourley, who has a chemical engineering background, co-authored several papers that exposed evidence that the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 were destroyed by means of controlled demolition. His critique of official-story defender Zdenek Bazant’s crush down/crush up collapse theory was published as part of a formal discussion in the mainstream Journal of Engineering Mechanics http://911blogger.com/node/18196. Gourley’s contributions also extended to the peer-reviewed paper detailing the active thermitic material discovered in the WTC dust http://www.ae911truth.net/store/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=107, which was published in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.htm . In addition, the Center collaborated with Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth http://www.ae911truth.org/, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice http://stj911.org/, and other scientists and engineers to submit 26 pages of comments on the NIST WTC 7 Draft Report within the three-week deadline.
Uncovering the data NIST used in its WTC investigations proved to be a little more difficult. The Center filed a FOIA Request with NIST on January 26, 2009, seeking disclosure of “all of the photographs and videos collected, reviewed, cited or in any other way used by NIST during its investigation of the World Trade Center building collapses.” NIST initially ignored this request, and for months dismissed attempts by the Center to gain acknowledgment of its receipt.

Undeterred, Gourley filed a lawsuit on May 28, 2009 to get the data released. Since then, NIST has been periodically turning over images and video from its archives. So far, the Center has received over 300 DVDs and several external hard disk drives related to the NIST Reports — more than three terabytes of data — and NIST has indicated that additional records will be released in the future.

The first section of data to be partially analyzed by the Center is the Cumulus Database, a collection of more than 6,500 video clips that NIST had gathered from residents, first responders and news organizations that were filming in New York City on September 11, 2001. Even though the Center has only been able to look through a small fraction of this enormous archive, several remarkable video sequences http://911blogger.com/news/2010-08-31/international-center-911-studies-secures-release-thousands-photos-and-videos-nist have already been located and posted online.

In one unsettling video clip, two firefighters who had just escaped from one of the Twin Towers discussed how secondary explosions http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-06/new-video-911-firefighters-reveal-huge-explosions-towers-collapsedinside the building caused the lobby to collapse.

One of the firefighters is so concerned about explosives that he says, “There may be more. Any one of these buildings could blow up.” The official accounts of the events have excluded the more than 100 witnesses citing the sights and/or sounds of explosions.

The release of this video generated so much interest that searches for it skyrocketed to #1 on Google Trends http://www.infowars.com/911-firefighters-reveailing-“huge-explosions”-in-wtc-tops-google-trends/ on October 6, 2010.

In another clip, a low frequency explosion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=player_embedded can be heard just before the East penthouse of WTC Building 7 falls.

One of the most mysterious pieces of footage to be exposed shows a massive amount of dust and a large object being ejected http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne1FJBVkh4s&feature=player_embedded from a window a few stories below the jet impact zone of one of the Towers.

“The size and speed of the expelled material indicate that an explosion must have caused this event,” Gourley said after examining the video.

Several clips show clear evidence of editing that Gourley described as “suspicious.”

This includes a video of WTC Building 7 from which the penthouse collapse sequence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH_Lv_sevwY&feature=player_embedded is missing. In another clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT3ea4AC2K8&feature=player_embedded that begins just after WTC 7 starts to fall, the soundtrack is strangely silent, and does not turn on until after the building has been completely destroyed.

In addition to these, a video recorded after the collapse of the Twin Towers was released, in which Michael Hess http://giulianipartners.com/mhess.aspx, the Corporation Counsel for New York City, can be seen calling for help http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZduP7HTM3cg from the 8th floor of WTC Building 7. This footage further corroborates the testimony of Barry Jennings http://barryjenningsmystery.blogspot.com/, the former Deputy Emergency Manager of the New York City Housing Authority, who reported that he and Hess were trapped on the 8th floor after an explosion inside the building destroyed the stairwell beneath them.

The Center is preparing other data collections for public download, and working with NIST to attain additional volumes of information that are still being withheld. Center volunteers are also analyzing a computer model http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnXeUIaYj3k of Building 7 that NIST reluctantly released to determine whether the parameters used in their investigation were scientifically legitimate. David Chandler will continue to provide his technical expertise by publishing a video that contains a detailed analysis of the recordings. Justin Keogh has been adding material to his website http://0x1a.com/ to assist those who wish to explore the extensive amount of written material pertaining to the WTC catastrophe.

In the meantime, the Cumulus video clips, which total about 86 GB in size, have been made available online, and instructions for download can be viewed here http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-02/international-center-911-studies-nist-cumulus-video-database-released .

This collection alone is so massive that the Center cannot analyze all of the footage in a timely manner with its limited assets. Many hours of video have yet to be thoroughly reviewed. At first glance, the current lack of resources may seem to be disappointing, but this dilemma actually presents one of the greatest opportunities for independent researchers, technical professionals and others to help bring new evidence to light.

“The more people there are that look at it, the better,” Gourley said when asked about the need for assistance. “There might be a bombshell hidden in there, and you never know until you go through it all.” The international attention http://www.businessreviewcanada.ca/blogs/editor/wtc-collapse-search-takes-internet-storm that some of the footage has garnered also suggests that other as-yet-unseen evidence could make headlines around the world.

The treasure trove of data that the International Center for 9/11 Studies has worked so hard to obtain is waiting earnestly for a few good men and women to sift through it, and unearth all the information that has been buried for years. Anyone with Internet access now has the potential to make discoveries that will bring us closer to justice for the victims of that fateful day more than nine years ago.

Global Research Articles by Eli Rika



Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight: The 9/11 “Official Story” and the Collapse of WTC Building Seven
by Prof David Ray Griffin
Global Research, May 30, 2010
911Truth.org – 2010-05-29
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
0diggsdigg 345Share
At 5:21 PM on 9/11, Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed, even though it had not been hit by a plane – a fact that is important because of the widespread acceptance of the idea, in spite of its scientific absurdity, that the Twin Towers collapsed because of the combined effect of the impact of the airliners plus the ensuing jet-fuel-fed fires. The collapse of World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) thereby challenges the official account of the destruction of the World Trade Center, according to which it was accomplished by al-Qaeda hijackers, even if one accepts the government’s scientifically impossible account of the Twin Towers. This fact was recently emphasized in the title of a review article based on my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7,[1] by National Medal of Science-winner Lynn Margulis: “Two Hit, Three Down – The Biggest Lie.”[2]
1. Why the Collapse of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary ProblemThe collapse of WTC 7 created an extraordinary problem for the official account of 9/11 for several reasons.
An Unprecedented OccurrenceOne reason is that, because of the collapse of WTC 7, the official account of 9/11 includes the dubious claim that, for the first time in the known universe, a steel-frame high-rise building was brought down by fire, and science looks askance at claims of unprecedented occurrences regarding physical phenomena. New York Times writer James Glanz, who himself has a Ph.D. in physics, wrote: “[E]xperts said no building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire.” Glanz then quoted a structural engineer as saying: “[W]ithin the structural engineering community, [WTC 7] is considered to be much more important to understand [than the Twin Towers],” because engineers had no answer to the question, “why did 7 come down?”[3]
Visual Evidence of ImplosionEqually remarkable, besides the mere fact that this building came down, was the way it collapsed: straight down, in virtual free fall, making the destruction of this building appear to be an example of the type of controlled demolition known as “implosion,” in which explosives and/or incendiaries are used to slice the building’s steel support columns in such a way as to cause the building to collapse into its own footprint. CBS anchor Dan Rather, not one to let a remarkable fact go unremarked, said:

“[I]t’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen . . . on television . . . , where a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down.”[4]

Dan Rather, moreover, was not the only reporter to make such a comment. Al Jones, a reporter for WINS NYC News Radio, said: “I turned in time to see what looked like a skyscraper implosion – looked like it had been done by a demolition crew.”[5]

Moreover, whereas Jones and Rather, being laymen in these matters, merely said that the collapse of Building 7 looked like a controlled demolition, experts, upon seeing the video, could tell immediately that it actually was a controlled demolition. In 2006, for example, a Dutch filmmaker asked Danny Jowenko, the owner of a controlled demolition company in the Netherlands, to comment on a video of the collapse of WTC 7, without telling him what it was. (Jowenko had been unaware that a third building had collapsed on 9/11.) After viewing the video, Jowenko said: “They simply blew up columns, and the rest caved in afterwards. . . . This is controlled demolition.” When asked if he was certain, he replied: “Absolutely, it’s been imploded. This was a hired job. A team of experts did this.”[6]
Testimonies about Explosions

Besides the obviousness from the very appearance of the collapse of Building 7 that it was a product of controlled demotion, there were testimonies about explosions in this building.

One of these was provided by Michael Hess, New York City’s corporation counsel and a close friend of Mayor Rudy Giuliani. While on his way back to City Hall, Hess was stopped for an interview at 11:57 that morning, during which he said:

“I was up in the emergency management center on the twenty-third floor [of WTC 7], and when all the power went out in the building, another gentleman and I walked down to the eighth floor [sic] where there was an explosion and we were trapped on the eighth floor with smoke, thick smoke, all around us, for about an hour and a half. But the New York Fire Department . . . just came and got us out.”[7]

Hess thereby reported a mid-morning explosion in WTC 7.

The other gentleman, Barry Jennings of the New York City Housing Authority, reported the same thing during another on-the-street interview, reporting that he and “Mr. Hess” had been walking down the stairs when they became trapped by a “big explosion.”[8] Jennings, in fact, said that explosions continued going off while they were waiting to be rescued.[9]

There were also reports of explosions in the late afternoon, just as WTC 7 started coming down. Reporter Peter Demarco of the New York Daily News said:

“[T]here was a rumble. The building’s top row of windows popped out. Then all the windows on the thirty-ninth floor popped out. Then the thirty-eighth floor. Pop! Pop! Pop! was all you heard until the building sunk into a rising cloud of gray.”[10]

NYPD officer Craig Bartmer gave the following report:

“I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down. . . . That didn’t sound like just a building falling down to me . . . . There’s a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. . . . [A]ll of a sudden. . . I looked up, and . . . [t]he thing started pealing in on itself. . . . I started running . . . and the whole time you’re hearing ‘boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.’”[11]

A New York University medical student, who had been serving as an emergency medical worker that day, gave this report:

“[W]e heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder. . . . [T]urned around – we were shocked. . . . [I]t looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out. . . . [A]bout a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that.”[12]

Physical Evidence

In addition to the visual and testimonial evidence, there was clear physical evidence that explosives and incendiaries were used to bring down WTC 7.

Swiss-Cheese Steel: Within a few months of 9/11, three professors from Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) had issued a report about a piece of steel from Building 7 that was described in a New York Times story by James Glanz and Eric Lipton as “[p]erhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.”13 Part of the mystery was the fact that the steel was “extremely thin,” indicating that the steel had “melted away,” even though “no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.” Another part of the mystery was that atoms in the steel seemed to have combined with sulfur “to form compounds that melt at lower temperatures,” but as to the source of the sulfur, “no one knows.”[14]

Describing this mysterious piece of steel more fully, an article entitled “The ‘Deep Mystery’ of Melted Steel” in WPI’s magazine, said:

“[S]teel – which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit – may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies . . . reveal that . . . a eutectic reaction . . . caus[ed] intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese . . .. A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges – which are curled like a paper scroll – have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes – some larger than a silver dollar – let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending – but not holes. A eutectic compound is a mixture [involving sulfur]. . . . ‘The important questions,” says [one of the professors], ‘are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from?’”[15]

The thinning and the holes even suggested that the steel had vaporized. Explaining as early as November 2001 why fire could not account for this mysterious steel, Glanz paraphrased one of the three WPI professors, Jonathan Barnett, as saying that it “appear[ed] to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.”[16]

Another New York Times story reported that the same phenomenon was described by Professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl of the University of California at Berkeley, who had received a National Science Foundation grant to spend two weeks at Ground Zero studying steel from the buildings. According to reporter Kenneth Change, Professor Astaneh-Asl, speaking of a horizontal I-beam from WTC 7, said: “Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.”[17]

These reports clearly showed that something other than fire had been making things happen in the buildings, because the fires could not possibly have been higher than 1800 degrees Fahrenheit, while the boiling point of steel is roughly the same as that of iron, which is 5182°F. But even if the steel had not evaporated but had simply melted, that by itself would have proved the point, because the melting point of steel is only a little less than that of iron, which is 2800°F. (An obvious source of both the melting and the sulfidation would be a well-known incendiary, thermate – a “mixture of thermite and sulfur . . . which lowers the melting point of iron it contacts when reacting by forming a eutectic system,” which is “useful in cutting through steel.”)[18]
Evidence in Plain Sight

Therefore, clear evidence against the official account of Building 7, according to which it was brought down by fire, existed in plain sight in the form of videos of its collapse, published testimonies about explosions in the building, and physical evidence reported in the New York Times. The reasonable inference to draw from this evidence – namely, that the official account is false – was reinforced by the first official report on this building’s collapse, which was issued in 2002 by FEMA. Besides including as an appendix the paper by the WPI professors containing the study of the Swiss-cheese piece of steel recovered from WTC 7 – a study that attributed the erosion to “oxidation and sulfidation” while adding: “No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified”[19] – the engineers who wrote the FEMA report admitted that their “best hypothesis” about why WTC 7 collapsed had “only a low probability of occurrence.”[20]
Failure to Become Well Known

In addition to all these facts, WTC 7 was a very big building, being 47 stories high and having a base about the size of a football field. Although it was dwarfed by the 110-story Twin Towers, it would have been the tallest building in half of the states in the nation. For all of these reasons, the collapse of this building should have become one of the best-known facts about 9/11. But it did not.
2. Widespread Ignorance about WTC 7

A Zogby poll in May 2006 found that 43 percent of the American people were unaware that WTC 7 had collapsed,[21] and that same year, as mentioned earlier, Danny Jowenko of the Netherlands still did not know about it, even though controlled demolition was his field.

A dramatic example of the fact that this building’s collapse has not been prominent in the public consciousness was provided in a New York City courtroom in September 2009. Judge Edward Lehner was hearing arguments about a petition sponsored by NYC CAN to allow residents to vote on whether New York City should have its own investigation of the World Trade Center attacks. After Judge Lehner had observed that the 9/11 Commission had carried out an investigation and issued a report, Dennis McMahon, a lawyer for NYC CAN, said that this report left many unanswered questions. “One of the biggest questions,” he added, “is why did Building 7 come down” – at which point Judge Lehner asked: “Building what?” McMahon replied: “World Trade Center Seven. There were three buildings that came down.” When the judge, continuing to illustrate his ignorance about this building, asked if it was owned by the Port Authority, McMahon replied that it was owned by Larry Silverstein.[22]

Judge Lehner, it should be emphasized, was not simply an ordinary American citizen. Besides being a judge presiding in New York City, he had been assigned to a case involving the 9/11 attacks in this city. So his ignorance about this building was surprising. And yet it was typical. With his query – “Building what?” – he expressed the ignorance manifested in 2006 by controlled demolition expert Danny Jowenko and almost half of the American people. How can we account for this ignorance?
Abnormal Circumstances

In a New York Times story in November 2001, James Glanz wrote that the collapse of WTC 7 was “a mystery that under normal circumstances would probably have captured the attention of the city and the world.”[23] Clearly these were not normal circumstances.

Part of the abnormality was the fact that Building 7, while huge, was overshadowed by the Twin Towers, which were over twice as tall. This fact by itself, however, would not account for the enormous ignorance of this third building’s collapse. Knowledgeable people had said right away, as Glanz pointed out, that there was a sense in which the collapse of Building 7 should have been the bigger story. Why was it not?
Deliberate Suppression

The answer seems to be that it was a deliberately suppressed story. This conclusion is supported by the following facts:

First, after 9/11 itself, our television networks played videos of the Twin Towers being hit by planes, then coming down, over and over, but the collapse of Building 7 was seldom if ever shown.

Second, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued in 2004, it did not even mention that Building 7 came down.

Third, after NIST – the National Institute of Standards and Technology – took over from FEMA the task of explaining the destruction of the World Trade Center, it repeatedly delayed its report on WTC 7. In 2003, NIST said that this report would be issued along with its report on the Twin Towers, the draft of which was to appear in September 2004.[24] However, even though NIST’s report on the Twin Towers did not actually appear until 2005, the promised report on WTC 7 was not included: NIST said that it would appear in 2006. But when August of 2006 came, NIST said: “It is anticipated that a draft report [on WTC 7] will be released by early 2007.”[25] But it was not released in 2007 – either early or late. Instead, NIST in December 2007 “projected” that it would release draft reports on July 8, 2008, followed by final reports on August 8, 2008.[26] Instead, the draft report did not appear until August, and the final report not until November of that year – when the Bush-Cheney administration was about to leave office.

Moreover, when in 2008 NIST was accused of having deliberately delayed its report on WTC 7 (which the 9/11 Truth Movement had long considered the “Achilles Heel” or “Smoking Gun” of the official account of 9/11[27]), NIST lied, saying that it had worked on this report only since 2005 and hence for only three years – the same length of time it had worked on its Twin Towers report. Actually, however, NIST had filed progress reports on WTC 7 in December 2002 and May 2003;[28] in June 2004, it published an Interim Report on WTC 7;[29] and in April 2005, NIST released another preliminary report on WTC 7.[30]Then, after ceasing work on this building until after the report on the Twin Towers was issued in October 2005, NIST reported, “the investigation of the WTC 7 collapse resumed.”[31] In truth, therefore, NIST had worked on its report on WTC 7 for almost six years, not merely three. So there was good reason to suspect that this report had been deliberately delayed for as long as possible.

3. NIST’s Draft for Public Comment: Mystery Solved?

Be that as it may, when the Draft for Public Comment did finally appear in August 2008, it was announced at a press conference with much bravado. Shyam Sunder, NIST’s lead investigator for its World Trade Center projects, said:

“Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery. WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives.”[32]

The mainstream media for the most part simply repeated Sunder’s claims. For example, an Associated Press story entitled “Report: Fire, Not Bombs, Leveled WTC 7 Building,” began by saying: “Federal investigators said Thursday they have solved a mystery of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: the collapse of World Trade Center building 7, a source of long-running conspiracy theories.” Then, after reinforcing this message by quoting Sunder’s assurance that “the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery,” this story concluded by quoting his claim that the science behind NIST’s findings is “incredibly conclusive,” so that “[t]he public should really recognize that science is really behind what we have said.”[33]

Reporters, however, could easily have discovered that this was not so. They could have seen, in fact, that NIST’s WTC 7 report repeatedly committed scientific fraud in the technical sense, as defined by the National Science Foundation.

4. NIST’s Falsification of Evidence

One type of fraud is falsification, which includes “omitting data.”[34] While claiming that it “found no evidence of a . . . controlled demolition event,”[35] NIST simply omitted an enormous amount of evidencefor that conclusion.
Omitting Testimonial Evidence

NIST failed, for one thing, to mention any of the testimonial evidence for explosions. Besides claiming that the event described as a mid-morning explosion by Michael Hess and Barry Jennings was simply the impact of debris from the collapse of the North Tower – which occurred at 10:28 and hence about an hour later than the explosion they had described – NIST failed to mention any of the reports of explosions just as the building started to come down.
Omitting Physical Evidence:

NIST’s report on this building also omitted various types of physical evidence.

The Swiss-Cheese Steel: One of these was the piece of Swiss-cheese steel reported by the three WPI professors in a paper that was, as mentioned earlier, included as an appendix to the 2002 FEMA report. After describing the erosion of this piece of steel, the professors had said: “A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed.”[36] When NIST took over from FEMA the responsibility of issuing the official reports on the World Trade Center, NIST’s director promised that its reports would address “all major recommendations contained in the [FEMA] report.”[37] However, when NIST’s report on Building 7 appeared in 2008, it did not even mention this mysterious piece of steel, let alone explain how it had been produced. NIST even claimed that no recovered steel from WTC 7 had been identified, because the steel used in this building, unlike the steel used in the Twin Towers, “did not contain . . . identifying characteristics.”[38]

NIST made this claim, incidentally, even though it had previously published a document in which it had referred to steel recovered from WTC 7, including the piece discussed by the WPI professors in the appendix to the FEMA report. This claim about not identifying any steel was made by NIST (in August 2008), moreover, even though one of these professors, Dr. Jonathan Barnett, had during a BBC program on WTC 7 (in July 2008) discussed an “eroded and deformed” piece of steel that he and his colleagues had studied in 2001, explaining that they knew “its pedigree” because “this particular kind of steel” had been used only in WTC 7, not in the Twin Towers.[39]

Melted Iron: Deutsche Bank, which had a building close to the World Trade Center that had been contaminated with dust, hired the RJ Lee Group, a scientific research organization, to prove to its insurance company that the dust contaminating its building was not ordinary building dust, as its insurance company claimed, but had resulted from the destruction of the World Trade Center. Reports issued by the RJ Lee Group in 2003 and 2004 proved that the dust was indeed WTC dust, having its unique chemical signature. Part of this signature, the RJ Lee Group said in its final (2004) report, was “[s]pherical iron . . . particles,” and this meant, it had pointed out in its 2003 report, that iron had “melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles.”[40]

The RJ Lee reports thereby provided additional evidence that temperatures had been reached that significantly exceeded those that could have been produced by fire. These reports, which were made known in an article published in January 2008 by a group of scientists led by physicist Steven Jones,[41] were simply ignored by NIST.

Melted Molybdenum: Another study was carried out by scientists at the US Geological Survey. Besides also finding the spherical iron particles, these scientists found that something had melted molybdenum[42] – which has an extremely high melting point: 4,753°F (2,623°C).[43] Although these USGS scientists failed to mention this discovery in the published version of their report, a group of scientists led by Steven Jones, having obtained the USGS team’s data through a FOIA request, reported evidence that this team had devoted serious study to “a molybdenum-rich spherule.”[44] NIST, however, failed to mention this discovery by the US Geological Survey, although it is another federal agency.

Nanothermite: A peer-reviewed report by University of Copenhagen chemist Niels Harrit and several co-authors, including physicist Steven Jones and chemist Kevin Ryan, showed that the WTC dust contained unreacted nanothermite. Unlike ordinary thermite, which is an incendiary, nanothermite is a high explosive.

This report by Harrit, Jones, Ryan, and their colleagues did not appear until 2009,45 so it could not have been mentioned in NIST’s final report, which came out at the end of November 2008. However, given the standard guidelines for the investigation of building fires, NIST should have tested the WTC dust for signs of incendiaries, such as ordinary thermite (including thermate), and explosives, such as nanothermite.[46]

When asked whether it had carried out such tests, NIST said it had not.[47] When a reporter asked NIST spokesman Michael Newman why not, he replied: “[B]ecause there was no evidence of that.” When the reporter asked the obvious follow-up question, “[H]ow can you know there’s no evidence if you don’t look for it first?” Newman replied: “If you’re looking for something that isn’t there, you’re wasting your time . . . and the taxpayers’ money.”[48]
5. NIST’s Fabrication of Evidence

Besides omitting and otherwise falsifying evidence, NIST also committed the type of scientific fraud called fabrication, which means simply “making up results.”[49]
No Girder Shear Studs

For example, in offering its explanation as to how fire caused Building 7 to collapse, NIST said that the culprit was thermal expansion, meaning that the fire heated up the steel, thereby causing it to expand. Expanding steel beams on the 13th floor, NIST claims, caused a steel girder connecting columns 44 and 79 to break loose. Having lost its support, column 79 failed, starting a chain reaction in which all the other columns failed.[50]

Leaving aside the question of whether this is even remotely possible, let us simply ask: Why did that girder fail? NIST’s answer was that it was not connected to the floor slab with sheer studs. NIST wrote: “In WTC 7, no studs were installed on the girders.”[51] In another passage, NIST said: “Floor beams . . . had shear studs, but the girders that supported the floor beams did not have shear studs.”[52]

However, NIST’s Interim Report on WTC 7, which it published in 2004 before it had developed its girder-failure theory, said shear studs were used to anchor “[m]ost of the beams and girders,” including the girder in question.[53]
A Raging 12th Floor Fire at 5:00

Although in its 2004 Interim Report on WTC 7, NIST said that by 4:45 PM, “the fire on Floor 12 was burned out,”[54] it claimed in its 2008 report that at 5:00, just 21 minutes before the building collapsed, the fire on this floor was still going strong.[55]
6. NIST’s Final Report: Affirming a Miracle

NIST’s final report on WTC 7, which appeared in November 2008, was for the most part identical with its draft report, which had appeared in August. But NIST did add a new element: the affirmation of a miracle, meaning a violation of a fundamental law of physics.

This issue is treated in a cartoon in which a professor has written a proof on a chalkboard. Most of the steps consist of mathematical equations, but one of them simply says: “Then a miracle happens.”[56] This is humorous because one thing scientists absolutely cannot do in their scientific work is appeal to miracles, even implicitly. And yet that is what NIST does. I will explain.
NIST’s August 2008 Denial of Free Fall

Members of the 9/11 Truth Movement had long been pointing out that Building 7 came down at the same rate as a free-falling object, or at least virtually so. But in NIST’s Draft for Public Comment, issued in August 2008, it denied this, saying that the time it took for the upper floors – the only floors that are visible on the videos – to come down “was approximately 40 percent longer than the computed free fall time and was consistent with physical principles.”[57]

As this statement implies, any assertion that the building did come down in free fall would not be consistent with physical principles – meaning the laws of physics. Explaining why not, during a “WTC 7 Technical Briefing” on August 26, 2008, Shyam Sunder said:

“[A] free fall time would be [the fall time of] an object that has no structural components below it. . . . [T]he . . . time that it took . . . for those 17 floors to disappear [was roughly 40 percent longer than free fall]. And that is not at all unusual, because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place. Everything was not instantaneous.”[58]

In saying this, Sunder was, of course, presupposing NIST’s rejection of controlled demolition – which could have produced a free-fall collapse by causing all 82 columns to fail simultaneously – in favor of NIST’s fire theory, which necessitated a theory of progressive collapse.
Chandler’s Challenge and NIST’s November Admission of Free Fall

In response, high-school physics teacher David Chandler, who was able to speak at this briefing, challenged Sunder’s denial of free fall, stating that Sunder’s “40 percent” claim contradicted “a publicly visible, easily measurable quantity.”[59] Chandler then placed a video on the Internet showing that, by measuring this publicly visible quantity, anyone knowing elementary physics could see that “for about two and a half seconds. . . , the acceleration of the building is indistinguishable from freefall.”[60]

Amazingly, in NIST’s final report, which came out in November 2008, it admitted free fall. Dividing the building’s descent into three stages, NIST described the second phase as “a freefall descent over approximately eight stories at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.25 s[econds].”[61] So, after presenting over 600 pages of descriptions, photographs, testimonies, graphs, analyses, explanations, and mathematical formulae, NIST says, in effect: “Then a miracle happens.”

Why this would be a miracle was explained by Chandler, who said: “Free fall can only be achieved if there is zero resistance to the motion.”[62] In other words, the upper portion of Building 7 could have come down in free fall only if something had suddenly removed all the steel and concrete in the lower part of the building, which would have otherwise provided resistance. If everything had not been removed and the upper floors had come down in free fall anyway, even for only a second, a miracle – meaning a violation of laws of physics – would have happened.

That was what Sunder himself had explained the previous August, saying that a free-falling object would be one “that has no structural components below it” to offer resistance. But then in November, while still defending its fire theory of collapse, NIST agreed that, as an empirical fact, free fall happened. For a period of 2.25 seconds, NIST admitted, the descent of WTC 7 was characterized by “gravitational acceleration (free fall).”[63]

Knowing that it had thereby affirmed a miracle, NIST no longer claimed that its analysis was consistent with the laws of physics. In its August draft, in which it said that the collapse occurred 40 percent slower than free fall, NIST had repeatedly said that its analysis was “consistent with physical principles.” One encountered this phrase at least three times.[64] In the final report, however, every instance of this phrase had been removed. NIST thereby almost explicitly admitted that its report on WTC 7, by admitting free fall while continuing to deny that explosives and incendiaries were used, is not consistent with the principles of physics.

NIST thereby implicitly acknowledged that Building 7 was intentionally demolished. It also thereby implicitly admitted the same about the Twin Towers, because the collapses of these buildings manifested many of the same tell-tale signs of controlled demolition as did WTC 7, plus some additional ones, including the horizontal ejection of sections of steel columns, weighing many thousands of pounds, more than 500 feet from the towers. (These ejections occurred at the outset of the collapses, after which the Towers came straight down.).[65]

And with this implicit admission that the collapses were examples of controlled demolition, NIST undermined the al-Qaeda theory of 9/11. Why?

For one thing, the straight-down nature of the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 means that the buildings were subjected to the type of controlled demolition known as “implosion,” which is, in the words of a controlled demolition website, “by far the trickiest type of explosive project,” which “only a handful of blasting companies in the world . . . possess enough experience . . . to perform.”[66] Al-Qaeda terrorists would not have had this kind of expertise.

Second, the only reason to go to the trouble of bringing a building straight down is to avoid damaging nearby buildings. Had the World Trade Center buildings toppled over sideways, they would have caused massive destruction in Lower Manhattan, crushing dozens of other buildings and killing tens of thousands of people. Does anyone believe that, even if al-Qaeda operatives had had the expertise to make the buildings come straight down, they would have had the courtesy?

A third problem is that foreign terrorists could not have obtained access to the buildings for all the hours it would have taken to plant incendiaries and explosives. Only insiders could have done this.[67]
7. Explaining the Ignorance about WTC 7

NIST’s admission that Building 7 came down in free fall for over two seconds should, therefore, have been front-page news. The same is true, moreover, of the various other things I have reported – NIST’s fabrications; NIST’s omission and distortion of testimonial evidence; NIST’s omissions of physical evidence, such as the Swiss-cheese steel and the particles showing that iron and molybdenum had been melted; and the later discovery of nanothermite particles in the WTC dust. Especially given the fact that the collapse of Building 7 had been declared a mystery from the outset, the world should have been waiting with bated breath for every new clue as to why this 47-story building had come down. Upon hearing Building 7 mentioned, nobody in the world with access to CNN should have asked, “Building what?” How do we explain the fact that five and even nine years after the mysterious collapse of this building, ignorance about it was still widespread?

To begin answering this question, let us return to James Glanz’s statement that the collapse of WTC 7 was “a mystery that under normal circumstances would probably have captured the attention of the city and the world.”[68] As I stated before, the abnormality seems to have been such that videos and even the very fact of this building’s collapse were deliberately suppressed. What was this abnormality?

A symposium in the February 2010 issue of American Behavioral Scientist, one of our leading social science journals, argues that social scientists need to develop a scientific approach to studying an increasingly important type of criminality: State Crimes Against Democracy, abbreviated SCADs,[69] understood as “concerted actions . . . by government insiders intended to manipulate democratic processes and undermine popular sovereignty.” Having the “potential to subvert political institutions and entire governments . . . [SCADs] are high crimes that attack democracy itself.”[70]

Distinguishing between SCADs that have been officially proven, such as “the Watergate break-ins and cover-up . . . , the secret wars in Laos and Cambodia . . . , the illegal arms sales and covert operations in Iran-Contra . . . , and the effort to discredit Joseph Wilson by revealing his wife’s status as an intelligence agent,” on the one hand, and suspected SCADs for which there is good evidence, on the other, the symposium authors include in the latter category “the fabricated attacks on U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964 . . . , the “October Surprises” in the presidential elections of 1968 . . . and 1980 . . . , the assassinations of John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy . . . , the election breakdowns in 2000 and 2004 . . . , the numerous defense failures on September 11, 2001 . . . , and the misrepresentation of intelligence to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq.”[71]

Besides regarding 9/11 as one of the suspected SCADs for which there is good evidence, this symposium treats it as its primary example. The abstract for the introductory essay begins by asserting: “The ellipses of due diligence riddling the official account of the 9/11 incidents continue being ignored by scholars of policy and public administration.”[72] The symposium’s final essay, criticizing the majority of the academic world for its “blithe dismissal of more than one law of thermodynamics” that is violated by the official theory of the World Trade Center collapses,[73] also criticizes the academy for its failure to protest when “Professor Steven Jones found himself forced out of a tenured position for merely reminding the world that physical laws, about which there is no dissent whatsoever, contradict the official theory of the World Trade Center Towers’ collapse.”[74]

The authors of this symposium point out, moreover, that the official theory of the destruction of the three World Trade Center towers has serious implications for science and engineering. If NIST’s explanation “provides the most robust account of the Towers’ collapse, based on known science,” then some previously accepted physical laws would need to be revised:

“[These laws] would have to succumb, at some point, to the theoretical claims purported to explain the Towers’ collapse: New laws determining when steel melts and the phases at which such material loses its tensile strength would have at some point to replace existing science-based presumptions.”[75]

This revision of physical laws would also have practical implications for building codes: “[T]he specifications of design for all skyscrapers ought, in the public interest, to be subjected to major review.” The acceptance of NIST’s account, therefore, creates an “obvious crisis,” which should be evoking scientific and practical responses.[76]

The practical crisis that should have been caused by NIST’s report on WTC 7 had previously been addressed by four of the “Jersey Girls,” who had been instrumental in getting the 9/11 Commission created. In a statement released in September 2008, they wrote:

“Over the past seven years, the Families of the 9/11 Victims have been repeatedly told by fire experts, engineers and architects that we should NOT FOCUS our efforts on advocating for building and fire code changes based on the collapse of the WTC 1 and 2 towers. We were continuously reminded that the crashing of airplanes into buildings was a unique event. Additionally, we were told that the design and construction of WTC Towers 1 and 2 was unique and that there were no other buildings of that particular height or design in the world. We were repeatedly told that the key was WTC 7 since this building was of conventional design and height, yet it too collapsed without the unique event of an airplane striking it. . . .

“Dr. Shyam Sunder of NIST . . . stated that WTC 7 met all New York City codes. Yet, WTC 7 is the first steel high-rise building of traditional construction in the United States — and the world, to completely collapse as a result of fire. According to . . . Dr. Sunder, “there were no flaws with the construction of the building.”

“We don’t how the rest of the country is feeling about this news, but we are very scared! These findings suggest that ANY EXISTING building is prone to a progressive collapse if a fire should start and the sprinkler system fails for whatever reason. . . .

“The ultimate purpose of advocating for the $16 million to have NIST study this event was to determine how to make buildings safer in the future. If we are now to believe that any skyscraper is subject to total collapse from fire, why isn’t NIST emphasizing the impact on EXISTING buildings? . . . NIST needs to . . . provide guidance for EXISTING buildings.

“NIST should put the most important conclusion in plain English and announce it to the entire country: UNCONTROLLED FIRES IN HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS CAN LEAD TO THEIR TOTAL COLLAPSE. . . . NIST must address this dangerous issue immediately. The future safety of the public and the fire services hangs in the balance.”[77]

Like the SCADs symposium, this brilliant piece of satire makes clear that NIST’s explanation of WTC 7’s collapse should have created a crisis in many fields, both theoretical and practical. The implications of NIST’s explanation should have been extensively discussed in technical journals of various types and then in newspapers and on television programs and radio talk shows. But no such discussion occurred. The worlds of physics, engineering, building codes, and public safety continued on as if the report had never been issued. How can we understand this?
Hiding the Most Obvious Evidence that 9/11 Was a SCAD

If the reason why the collapse of WTC 7 did not occur “under normal circumstances” is the fact that it was part of 9/11, which was a SCAD, then it would not be surprising that the collapse of this building, which “under normal circumstances would probably have captured the attention of the city and the world,” did not do so.

If 9/11 was a SCAD, the collapse of WTC 7 would not have been allowed to capture the world’s attention for the reasons mentioned earlier: Unlike the Twin Towers, it was not hit by a plane; because of this, there was no jet fuel to spread big fires to many floors; its collapse, unlike that of each of the Twin Towers, looked exactly like a classic implosion, in which the collapse begins from the bottom and the building folds in upon itself, ending up almost entirely in its own footprint; and the videos show that it came down, at least part of the way, in absolute free fall. The fact that Building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition was, therefore, more obvious.

This greater obviousness is illustrated not only by Danny Jowenko’s response, but also by the many engineers and scientists who joined the 9/11 Truth Movement only after seeing a video of this building’s collapse. For example, Daniel Hofnung, an engineer in Paris, wrote:

“In the years after the 9/11 events, I thought that all I read in professional reviews and French newspapers was true. The first time I understood that it was impossible was when I saw a film about the collapse of WTC 7.”[78]

Likewise, civil engineer Chester Gearhart wrote:

“I have watched the construction of many large buildings and also have personally witnessed 5 controlled demolitions in Kansas City. When I saw the towers fall on 9/11, I knew something was wrong and my first instinct was that it was impossible. When I saw building 7 fall, I knew it was a controlled demolition.”[79]

This video was also decisive for University of Copenhagen chemist Niels Harrit, who later became the first author of the nanothermite paper. When asked how he became involved with these issues, he replied:

“It all started when I saw the collapse of Building 7, the third skyscraper. It collapsed seven hours after the Twin Towers. And there were only two airplanes. When you see a 47-storey building, 186 meters tall, collapse in 6.5 seconds, and you are a scientist, you think “What?” I had to watch it again…and again. I hit the button ten times, and my jaw dropped lower and lower. Firstly, I had never heard of that building before. And there was no visible reason why it should collapse in that way, straight down, in 6.5 seconds. I have had no rest since that day.”[80]

Given these reactions, it is obvious why, if 9/11 was a State Crime Against Democracy, the fact of Building 7’s collapse, especially the video of this collapse, had to be suppressed as much as possible.
WTC 7 as a Dud?

Having made this point, I need to respond to an obvious objection: If those who were responsible for bringing down Building 7 were going to need to suppress the video of its collapse, why did they wait until late in the afternoon, when the air was clean and cameras would be trained on this building, with the consequence that we have perfectly clear videos of the collapse of this building from various angles, each one showing its straight-down free-fall descent? Why did they not bring it down in the morning, shortly after one of the Twin Towers had collapsed, when the resulting dust cloud would have made any images impossible? After the collapse of the North Tower at 10:28, for example, visibility did not return sufficiently for film crews to come back to the area, NIST reported, until 11:00.[81] Had Building 7 been imploded at, say, 10:45, its collapse would still have been a big mystery, but there would have been no videos showing that it had come straight down and, for over two seconds, in absolute free fall.

There are many reasons, as I showed in an appendix to The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, to believe that this had indeed been the plan, but that this building was, as one researcher put it, “a dud”[82] – meaning that “the demolition system in WTC 7 simply did not respond as intended and the building defiantly remained intact.”[83] As a result, agents were perhaps sent into the building to set fires to provide the basis for a cover-story saying that fires had brought the building down. This hypothesis — that fires were set in the building only after a controlled demolition system had failed to bring it down in the morning — would explain why, although the fires in Building 7 were supposedly started by burning debris from the North Tower’s collapse at 10:28, no flames are visible in this building, as NIST admits, until after noon, and on some floors there is no photographic evidence of fire until 3:40 PM or even later.[84]

I have emphasized this likelihood – that the destruction of WTC 7 was a botched operation – because if true it provides the clearest possible illustration of the theme of this essay, namely, that SCADs can be hidden in plain sight. There are literally dozens of problems in the official account of 9/11 sufficiently serious to show the official story to be false. But the clearest proof is provided by the video of this enormous building coming straight down in absolute free fall. And yet even though this proof has existed in plain sight for all these years, the fact that 9/11 was an inside job, and hence a State Crime Against Democracy, has remained a hidden fact, at least in the sense that it is not part of the public conversation. If the destruction of WTC 7 was a botched operation, then the hiding of the fact that 9/11 was a SCAD is even more impressive. How has this hiding been achieved?
Hiding SCADs: The Role of the Mainstream Media

Peter Dale Scott, discussing the erosion of the US Constitution in recent times, suggests that “this erosion has been achieved in part through a series of important deep events in [post-World-War-II] American history – events aspects of which . . . will be ignored or suppressed in the mainstream media.”[85] Indeed, Scott adds:

“[T]he mainstream U.S. media . . . have become so implicated in past protective lies . . . that they, as well as the government, have now a demonstrated interest in preventing the truth about any of these events from coming out. This means that the current threat to constitutional rights does not derive from the deep state alone. . . . [T]he problem is a global dominance mindset that prevails not only inside the Washington Beltway but also in the mainstream media . . . , one which has come to accept recent inroads on constitutional liberties, and stigmatizes, or at least responds with silence to, those who are alarmed by them. . . . [A]cceptance of this mindset’s notions of decorum has increasingly become a condition for participation in mainstream public life.”[86]

Referring thereby to events such as the JFK assassination, the Tonkin Gulf hoax, and 9/11, Scott by “deep events” means the same types of events called SCADs by the authors of the symposium on that topic. Indeed, one of those authors explicitly cites Scott’s writings, treating his “deep events” as examples of SCADs and quoting his statements about the complicity of the mainstream media in covering up the truth about these events.[87]

These authors also make the same point themselves, remarking that “the U.S. government’s account of 9/11 [is] parroted by the mainstream media”[88] and commenting on “the profound disavowal of still burning, molten questions originating at 9/11 Ground Zero gone begging by the American media.”[89]

Besides parroting the government’s account of 9/11 and stigmatizing those who provide alternative accounts with the discrediting label “conspiracy theorists,” how has America’s mainstream media kept the truth about WTC 7 hidden from the majority of the American people? Through various means, including the following:

First, by never replaying the statements by Dan Rather and other reporters about how the collapse of WTC 7 looked just like a controlled demolition.

Second, by seldom if ever replaying the video of this building’s collapse.

Third, by never mentioning credible critiques of the official account. For example, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False, which has been endorsed by prestigious scientists and engineers, has never been reviewed in the mainstream media, even though my previous 9/11 book, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, was a Publishers Weekly “Pick of the Week” in 2008.[90]

Fourth, by never mentioning, except for one story that apparently slipped through,[91] the existence of an organization called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which by now has some 1,200 professional architects and engineers calling for a new investigation of WTC 7 as well as the Twin Towers.[92]

Fifth, by never reporting scientific evidence contradicting the official account of these buildings’ destruction, such as the reported discovery of nanothermite in the WTC dust.

Sixth, by overlooking the fact that NIST’s report on WTC 7 omitted an enormous amount of evidence showing that explosives and/or incendiaries must have been used. For example, although the New York Times in 2002 called the piece of Swiss-cheese steel recovered from this building “the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation,” it did not issue a peep when NIST’s 2008 report on this building failed to mention this piece of steel and even claimed that no steel from this building had been identified: The Times clearly knew better but said nothing.

Seventh, by not mentioning the fact, even after it was reported in my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, that NIST had used various types of fabricated evidence to support its theory of a fire-induced collapse.

Eighth, by reporting NIST’s August 2008 press briefing, in which Shyam Sunder announced, triumphantly, that the “the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery” and that “science is really behind what we have said,” but then not reporting on NIST’s final report in November of that year, in which NIST almost explicitly admitted that science does not stand behind, but instead contradicts, its theory of this building’s collapse.

Ninth, by systematically ignoring the fact that the official account of WTC 7’s collapse has implications for many fields that, if taken seriously by leaders in those fields, would demand revolutionary changes in both theory and practice.[93]
Conclusion and Proposal

Through these and related means, the truth about the collapse of WTC 7 has been effectively hidden, even though it has existed in plain sight all these years. Even the bare fact of the collapse itself has been so effectively hidden that in 2006 over 40 percent of the American public did not know about it, and in 2009 a judge in New York City, upon hearing a reference to Building 7, asked: “Building what?”

I offer this essay as a case study in the power of the forces behind SCADs or deep events to hide things that exist in plain sight, because if they can hide the straight-down free-fall collapse of a 47-story building captured on video in broad daylight, they can hide almost anything.

I say this, however, not to instill despair, but to point to the seriousness of the problem, and also to pave the way for making a proposal. Recognizing the high correlation between those who know about the collapse of WTC 7 and those who believe that a new – or rather real – 9/11 investigation is needed, I propose that the international 9/11 Truth Movement initiate, starting this September, a world-wide, year-long “Building What?” campaign. Through this campaign, we would seek to make the fact of its collapse so widely known that the mention of Building 7 would never again evoke the question: “Building What?”[94]

David Ray Griffin is the author of 36 books on various topics, including philosophy, theology, philosophy of science, and 9/11. His 2008 book, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé, was named a “Pick of the Week” by Publishers Weekly. In September 2009, The New Statesman ranked him #41 among “The 50 People Who Matter Today.” His most recent book is The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False (2009). His next book will be Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee’s Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory (September 2010). He wishes to thank Tod Fletcher, Jim Hoffman, and Elizabeth Woodworth for help with this essay.

1 David Ray Griffin, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 Is Unscientific and False (Northampton: Olive Branch [Interlink Books], 2009).

2 Lynn Margulis, “Two Hit, Three Down – The Biggest Lie,” Rock Creek Free Press, January 24, 2010 (http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/353434420/two-hit-three-down-the-biggest-lie).

3 James Glanz, “Engineers Have a Culprit in the Strange Collapse of 7 World Trade Center: Diesel Fuel,” New York Times, November 29, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/29/nyregion/nation-challenged-site-engineers-have-culprit-strange-collapse-7-world-trade.html).

4 Rather’s statement is available on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvx904dAw0o).

5 See the video 911 Eyewitness (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444) at 29:05.

6 See “Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 Controlled Demolition,” YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=877gr6xtQIc), or, for more of the interview, “Jowenko WTC 7 Demolition Interviews,” in three parts (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I&feature=related).

7 “Michael Hess, WTC7 Explosion Witness,” YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUfiLbXMa64). Hess should have said “down to the sixth floor.” As Barry Jennings later clarified, the explosion that blocked their descent occurred when they reached the sixth floor, after which they walked back up to the eighth floor, where they waited to be rescued; see “Barry Jennings-–9/11 WTC7 Full Uncut Interview,” Part 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxUj6UgPODo), at 5:08-5:33.

8 See “Barry Jennings – 9/11 Early Afternoon ABC 7 Interview” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI).

9 This statement could previously be seen in “Barry Jennings-–9/11 WTC7 Full Uncut Interview,” Part 1, at 3:57-4:05. But at the time this essay was posted, this portion of the interview had been blocked from the Internet, because it is now in the film Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup.

10 Quoted in Chris Bull and Sam Erman, eds., At Ground Zero: Young Reporters Who Were There Tell Their Stories (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 2002), 97.

11 Bartmer’s statement is quoted in Paul Joseph Watson, “NYPD Officer Heard Building 7 Bombs,” Prison Planet, February 10, 2007 (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/100207heardbombs.htm).

12 This unnamed medical student can be seen making this statement in 911 Eyewitness (at 31:30).

13 James Glanz and Eric Lipton, “A Search for Clues in Towers’ Collapse,” New York Times, February 2, 2002 (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E0DE153DF931A35751C0A9649C8B63).

14 Ibid.

15 Joan Killough-Miller, “The ‘Deep Mystery’ of Melted Steel,” WPI Transformations, Spring 2002  (http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html).

16 James Glanz, “Engineers Suspect Diesel Fuel in Collapse of 7 World Trade Center,” New York Times, November 29, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/29/nyregion/29TOWE.html). I have here quoted Glanz’s paraphrase of Barnett’s statement.

17 See Kenneth Change, “Scarred Steel Holds Clues, And Remedies,” New York Times, October 2, 2001 (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B05E6DC123DF931A35753C1A9679C8B63).

18 For the melting point of iron, see “Iron,” WebElements: The Periodic Table on the Web (http://www.webelements.com/iron/physics.html). The description of thermate is from “Thermite,” Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite), as of May 25, 2010.

“Iron,” WebElements: The Periodic Table on the Web (http://www.webelements.com/iron/physics.html).

19 Jonathan Barnett, Ronald R. Biederman, and R. D. Sisson, Jr., “Limited Metallurgical Examination,” Appendix C of World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA, 2002 (http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf); also available on Jim Hoffman’s website (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm); see “C.2: Sample 1 (from WTC 7),” pages 1-5.

20 See FEMA, World Trade Center Building Performance Study (http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf), Chap. 5, Sect. 6.2, “Probable Collapse Sequence,” at page 31.

21 “A Word about Our Poll of American Thinking Toward the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks,” Zogby International, May 24, 2006 (http://www.zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231).

22 In the ensuing exchange, Judge Lehner showed that he was not completely unaware of this building’s destruction, asking if it was “the one that has been rebuilt.” Shortly thereafter, however, the judge confused this building with the Twin Towers. See pages 16-19 of “Proceedings, Christopher Burke et al, Petitioners. vs. Michael McSweeney as City Clerk of New York and Clerk of the City Council of New York and the Board of Elections in the City of New York, before Honorable Edward H. Lehner, J. S. C., Supreme Court of the State of New York, September 29, 2009.”

23 Glanz, “Engineers Have a Culprit in the Strange Collapse of 7 World Trade Center.”

24 “National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee 2003 Report to Congress” (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTAC2003ReporttoCongressFinal.pdf), 4.

25 NIST, “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions,” August 30, 2006 (http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/nist/WTC_FAQ_reply.html), Question 14. This is the original version of the document, which contained what is stated in the text. But NIST, never a stickler for retaining past statements that later prove embarrassing, “updated” this document over two years later, on January 28, 2008 (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm). This “updated” version of this 2006 document gives the reader the impression that NIST in 2006 – instead of having said, “It is anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007” – actually said: “It is anticipated that a draft report will be released for public comment by July 2008 and that the final report will be released shortly thereafter.” The original document, as updated August 30, 2006, has been preserved in Jim Hoffman, “NIST’s World Trade Center FAQ” (http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/nist/WTC_FAQ_reply.html).

26 NIST, “WTC Investigation Overview,” December 18, 2007 (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTAC_December18(Sunder).pdf). Like the NIST 2006 document discussed in the previous note, this one has also been revised, so that it now says merely July and August, 2008, respectively, without giving exact dates.

27 See “WTC 7: The Smoking Gun of 9/11” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwSc7NPn8Ok), and Paul Joseph Watson, “BBC’s 9/11 Yellow Journalism Backfires: Building 7 Becomes the Achilles Heel of the Official Conspiracy Theory,” Prison Planet, March 5, 2007 (http://infowars.wordpress.com/2007/03/05/bbcs-911-yellow-journalism-backfires).

28 “Progress Report on the NIST Building and Fire Investigation into the World Trade Center Disaster,” National Institute of Standards and Technology (henceforth NIST), December 9, 2002 (http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03040.pdf); “Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster,” NIST, May 2003 (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/MediaUpdate%20_FINAL_ProgressReport051303.pdf).

29 Interim Report on WTC 7, NIST, June 2004 (http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf).

30 “WTC 7 Collapse,” NIST, April 5, 2005 (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf).

31 “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions,” NIST, August 30, 2006 ((http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/nist/WTC_FAQ_reply.html), Question 14 (see note 25, above).

32 Shyam Sunder, “Opening Statement,” NIST Press Briefing, August 21, 2008 (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/opening_remarks_082108.html).

33 Associated Press, “Report: Fire, Not Bombs, Leveled WTC 7 Building,” USA Today, August 21, 2008 (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-08-21-wtc-nist_N.htm).

34 National Science Foundation, Office of Inspector General, “What is Research Misconduct?” in New Research Misconduct Policies, (http://www.nsf.gov/oig/session.pdf). This document is undated, but internal evidence suggests that it was published in 2001.

35 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Structural Fire Response and Probable Collapse Sequence of World Trade Center Building 7, November 2008, Vol. 1 (http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-9%20Vol%201.pdf) : 324.

36 Jonathan Barnett, Ronald R. Biederman, and Richard D. Sisson, Jr., “Limited Metallurgical Examination,” FEMA, World Trade Center Building Performance Study, May 2002, Appendix C (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/AppendixC-fema403_apc.pdf): 13.

37 Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., testimony before the House Science Committee Hearing on “The Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse,” May 1, 2002 (http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/official/nist/bement.htm). In the quoted statement, “FEMA” replaces “BPAT,” which is the abbreviation for “Building Performance Assessment Team,” the name of the ASCE team that prepared this report for FEMA.

38 “Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation,” August 21, 2008 (http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/nist/wtc_qa_082108.html).  In response to the question, “Why didn’t the investigators look at actual steel samples from WTC 7?
” NIST replied: “Steel samples were removed from the site before the NIST investigation began. In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, debris was removed rapidly from the site to aid in recovery efforts and facilitate emergency responders’ efforts to work around the site. Once it was removed from the scene, the steel from WTC 7 could not be clearly identified. Unlike the pieces of steel from WTC 1 and WTC 2, which were painted red and contained distinguishing markings, WTC 7 steel did not contain such identifying characteristics.” This document was originally available on NIST’s website (http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html). However, like some other NIST reports, it has been removed. But is preserved at Jim Hoffman’s website (http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/nist/wtc_qa_082108.html). This statement was repeated in a version of this document that was updated April 21, 2009, which is also preserved at Hoffman’s site (http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/nist/wtc_qa_042109.html).

39 In NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, Damage and Failure Modes of Structural Steel Components, September 2005 (http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-3C%20Damage%20and%20Failure%20Modes.pdf), the authors, Stephen W. Banovic and Timothy Foecke, referred to “the analysis of the steel from WTC 7 (Sample #1 from Appendix C, BPAT/FEMA study) where corrosion phases and morphologies were able to determine a possible temperature region” (233). The BBC program was The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – The Third Tower, July 6, 2008 (available at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9072062020229593250# and http://www.911blogger.com/node/16541); the statement by Barnett is at 48:00. I am indebted to Chris Sarns for both of these discoveries.

40 RJ Lee Group, “WTC Dust Signature,” Expert Report, May 2004 (http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%20Liberty%20Street/Mike%20Davis%20LMDC%20130%20Liberty%20Documents/Signature%20of%20WTC%20dust/WTCDustSignature_ExpertReport.051304.1646.mp.pdf): 11; “WTC Dust Signature Study: Composition and Morphology,” December 2003 (http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%20Liberty%20Street/Mike%20Davis%20LMDC%20130%20Liberty%20Documents/Signature%20of%20WTC%20dust/WTC%20Dust%20Signature.Composition%20and%20Morphology.Final.pdf): 17. For discussion of the differences between these two versions of the RJ Lee report, see Griffin, The Mysterious Collapse, 40-42.

41 Steven E. Jones et al., “Extremely High Temperatures during the World Trade Center Destruction,” Journal of 9/11 Studies, January 2008 (http://journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf): 8.

42 Ibid., 4-5.

43 “Molybdenum,” WebElements: The Periodic Table on the Web (http://www.webelements.com/molybdenum/physics.html).

44 For the published USGS report, see Heather A. Lowers and Gregory P. Meeker, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, “Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust,” 2005 (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html). The USGS’s evidence for the molybdenum-rich spherule is reported in Steven Jones et al., “Extremely High Temperatures,” 4.

45 Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, et al., “Active Thermitic Material Observed in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” The Open Chemical Physics Journal 2 (2009): 7-31 (http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/openaccess2.htm).

46 According to the Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, put out by the National Fire Protection Association, investigators should, in seeking to determine the cause of a fire, look for evidence of accelerants, which are any substances that could be used to ignite a fire or accelerate its progress (National Fire Protection Association’s 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, 1998 Edition, Section 12-2.4 (http://www.interfire.org/res_file/92112m.asp), and thermite mixtures are explicitly classified as accelerants (Section 19.2.4, “Exotic Accelerants” and “Thermite Mixtures”).

47 “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions,” NIST, August 30, 2006 (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm), Question 12 (NIST’s answer to this question has not been “updated” [see note 25, above]).

48 Jennifer Abel, “Theories of 9/11,” Hartford Advocate, January 29, 2008 (http://www.ae911truth.org/press/23).

49 National Science Foundation, “What is Research Misconduct?”

50 See Griffin, The Mysterious Collapse, 150-55.

51 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Vol. 1: 346.

52 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Vol. 2 (http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-9%20Vol%202.pdf), 462.

53 See NIST, Interim Report on WTC 7 (http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf): L-6-7, and Griffin, The Mysterious Collapse, 212-15.

54 Interim Report on WTC 7: L-26. This contradiction is pointed out in a video, “NIST Report on WTC7 Debunked and Exposed!” YouTube, December 28, 2008 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY), at 0:45 to 1:57.

55 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Vol. 2: 384, Figure 9-11.

56 This cartoon can be seen on the Internet (http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/pages/gallery.php).

57 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Draft for Public Comment, Vol. 2 (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1-9_vol2_for_public_comment.pdf), 595-96. In “Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation,” which was issued August 21, 2008 (simultaneously with NIST’s Draft for Public Comment), NIST repeated this denial, saying: “WTC 7 did not enter free fall.” As pointed out in note 38, above, NIST has removed this document from its website, but it has been preserved by Jim Hoffman (http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/nist/wtc_qa_082108.html).

58 “WTC 7 Technical Briefing,” NIST, August 26, 2008. NIST has removed this video and the accompanying transcript from the Internet. However, Nate Flach has made the video available at Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/11941571), and the transcript, entitled “NIST Technical Briefing on Its Final Draft Report on WTC 7 for Public Comment,” is available at David Chandler’s website (http://911speakout.org/NIST_Tech_Briefing_Transcript.pdf).

59 Ibid.

60 David Chandler, “WTC7 in Freefall – No Longer Controversial,” September 4, 2008 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I), at 2:45.

61 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Vol. 2: 607. The same point is stated in the brief version of NIST’s WTC 7 report, NIST NCSTAR 1A, which states: “In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north face. This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories” (45).

62 Chandler, “WTC7 in Freefall – No Longer Controversial,” at 3:27.

63 “Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation,” NIST, updated April 21, 2009 (http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/nist/wtc_qa_042109.html). (This version was “updated” from the original, which was posted August 21, 2008: see notes 38 and 57, above.) This updated document, originally available at NIST’s website (http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html), has been removed it. It is preserved, however, at Jim Hoffman’s website (http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/nist/wtc_qa_042109.html).

64 NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Draft for Public Comment, Vol. 2: 595-96, 596, 610.

65 See my discussion in Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008), 30-31.

66 “The Myth of Implosion” (http://www.implosionworld.com/dyk2.html).

67 As to how domestic terrorists could have gotten access, an answer becomes possible if we are aware that Larry Silverstein, who owned Building 7 and had recently taken out a lease on the rest of the World Trade Center, stood to make several billion dollars if it was destroyed in a terrorist attack, and that a brother and a cousin of George W. Bush were principals of a company that handled security for the World Trade Center (Griffin, Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory [Northampton: Olive Branch, 2007], 111).

68 Glanz, “Engineers Have a Culprit in the Strange Collapse of 7 World Trade Center.”

69 Symposium on State Crimes Against Democracy, American Behavioral Scientist 53 (February 2010): 783-939 (http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6). Online access is expensive, but the entire issue can be purchased for $24 (journals@sagepub.com).

70 Lance deHaven-Smith, “Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government,” American Behavioral Scientist 53 (February 2010): 795-825 (http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6), at 796.

71 Ibid. 797.

72 Ibid., 783.

73 Matthew T. Witt, “Pretending Not to See or Hear, Refusing to Signify: The Farce and Tragedy of Geocentric Public Affairs Scholarship,” American Behavioral Scientist 53 (February 2010): 921-39 (http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6), at 934.

74 Ibid., 932 (emphasis in original).

75 Ibid., 932.

76 Ibid.

77 “Statement of September 11th Advocates Regarding the Release of the NIST Final Draft of Collapse of WTC7” (signed by Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg, and Lorie Van Auken), September 26, 2008 (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20080927030009489).

78 Daniel Hofnung, Patriots Question 9/11 (http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html#Dhofnung).

79 Chester W. Gearhart, Patriots Question 9/11 (http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html#Gearhart).

80 “Danish Scientist Niels Harrit, on Nanothermite in the WTC Dust (English subtitles),” YouTube, April 6, 2009 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o).

81 NIST NCSTAR 1A, Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (brief report), November 2008 (http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf): 51; NIST NCSTAR 1-9: 119.

82 Jeremy Baker, “Was WTC 7 a Dud?” Serendipity, 2005 (http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wtc7_dud.htm).

83 Jeremy Baker, “Last Building Standing,” Serendipity, 2007 (http://www.serendipity.li/wot/last_building_standing.pdf). This is a revised and updated version of Baker, “Was WTC 7 a Dud?”

84 NIST NCSTAR 1: 1-9: 194, 243, 244, 247.

85 Peter Dale Scott, “9/11, Deep State Violence, and the Hope of Internet Politics,” Global Research, June 11, 2008 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9289).

86 Ibid. More recently, Scott has ceased speaking about a “deep state,” because it suggests an organized entity with a location, and speaks instead only of “deep events” brought about by “deep forces.” This revised language is reflected in his forthcoming book, American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010), in which he refers to “deep events” as “events that are systematically ignored, suppressed, or falsified in public (and even internal) government, military, and intelligence documents as well as in the mainstream media and public consciousness,” and says that underlying these events “is frequently the involvement of deep forces linked either to the drug traffic or to agencies of surveillance (or to both together).” He then adds: “A clearly defined deep event will combine both internal features – evidence, such as a discernible cover-up, that aspects are being suppressed – and external features – an ongoing and perhaps irresoluble controversy as to what happened.”

87 Laurie A. Manwell, “In Denial of Democracy: Social Psychological Implications for Public Discourse on State Crimes Against Democracy Post-9/11,” American Behavioral Scientist 53 (February 2010): 848-84 (http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6), at 867-70.

88 Ibid., 863.

89 Matthew T. Witt and Alexander Kouzmin, “Sense Making Under ‘Holographic’ Conditions: Framing SCAD Research,” American Behavioral Scientist 53 (February 2010): 783-94 (http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6), at 789.

90 Publishers Weekly, November 24, 2008 (http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/1-legacy/15-web-exclusive-book-reviews/article/6017-web-exclusive-reviews-week-of-11-24-2008-.html).

91 Jennifer Harper, “Explosive News,” Washington Times, February 22, 2010 (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/22/inside-the-beltway-70128635/?feat=home_columns).

92 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (http://ae911truth.org).

93 On the failure of the press release about WTC 7 by the Jersey Girls (see note 77, above) to receive any press coverage: Email letter from Lorie Van Auken, May 23, 2010.

94 This essay is based on a lecture of the same title delivered at a conference, “Understanding Deep Politics,” held May 14-16, 2010, in Santa Cruz, California, which was organized by Gabriel Day, Cheryl Curtiss, Jason King, and Kevin Zenzie.

David Ray Griffin is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by David Ray Griffin


Last edited by joeturn; 30 May 2011 at 18:13 PM.


Scott Horton Interviews Jason Leopold

Scott Horton, August 11, 2011

Investigative reporter Jason Leopold discusses his article “Former Counterterrorism Czar Accuses Tenet, Other CIA Officials of Cover-Up” about Richard Clarke essentially blaming the CIA for failing to prevent the 9/11 terrorist attack by withholding the identities and whereabouts of two eventual hijackers; likely CIA efforts to recruit the hijackers and gain a desperately-wanted foothold inside al-Qaeda; the televised interview of Clarke by filmmakers John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski on Colorado Public Television; and information on Richard Blee, the barely-known replacement of Michael Scheuer at the CIA’s Alec Station (bin Laden unit).

MP3 here. (19:32)

Jason Leopold is an investigative reporter and the Deputy Managing Editor of Truthout. His in-depth coverage includes the US Attorney firing scandal, the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilsion and the Bush administration’s torture program. He is a two-time winner of the Project Censored award for his investigative work on Halliburton and Enron, and in March 2008, was awarded the Thomas Jefferson award by The Military Religious Freedom Foundation for a series of stories on the rise of Christian fundamentalism in the US military.

Leopold also received the Dow Jones Newswires Journalist of the Year Award in 2001 for his reporting on Enron and the California energy crisis. He has worked as an editor and reporter at the Los Angeles Times and was Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. He is the author of the Los Angeles Times bestseller, News Junkie, a memoir.


An Explosive New 9/11 Charge

In a new documentary, former national-security aide Richard Clarke suggests the CIA tried to recruit 9/11 hijackers—then covered it up. Philip Shenon on George Tenet’s denial.

Aug 11, 2011 8:47 AM EDT

With the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks only a month away, former CIA Director George Tenet and two former top aides are fighting back hard against allegations that they engaged in a massive cover-up in 2000 and 2001 to hide intelligence from the White House and the FBI that might have prevented the attacks.

The source of the explosive, unproved allegations is a man who once considered Tenet a close friend: former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, who makes the charges against Tenet and the CIA in an interview for a radio documentary timed to the 10th anniversary next month. Portions of the Clarke interview were made available to The Daily Beast by the producers of the documentary.

Richard A. Clarke
Richard A. Clarke in 2010., Markus Schreiber / AP Photo

In the interview for the documentary, Clarke offers an incendiary theory that, if true, would rewrite the history of the 9/11 attacks, suggesting that the CIA intentionally withheld information from the White House and FBI in 2000 and 2001 that two Saudi-born terrorists were on U.S. soil—terrorists who went on to become suicide hijackers on 9/11.

Clarke speculates—and readily admits he cannot prove—that the CIA withheld the information because the agency had been trying to recruit the terrorists, while they were living in Southern California under their own names, to work as CIA agents inside Al Qaeda. After the recruitment effort went sour, senior CIA officers continued to withhold the information from the White House for fear they would be accused of “malfeasance and misfeasance,” Clarke suggests.

Clarke says it is fair to conclude “there was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share information.” Asked who would have made the order, Clarke replies, “I would think it would have been made by the director,” referring to Tenet.

Clarke said that if his theory is correct, Tenet and others would never admit to the truth today “even if you waterboarded them.”

Clarke’s theory addresses a central, enduring mystery about the 9/11 attacks— why the CIA failed for so long to tell the White House and senior officials at the FBI that the agency was aware that two Al Qaeda terrorists had arrived in the United States in January 2000, just days after attending a terrorist summit meeting in Malaysia that the CIA had secretly monitored.

In a written response prepared last week in advance of the broadcast, Tenet says that Clarke, who famously went public in 2004 to blow the whistle on the Bush White House over intelligence failures before 9/11, has “suddenly invented baseless allegations which are belied by the record and unworthy of serious consideration.”

The CIA insisted to the 9/11 Commission and other government investigations that the agency never knew the exact whereabouts of the two hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, inside the U.S.—let alone try to recruit them as spies.

Agency officials said the CIA’s delay in sharing information about the two terrorists was a grave failure, but maintained there was no suggestion of deception by CIA brass. Tenet has said he was not informed before 9/11 about Hazmi and Mihdhar’s travel to the U.S., although the intelligence was widely shared at lower levels of the CIA.

The 9/11 Commission investigated widespread rumors in the intelligence community that the CIA tried to recruit the two terrorists—Clarke was not the first to suggest it—but the investigation revealed no evidence to support the rumors. The commission said in its final report that “it appears that no one informed higher levels of management in either the FBI or CIA” about the two terrorists.

But in his interview, Clarke said his seemingly unlikely, even wild scenario—a bungled CIA terrorist-recruitment effort and a subsequent cover-up—was “the only conceivable reason that I’ve been able to come up with” to explain why he and others at the White House were told nothing about the two terrorists until the day of the attacks.

“I’ve thought a lot about this,” Clarke says in the interview, which was conducted in October 2009. He said it was fair to conclude “there was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share information.” Asked who would have made the order, Clarke replies, “I would think it would have been made by the director,” referring to Tenet.

Clarke, now a security consultant and bestselling author, has hinted in his writings in the past that there may have been a CIA cover-up involving Hazmi and Mihdhar, although he has never made such direct attacks on Tenet and others at the CIA by name.

He did not reply to requests from The Daily Beast to expand on his comments or to explain why he has not repeated them publicly since the 2009 interview. The documentary’s producers, FF4 Films, said they had been in contact with Clarke this month and that he stood by his remarks in the broadcast.

The producers, John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski, had previously made a well-reviewed film documentary, Press for Truth (www.911pressfortruth.com), on the struggle of a group of 9/11 victims’ families to force the government to investigate the attacks.

In finishing the radio documentary, they recently supplied a copy of Clarke’s comments to Tenet, who joined with two of former top CIA deputies—Cofer Black, who was head of the agency’s counterterrorism center, and Richard Blee, former head of the agency’s Osama Bin Laden unit—in a statement denouncing Clarke.

“Richard Clarke was an able public servant who served his country well for many years,” the statement says. “But his recently released comments about the run-up to 9/11 are reckless and profoundly wrong.”

“Clarke starts with the presumption that important information on the travel of future hijackers to the United States was intentionally withheld from him in early 2000. It was not.”

The statement continued. “Building on his false notion that information was intentionally withheld, Mr. Clarke went on to speculate—which he admits is based on nothing other than his imagination—that the CIA might have been trying to recruit these two future hijackers as agents. This, like much of what Mr. Clarke said in his interview, is utterly without foundation.”

Clarke, who led governmentwide counterterrorism efforts from the White House during the Bush and Clinton administration, has said in the past that he was astonished to learn after 9/11 that the CIA had long known about the presence of Hazmi and Mihdhar inside the United States.

“To this day, it is inexplicable why, when I had every other detail about everything related to terrorism, that the director didn’t tell me, that the director of the counterterrorism center didn’t tell me,” Clarke said in the interview for the documentary, referring to Tenet and Cofer Black. “They told us everything—except this.”

He said that if he had known anything about Hazmi and Mihdhar even days before 9/11, he would have ordered an immediate manhunt to find them—and that it would have succeeded, possibly disrupting the 9/11 plot.

“We would have conducted a massive sweep,” he said. “We would have conducted it publicly. We would have found those assholes. There’s no doubt in my mind, even with only a week left. They were using credit cards in their own names. They were staying in the Charles Hotel in Harvard Square, for heaven’s sake.” He said that “those guys would have been arrested within 24 hours.”

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

Philip Shenon is an investigative reporter based in Washington, D.C. Almost all of his career was spent at The New York Times, where he was a reporter from 1981 until 2008. He is the bestselling author of The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation. He has reported from several war zones and was one of two reporters from the Times embedded with American ground troops during the invasion of Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War.

For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast ateditorial@thedailybeast.com.


Lou Dobbs missing 911 Lies Video

May 30, 2009 by wordgeezer

Thanks to vdoevidence911 on Youtube this video is still around. He posted it on Sept 13, 2006. The original CNN video was from August 9, 2006, about the time that Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton came out with their book Without Precedent and was later posted on Youtube. Lou Dobbs quoted this book in his video. I posted the video on my blog on August 12, 2006, but the video was promptly removed from Youtube. I found a transcript on CNN, so copied it and posted it on August 16, 2006 along with a link to it.

Anyways, thanks to vdoevidence911 on Youtube the video has been on there since September 2006, but under another name. Googling “Lou Dobbs Wakes Up to 9/11 Lies” there are 25 articles or so with the same dead video on them, so I guess i wasn’t alone in not being able to find it.

Transript for the missing Lou Dobbs 911 video

There is a transcript for the video that was removed from Youtube.
It is on the CNN website under transcripts, so Lou Dobbs has not been silenced.


Aired August 9, 2006 – 18:00 ET


Tonight, a new account of the government’s response to September 11th points to a picture of ineptitude, confusion, and perhaps deception. A top Democrat, a Republican suggests Americans still don’t know the full truth about that day.

We’ll have that special report.

Also tonight, two Texas border patrol agents are facing 20 years in prison, but the drug smuggler they pursued given immunity by federal prosecutors. What in the world is going on in this country?

We’ll have that special report for you tonight. We’ll have the answers.

And tonight, Israel reporting 15 of its soldiers killed today. We’ll be live in Beirut. I’ll be talking with a Middle Eastern analyst who says Iran is the key to peace in the region.

Stay with us.


DOBBS: Tonight, we’re one month away from the fifth anniversary of September 11th. A shocking new book by the 9/11 Commission co- chairmen, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, says Americans still don’t know the whole truth about their government’s initial response to those terrorist attacks that day.

Christine Romans has the report.


CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two hours of chaos and confusion on September 11th, and months of government ineptitude at incorrect testimony. A new book by 9/11 commission co- chairmen Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton outlines repeated misstatements by the Pentagon and Federal Aviation Administration.

They write, “Fog of war could explain why some people were confused on the day of 9/11. But it could not explain why all of the after-action reports, accident investigations and public testimony by FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue.”

Untrue, the military’s original timeline of United Flight 93. The military said FAA notified NORAD of a hijacked plane at 9:16 a.m., 47 minutes before the plane crashed in Pennsylvania. In fact, the military found out three minutes after the plane crashed. And equally untrue, the government’s timeline for American Flight 77 and details about fighter jets scrambled to intercept it.

The book also alleges government officials weren’t forthcoming with the investigation and it took interviews and subpoenas to shake loose valuable information.

A Pentagon audit declassified last year found “DOD did not accurately report to the 9/11 Commission on the response to the September 11th, 2001 hijackings.” Pentagon investigators blamed “insufficient forensic capabilities” and worse. Admits, “DOD might not be able to sufficiently capture and report on actions taken in response to a future significant air event.”

Still, so far government investigators stopped short of calling all these inaccuracies lies.


ROMANS: Investigations are under way by the inspectors general of the Pentagon and the Department of Transportation to find out just why the FAA and NORAD didn’t tell the truth.

Now, Kean and Hamilton say all the inaccuracies have fueled conspiracy theorists, they’ve stymied the investigation, and Lou, damaged the credibility of this government.

DOBBS: Well, this government doesn’t deserve much credibility, does it? In point of fact, if all of the after-action reports are untrue, for whatever reason, that’s a lie, because they were asserted as the truth by people who knew better or should have.

ROMANS: And really troubling, the Department of Defense’s own inspector general report that was declassified showed that if the same thing happened again, you’d have the same chaos and the same misreporting or lies afterward.

DOBBS: Incompetence and ineptitude on the part of this government on September 11th and in the weeks and months leading up to it are established. The fact that the government would permit deception after a deception, whether honestly, if you can call it that, honestly intended or not. But the fact that they were continue and perpetuate the lie, suggests that we need a full investigation of what is going on and what is demonstrably an incompetent and

Tonight, a new account of the government’s response to September 11th points to a picture of ineptitude, confusion, and perhaps deception. A top Democrat, a Republican suggests Americans still don’t know the full truth about that day.

We’ll have that special report.

Also tonight, two Texas border patrol agents are facing 20 years in prison, but the drug smuggler they pursued given immunity by federal prosecutors. What in the world is going on in this country?

We’ll have that special report for you tonight. We’ll have the answers.

And tonight, Israel reporting 15 of its soldiers killed today. We’ll be live in Beirut. I’ll be talking with a Middle Eastern analyst who says Iran is the key to peace in the region.

Stay with us.


DOBBS: Tonight, we’re one month away from the fifth anniversary of September 11th. A shocking new book by the 9/11 Commission co- chairmen, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, says Americans still don’t know the whole truth about their government’s initial response to those terrorist attacks that day.

Christine Romans has the report.


CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two hours of chaos and confusion on September 11th, and months of government ineptitude at incorrect testimony. A new book by 9/11 commission co- chairmen Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton outlines repeated misstatements by the Pentagon and Federal Aviation Administration.

They write, “Fog of war could explain why some people were confused on the day of 9/11. But it could not explain why all of the after-action reports, accident investigations and public testimony by FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue.”

Untrue, the military’s original timeline of United Flight 93. The military said FAA notified NORAD of a hijacked plane at 9:16 a.m., 47 minutes before the plane crashed in Pennsylvania. In fact, the military found out three minutes after the plane crashed. And equally untrue, the government’s timeline for American Flight 77 and details about fighter jets scrambled to intercept it.

The book also alleges government officials weren’t forthcoming with the investigation and it took interviews and subpoenas to shake loose valuable information.

A Pentagon audit declassified last year found “DOD did not accurately report to the 9/11 Commission on the response to the September 11th, 2001 hijackings.” Pentagon investigators blamed “insufficient forensic capabilities” and worse. Admits, “DOD might not be able to sufficiently capture and report on actions taken in response to a future significant air event.”

Still, so far government investigators stopped short of calling all these inaccuracies lies.


ROMANS: Investigations are under way by the inspectors general of the Pentagon and the Department of Transportation to find out just why the FAA and NORAD didn’t tell the truth.

Now, Kean and Hamilton say all the inaccuracies have fueled conspiracy theorists, they’ve stymied the investigation, and Lou, damaged the credibility of this government.

DOBBS: Well, this government doesn’t deserve much credibility, does it? In point of fact, if all of the after-action reports are untrue, for whatever reason, that’s a lie, because they were asserted as the truth by people who knew better or should have.

ROMANS: And really troubling, the Department of Defense’s own inspector general report that was declassified showed that if the same thing happened again, you’d have the same chaos and the same misreporting or lies afterward.

DOBBS: Incompetence and ineptitude on the part of this government on September 11th and in the weeks and months leading up to it are established. The fact that the government would permit deception after a deception, whether honestly, if you can call it that, honestly intended or not. But the fact that they were continue and perpetuate the lie, suggests that we need a full investigation of what is going on and what is demonstrably an incompetent and at worst deceitful federal government.

Posted by Geezer Power at 8/16/2006 05:35:00 PM  



The 23 Biggest 9/11 Coincidences

By Hal Stanton



Getty Images


September 11, 2001 was unquestionably a tragic day for America and the world.  While the 3,000-plus deaths on American soil elicited support and tears from around the world, now many international citizens resent or even despise the country that ratcheted up the War on Terror.

But for many in the country, and a staggering number of foreign citizens, the truth about what really took place on September 11, 2001 remains under relentless scrutiny and doubt.  The mainstream media and politicians love to pass these claims off as “conspiracy theories” (the threat of being a social outcast can get the best of us), but the facts tell a much different story.

Here are just some of the major coincidences surrounding 9/11.


911 The 23 Biggest 911 Coincidences


Tulsa Liberty

– September 22, 2011Posted in: 911, Financial, News


By Hal Stanton


September 11, 2001 was unquestionably a tragic day for America and the world.  While the 3,000-plus deaths on American soil elicited support and tears from around the world, now many international citizens resent or even despise the country that ratcheted up the War on Terror.

But for many in the country, and a staggering number of foreign citizens, the truth about what really took place on September 11, 2001 remains under relentless scrutiny and doubt.  The mainstream media and politicians love to pass these claims off as “conspiracy theories” (the threat of being a social outcast can get the best of us), but the facts tell a much different story.

Here are just some of the major coincidences surrounding 9/11.


Were the hijackers lucky on 9/11… or had an insider tipped them off? That morning, the majority of the eastern air defense of NORAD was preoccupied with a war game that left many jets far away from Washington and New York.

In the first phone call between the air-traffic controller and NORAD, the first question out of the NORAD employee’s mouth is, “Is this real world or exercise?”

On July 7, 2005, the day of the London Bombings, London police were also running a simulated exercise: by a stroke of amazing coincidence that exercise revolved around a terrorism bombing in the London subways. Further, Mayor Guiliani happened to be in London advising on security.


The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was a neo-con think tank stacked with future members of President George W. Bush’s entourage including Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby and Richard Perle.

In September 2000, PNAC published a controversial and aggressive study called “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” Among very concise outlines on military expansion in the Persian Gulf, the paper deduces “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.”

They say that if you want to find out who started a war, ask: “Who ended up with something in the end?”  Post September 11, the four horseman of PNAC (Cheney, Wolfowitz, Libby and Perle) were the main catalysts for moving into Iraq despite no WMDs. Is it all just a coincidence that the policy they advocated was fulfilled after only a year of power?


On July 25, 2001, Alex Jones, the outspoken conspiracy theorist, predicted on his video report that the U.S government would carry out terrorist attacks against itself in what’s known as a false flag operation.  The attack would open the doors for a military invasion in the Middle East, expanding the power of corporate America and the military industrial complex, as well as extend martial law to American citizens.

In the midst of Jones’s freestyle predictions, he guesses Bin Laden will be blamed for hitting a target, “like the World Trade Center.”


In an official statement by Susan Ginsberg of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, she stated that three passports were found at the plane crash sites: two in Pennsylvania and one in New York.  Another passport was found in a piece of Mohammad Atta’s “left-behind luggage.”

This is an amazing coincidence for obvious reasons, but let’s state them anyway…

a) A fireball 100 stories high in a building that collapses to dust and debris leaves behind a perfect passport of one of the culprits to a crime, but it doesn’t leave behind the indestructible black boxes of the aircraft recorders.

b) A plane crash in which damage was particularly severe, leaving no human bodies, just pieces of corpses weighing in at no more than 600 pounds, and a jet engine virtually demolished, left two intact passports of the culprits.

c) While the rest of the country uses identification to board flights (State IDs for domestic travel, passports for international and non-American’s must provide either Green Cards or Passports), a foreign terrorist hijacker was able to board a flight while leaving his passport in his friend’s luggage. And that luggage also happened to name all 19 hijackers and their precise motives in carrying out the attacks on the morning of their deaths.


BYU Professor Steven Jones has been on a crusade since 9/11, aiming to prove that the buildings had to collapse with a controlled demolition.  Jones claims that our eyes didn’t deceive us, that what we all witnessed as a demolition-like collapse was in fact a controlled demolition.

Jones is a physicist and did a study on the video from the towers that day. He spotted falling pieces of molten metal falling from the towers, including white ash, indicating levels of heat impossible to reach with burning jet fuel.  Instead that heat must have come from a substance like thermite, which also happens to be used in controlled demolitions to cut through steel.

FEMA even stated that one of the mysteries of the WTC 7 site was the sulfidiation and oxidation on the steel, which caused it to melt; however, FEMA walked away after “no clear explanation” was found.

No steel structure before (or since) had ever collapsed due to fire. While some steel buildings had burned a long time from fire, none has fallen because steel melts at a much higher temperature than gasoline, other fuels or combustibles normally found in buildings can burn at.

Despite this resistance to high temperature, on September 11, 2001, three of the most advanced steel structures in the world collapsed officially due to fire caused by burning jet fuel and structural damage due to the impact of the planes. This angle may not convince everyone of an alternate explanation for towers 1 and 2, but for tower 7, how can this be explained?

WTC 7 is considered by many conspiracy theorists to be the smoking gun of 9-11, because they argue is no plausible argument that can justify why a building that had no direct impact by the plane would burn so hot as to cause a first-of-its-kind collapse of a steel structure (aside from the towers hours earlier). Physicists like Steven Jones and scores of independent researchers from around the world agree.


Fresh off The Project for a New American Century’s subtle musings for a new Pearl Harbor, Cheney got the task of essentially controlling the government in the event of a terrorist or war catastrophe.

While President Bush conveniently had his hands full with elementary school children, Cheney ran the government from an underground control room on 9/11 because the executive order by the President four months earlier had permitted Cheney to bypass the previous protocol.


Halliburton, the conglomerate that provides defense, infrastructure and energy, also happens to be the company Dick Cheney was formerly CEO of before he became Vice President.

The same man who ran a company which profited hugely from 9/11 also helped start a think tank that pushed for a U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to shape the world according to America’s design. Meanwhile, that man’s very same company has now quietly and comfortably moved its entire operation to nearby rich Dubai.


It’s no secret America and Saudi Arabia are business partners.  The Saudis supply much of our country’s oil at a cheap rate in return for protection.  It’s also no secret that the Bush family is crazy about the Saudis, doing business with them for decades; George Bush, Sr. was attending a Carlyle Group meeting with the kin of one Osama Bin Laden the morning of September 11.


Despite everyone in government playing stupid that they had no idea attacks were coming, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, was advised by the FBI to stop taking commercial flights as reported by CBS on July 26, 2001.

The FBI claimed this issue was the result of a threat assessment and “neither the FBI nor the Justice Department… would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it,” CBS News reported.


Conspiracy theories surrounding 9-11 don’t end at Ground Zero. The Pentagon attack has also provided endless fodder for speculation.

These theories couldn’t be more instigated by the government’s handling of surveillance video footage showing the moment of impact. Video analysts claim the government has cut frame 20 from the tape, which is rumored to show the object that struck the Pentagon.  While the official report claims in was a plane, doubters say it was a missile.

During one of the first news reports at the site, CNN anchor Jamie Macintyre claimed that “there’s no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon.”


On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld issued a press conference declaring that $2.3 trillion of the Pentagon’s money could not be accounted for.

The next day, the explosion at the Pentagon obliterated its accounting office and the ensuing destruction and confusion put the case of the money trail to rest.


On July 24, 2001, Larry Silverstein, the new leaseholder of the World Trade Center site , opened an insurance policy on the WTC which included coverage for terrorist attacks.

The policy was valued at $3.5 billion, but Silverstein stated that two acts of terror had occurred, and therefore he was entitled to claim each building’s collapse as a terrorist attack.


On September 6, 2001, airline stocks, including United and American, suddenly had a put/call ratio 25 times higher than normal. Over the next few days, as the numbers kept climbing, Bloomberg reported a high on airline put options that was as much as 285 times their average.

This means that some unknown persons or a company made a bet that said “United and American Airlines are going to lose money very soon.”


The internet is rife with homemade and professional videos that illustrate that WTC 7′s collapse was at free fall speed. This means that there was zero friction on its way down…

If we were to imagine 47 stories of steel, glass and concrete falling on top of itself, we would assume there’d be a natural collapsing effect of asymmetrical falling speeds. But this isn’t the case with WTC 7. The building, which wasn’t even hit by a plane, collapsed like a pancake without friction after a fire in the lobby.


W’s brother, Marvin Bush, was on the Board of Directors of the company Securacom, which maintained security for the WTC right until it collapsed on 9/11. The company also handled security for Dulles Airport and United Airlines, two other hot potatoes of 9/11 coincidences.

In the weeks leading up to 9/11 the towers had been on high alert due to bomb threats.  Many occupants reported numerous evacuations and fire drills in the time before the attacks, However, seemingly immediately, on September 6, the firm pulled all its bomb sniffing dogs out of the towers abruptly.


Before Dov Zakheim was the Pentagon’s top budget officer, setting the price for the Iraq invasion, he was CEO of System Planning Corp, which, through its subsidiary Tridata Corp, oversaw the investigation into the 1993 WTC bombing, giving it access to all the WTC’s blueprints.

SPC sells many 9/11 conspiracy theory technologies: the Command Transmitter System, which allows pilotless remote flight control, a radar simulator for target acquisition used by the Navy and others and a flight termination system used to destroy drones in the event of malfunction or misses.

Barbara was the wife of former U.S. Solicitor General, Ted Olsen, and a regular commentator on Fox News and CNN when she died on September 11th in Flight 77′s crash into the Pentagon.

In initial television interviews, Ted Olsen recounted Barbara calling him during flight on her cell phone and explaining the hijacking situation, saying there were men with box-cutters and that the passengers were planning on rushing the cockpit and securing the plane.

Did a highly connected Washington Insider pass information to her husband on a plane that many dispute ever hit the Pentagon and by cell phone, which is extremely difficult at that altitude? Of course, she might have misspoken and was calling from the backseat phone, but it’s a strange coincidence nonetheless.


One month and fifteen days after 9/11, a 342-page document was produced while much of the government was in disarray and upended.  The assumption is that the pages of the Patriot Act had to of been written before 9/11 and then introduced to Congress at a moment of vulnerability.

Before the Patriot Act, we didn’ have body scanners at airports, warrantless wire taps and police officers actually needed a warrant before they could enter your home.


Controlled Demolitions, Inc. (yes, that is their real name), along with Tully Construction, were hired to clean up the debris in Ground Zero after the collapse.  Aside from both companies reporting the discovery of molten steel after the collapse, Controlled Demolitions Inc. also happened to be the clean-up crew on another of America’sfatal days of terrorism: the Oklahoma City bombings.


Able Danger was a classified military planning program intended to develop information on transnational terrorism.

Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer and four other members of the team allege they identified Mohammad Atta plus three other 9/11 terrorists as possible participants in the 1992 bombing.  He implies that this information was ignored by the brass.

After 9/11, Shaffer approached Phillip Zelikow of the 9-11 commission but Zelikow showed no interest in these claims. The Department of Defense then purchased every copy of Shaffer’s book, which detailed the story of Able Danger, and destroyed them.


Our former Commander in Chief, leader of the free world, was not permitted to speak alone to the Commission investigators after the attacks.  His watchdog, Dick Cheney, was by his side every moment. Also, the dynamic duo only agreed to speak if the conversation was not under oath.


Give Youtube a whirl and search for eyewitness accounts of explosions inside the towers.  These claims fuel rumors that the tower collapsed due to a controlled demolition.

In an amateur video interview with firefighters shortly after the buildings collapsed, each one of them mentioned explosions. Wouldn’t firefighters know the sound of an explosion when they heard one?

Related Blogs
The Rest Of The Story: http://tulsachange.com/the-23-biggest-911-coincidences#ixzz1diRWDzjM

276 of the many 9/11
For a printable 3-fold 911 Coincidences flyer, please download
911 Coincidences in .pdf format
It doesn’t have space for the greyed items listed below!

See also the much more detailed Killtown 911 Oddities page

9/11 Leadup

1: Unknown to JFK on 3/13/62, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on Lyman Lemnitzer’s Operation Northwoods, a plan to blow up a US airplane, committing terrorist murders against U.S. citizens on American soil, and blaming it on Cuba to justify an invasion there. Kennedy demoted Lemnitzer 11/’62, and was assassinated 11/22/’63 (ABC News 05/1/’01)

2: In 1975, President Ford appointed Lemnitzer to the Commission on CIA Activities within the United States (aka the Rockefeller Commission) to investigate whether the Central Intelligence Agency had committed acts that violated American laws.

3: 2/3/’64: WTC Engineer John Skilling issued white paper analysis stating WTC would survive Boeing 707 hitting it at at 600mph. (Seattle Times 2/27/’93)

4: Design of the structural framing of the 1,350-ft high Twin Towers gave the exterior columns great reserve strength, > 2,000% increase before failure (Engineering News Record 4/2/64)

5: John Hinckley, George HW Bush’s associate who shot President Reagan in 3/30/’81, is the ‘black sheep’ of the family

6: The technology to fly a Boeing 720 remotely-controlled existed in 1984 (NASA)

7: Saddam, then a recipient of massive US military aid, said frigate USS Stark was mistaken as Iranian and refused a US request to interview the Iraqi pilot after a 17/5/1987 missile attack killed more than a sixth of the crew and almost sunk it. (Robert Fisk 12/31/’06)

8: From 1987 to 2000, Dov Zakheim was CEO of System Planning Corp (SPC). Through subsidiary Tridata Corp, oversaw the investigation after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. He had access to the buildings blueprints

9: SPC sells the Command Transmitter System, a remote control system for planes, which allow an operator to control a pilotless aircraft or drone within about 40 miles of the active transmitter (SPC)

10: SPC sells a radar simulator for target acquisition used by US Navy, the Ballistic Missile Defense Org (BMDO) Countermeasure Group, and DARPA (SPC)

11: SPC sells the Flight Termination System, a system used to destroy target drones in the event of malfunction or “misses” (SPC)

12: George H W Bush gave his speech calling for a New World Order on 9/11/90, eleven years before 9/11/01

13: George Bush succeeded in business only after the investment of reputed al Qaeda financiers Salem bin Laden and Khalid bin Mahfouz. The bin Ladens and Bushes are family friends; Osama is the ‘black sheep’ of the family. (Forbes 3/18/’02)

14: 5/24/95: Only 150 lbs of explosives leveled the OK City Murrah Building’s significant remains as planned, leaving the adjacent parking structure intact (AP, 5/24/95)

15: Unocal rep testified before congress in Feb 98 that an Afghan pipeline needed a stable Afghan gov’t and asks the US to use its influence to end conflicts there (Washington Post 10/5/98)

16: 2/20/’98: Project for New American Century (PNAC) called for a war in Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein (Wikipedia)

17: On 2/23/98 bin Laden proclaimed from his Afghan redoubt, “To kill Americans … is an individual duty of every Muslim”, to this day his strongest link to 9/11. (Al-Quds al-‘Arabi, 2/23/98)

18: Left-handed Osama bin Laden was declared the US taxpayer’s No. 1 fugitive. On 8/20/98 you wrecked just thousands of dollars’ worth of his obstacle courses, field barracks, and tents with $79 million in cruise missiles, voiding any US claim that 9-11 was unprovoked (New Yorker, 1/24/’00)

19: In the 11/98 issue of Foreign Affairs, Philip Zelikow, part of President Bush’s transition team in 2000-2001, speculated in an article, Catastrophic Terrorism that if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had succeeded, “an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history [involving] loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America’s fundamental sense of security … The United States might respond with … scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force. More violence could follow … Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently.” (Wikipedia)

20: Bin Laden was a CIA asset, with al Qaeda cells fighting alongside the US in the Balkan conflict as recently as 1999

21: Unocal suspended Afghan pipeline work in Aug ’98 due to political instability (Unocal)

22: Filming began in March 2000 for The Lone Gunmen‘s ‘pilot’ episode that depicts a US plot to crash an electronically hijacked Boeing 727 into WTC and blame foreign terrorists to provoke war and increase military’s budget (Kansas City Star, 3/’01)

23: PNAC, 2000: need for a ‘new Pearl Harbor’ to advance militaristic plans, by Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Pearle, Dov Zakheim, Feith, Bill Kristol and others (Rebuilding America’s Defenses, p. 51 (2000))

24: The domain name “saudi-binladin-group.com” was registered on 9/11/2000

25: Investigation of 10/12/’00 USS Cole al Qaeda bombing blocked by Yemen’s US ambassador to Yemen, Barbara Bodine.

26: PTECH, founded by a Saudi financier placed on America’s Terrorist Watch List in October 2001, had access to the FAA’s entire computer system for two years before the 9/11 attack, and whistleblower Indira Singh was told to shut up about it (Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, 6/20/06)

27: The US had at least 28 advanced specific warnings, from the likes of George Schultz, Vladimir Putin, FBI Special Investigator Robert Wright, FBI undercover ISI informant Randy Glass, former House lead counsel David Schippers, Garth Nicolson, US intelligence operative Delmart Vreeland, and many others (globalresearch.ca articles SMI402A )

28: In 5/01 US military suggested a trial run of a terrorist civil jet crash into the Pentagon, but senior officers rejected it as “too unrealistic”. (The Guardian, 4/15/’04)

29: On May 8, 2001 Dick Cheney appointed himself to the job of co-ordinating response to domestic terror attacks, bypassing established structure (5/’01)

30: 5/’01: For the third time, US security chiefs rejected Sudan’s offer of thick files on bin Laden and al-Qaeda. (Guardian, 9/30/’01)

31: Dov Zakheim was President Bush’s senior foreign policy advisor during the 2000 campaign.

32: Dov Zakheim went from his position at SPC to become the Comptroller of the Pentagon 5/4/’01, until 4/15/’04. He had access to Boeing aircraft through a lease deal he brokered

33: 6/1/’01, order moving authority to shoot down hijacked aircraft from field commanders to Rumsfeld, was rescinded shortly after 9/11

34: The theme of Paul Wolfowitz’ West Point commencement address was preparedness for a Pearl Harbor-style “surprise attack”, saying “you too will be tested in combat” (DefenseLink, 6/2/’01)

35: 6/28/’01: CIA Director Tenet wrote an intelligence summary for National Security Adviser Rice: “It is highly likely that a significant al-Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks.” (Washington Post 5/17/’02)

36: Presidential Decision Directive W-199I-WF-213589 blocked the FBI from interfering with al-Qaeda, under threat of arrest for national security implications (Greg Palast)

37: The FBI Radical Fundamentalist Unit’s Dave Frasca and others promoted on 1/10/03 after quashing multiple, urgent requests for investigations into al Qaeda training at flight schools (summer, 2001) (Portland Indymedia 2/4/’03)

38: The second highest bidder, WTC landlord Larry Silverstein leased the entire WTC complex 6 weeks before attacks in 6/’01 with an escape clause that left him paying nothing in the event of destruction by a terrorist attack (New York Times, 10/10/’03)

39: In the end […] there were various trade-offs. The Silverstein group lowered its down payment from $800 million to $491 million but raised its annual rent payment. Mr. Silverstein also had to post a nonrefundable letter of credit, which had many Port Authority executives holding their breath until shortly after 3 p.m. yesterday. (New York Times, 4/26-27/’01)

40: Twin Towers needed $5.6 billion in repairs to prevent galvanically corroded bolts from shedding aluminum cladding onto pedestrians below

41: Marvin Bush sat on the board of a Kuwaiti-owned electronic security Securacom, provider to the WTC, Dulles Airport and United Airlines (Prince George’s Journal 2/4/’03 )

42: Osama bin Laden underwent dialysis at the American Hospital in Dubai 7/14/’01 and was met by the local CIA chief (Le Figaro 1/11/’01)

43: Michael Springmann, State Department veteran: the CIA issued al Qaeda visas from the Jeddah bureau to facilitate US training (BBC 11/6/’01)

44: Governor George Pataki’s New York City office had moved out of the World Trade Center in the months before the attacks to new offices on Third Avenue.

45: John Ashcroft stopped flying on commercial aircraft in 7/01 due to ‘security considerations’ (CBS 7/26/’01)

46: The 8/6/01 Presidential Daily Briefing, entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.,” indicated al-Qaida wanted to strike the nation’s capital, preparations for airline hijackings (CNN video, 4/10/’04)

47: Raytheon and USAF flew and landed a pilotless Boeing 727 8/01 using military GPS system so ground control can comandeer hijacked planes (Der Spiegel, Raytheon)

48: Weeks before 9/11, FBI agent Colleen Rowley’s Zacarias Moussaoui investigation was so thwarted her colleagues joked bin Laden had an FBI mole (TIME magazine 5/23/’02)

49: WTC tenant said weeks before attacks they had “unusual” amount of evacuations from WTC, thinks “they had an inkling something was going on.” (People magazine 10/1/’01)

50: FBI’s John O’Neill, obsessively pursuing bin Laden’s terror network, was pressured to resign, but offered WTC security chief job & died in the collapse on 9/11, first day on the job (Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, Le Verite Interdite)

51: Two week heightened security and bomb-sniffing dogs for the WTC was lifted days before the attacks (Newsday 9/12/’01)

52: US pulled the plug on Muslim websites days before 9/11 (Guardian 9/10/’01)

53: Zim, an Israeli owned shipping company broke its lease and paid a $50,000 fine in order to move out of the WTC on Sept 4 (Virginian-Pilot, Real Estate Weekly)

54: President Bush’s brother Jeb called up Florida’s National Guard on Sept 7 (Jeb Bush: Executive Order 01-261, 7 Sept 2001)

55: Toronto Star: NORAD conducted operation ‘Northern Vigilance’ on Sept 9, planned months in advance, which deployed fighter jets to Alaskan region (NORAD, Toronto Star)

56: 9/6/01: 2,075 put options were made on United Airlines and on 9/10 2,282 put options were made for American Airlines. Given the prices at the time, this could have yielded speculators between $2 million and $4 million in profit. (NewsMax, 6/3/’02)

57: Senior Pentagon officials cancelled flights on Sept 10 for the following day (Newsweek, 9/24/2001)

58: Ariel Sharon was scheduled to address Israeli support groups in New York City but the Israeli General Security Apparatus, the Shabak, cancelled his plans the day before

59: FEMA arrived in New York on Sept 10 to prepare for a scheduled biowarfare drill, and set up a triage center (9/11 Commission, NYC.gov, CBS video)

60: Condoleeza Rice warned San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown not to travel 8 hours before attacks (SF Chronicle)

61: Sen. Bob Graham, Rep. Porter Goss, & other US Intel committee members breakfasted 9/11 with Paki ISI director Mahmoud Ahmad who had authorized an al Qaeda $100,000 wire transfer to Mohammed Atta days before (Wall St Journal, Washington Post 5/18/2002)

62: President Bush’s cousin Jim Pierce escaped death at the WTC thanks to a ‘schedule change’ the night before (Ananova 9/18/’01)

63: George HW Bush and Osama’s brother Shafig bin Laden spent the morning of September 11 together at a board meeting of the Carlyle Group

64: On 9/11 the “last” annual Warren Buffett golf charity for celebrity billionaires occurred at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, where President Bush flew to on Air Force One later in the day for “safety.” (San Francisco Business Times 2/4/’02)

65: The sender of an e-mail warning delivered to the Israeli company Odigo in the WTC two hours before the first plane hit has not been investigated (Micha Macover, CEO of the company via Ha’aretz 12/21/2002)

66: NY mayor Rudy Giuliani says he was told South WTC was going to collapse (ABC video)

The Hijackers

67: Nine hijackers identified by the US have been found alive or are known to have died years ago. (Daily Telegraph 23/09/’01)

68: At least seven of the 9/11 hijackers trained in US military bases (Newsweek, 9/15/’01; New York Times, 9/15/’01)

69: Five of the hijackers lived in a motel right outside the gates of the NSA at Fort Meade (BBC 06/08/’02)

70: Mohamed Atta attended the International Officer’s School at Maxwell Air Force Base, enjoyed pork chops, drank to excess and did cocaine (Daniel Hopsicker’s Welcome to Terrorland)

71: Ahmed Alnami, Ahmed Alghamdi, and Saeed Alghamdi listed the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Florida, as their permanent address on their driver’s licenses. Hamza Alghamdi was also connected to the Pensacola base (Pensacola News Journal, 9/17/’01)

72: Abdulaziz Al-Omari who reputedly attended Brooks Air Force Base Aerospace School, Texas said his passport was stolen when his apartment in Denver CO was burgled in ’95 (Daily Telegraph 23/09/’01)

73: Saeed Alghamdi attended the Defense Language Institute in Monterey (Knight Ridder)

74: 9/11 hijackers’ Florida operation base was in the congressional district of Porter Goss, who sponsored the PATRIOT Act

75: Atta seen ‘wasted’ at Florida bar on Sept 7 (St Petersburg Times)

76: Mohammed Atta left a rental car with a will, a Koran, driver’s license and a “how to fly planes” video at the airport: too strident evidence? (WorldNetDaily 09/11/’02)

77: Atta and two Arab men spewed anti-American sentiments on Sept 10 at Florida strip club, spend hundreds on drinks and lap dances, and copy of Quran and business card were left behind (USA Today)

78: Mohamed Atta allegedly flew Flight 11 passed directly over Indian Point nuclear power plant en route, which if he had hit, would have rendered the US northeast corridor uninhabitable for 1,000s of years

79: Not one hijacker’s name is on any of the passenger manifests or victim lists even though they were required to show photo IDs to board

80: No charges were brought against Wally Hilliard, owner of Atta’s flight school, for the 43 lbs of heroin found on board his LearJet (the biggest seizure ever in Central Florida) just three weeks after Atta enrolled

81: Hilliard’s plane (supplied by a pair of drug smugglers who had also outfitted CIA drug runner Barry Seal) had made 30-round trips to Venezuela with the same passengers who always paid cash

82: An amazing amount of confusion exists regarding the number of passengers claimed to have been on the planes, which in aggregate were only 27% full

83: Investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused, then hid him. A high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were under orders from the White House

84: 9/11 commissioner Richard ben-Veniste had been Seal’s attorney before Seal’s murder (Hopsicker 2001, pp. 325-30 )

Wargames & Standdown

85: 1999 – NORAD conducted exercises in 1999 which airplanes were hijacked and crashed into targets which included the WTC and Pentagon were anticipated. (USA Today 4/18/’04)

86: Three F-16 jetfighters from Andrews AFB, 15 miles from Pentagon, were flown 180 miles away for training mission in the morning of 9-11 (Aviation Week 09/09/’02)

87: Andrews AFB, home to DC Air National Guard and Air Force 1 & 2, had no jetfighters on alert (Newsday, USA Today)

88: Pentagon conducted emergency training exercises of a mock passenger plane crash into the Pentagon in 10/24/’00 (Army press release)

89: Missle shield over Washington, DC was deactivated several weeks before 9/11, due to upcoming ‘wargames’ by Paul Wolfowitz, Sandy Berger, and Condoleeza Rice. Joint Chief of Staff Chairman Gen Meyers, then the head of NORAD, had moved most of the planes to West Coast. (Tom Heneghen on Alex Jones)

90: Feb 5, 2003: Donald Rumsfeld, Gen. Myers confirmed there were total of four wargames and simulations (Vigilant Guardian) on 9/11 from Rep. McKinney questioning (C-SPAN)

WTC 1, North Tower (Flt. 11)

91: Larry Silverstein was not in his office on the 88th floor because of a ‘doctors appointment’ (New York Magazine)

92: Witnesses, physical and photographic evidence suggests aircraft may not have been a Boeing 767

93: Basement worker Bill Rodriguez heard an explosion below him, then the plane impact above him, saw burned man come out of basement elevator (CNN)

94: 9/11 Commission” Report (2004) said the lobby was destroyed by “a jet fuel fireball … shooting down at least one bank of elevators”, but Arturo Griffith and a co-worker, heading from the second-level basement to the 49th floor, survived the freight elevator cable severing and free-fall after the plane impact. (Emergency brakes caught after 15 floors)

95: The video shows a bright flash just in front of the plane before what may not have been a commercial airliner enters the North Tower (Naudet brothers)

96: Massive explosions extending well over 63 meters in all directions of the 63 meter wide tower sent huge steel beams to impale surrounding buildings

97: Tower fell at free-fall speed in less than 11 swconds, with squibs emanating from well below the collapse zone (KTLA 5 video)

98: Second steel-framed skyscraper in history to collapse ‘due to fire’

99: ‘Pancaking’ floors within the perimeter wall would create underpressures above the top pancaking floor, but dust being sucked back into the tower is not seen

100: A section almost half the height of the intact building remained standing for about 15 seconds, then disappeared into dust (Morgan Reynolds)

101: The head of a national demolition association stated that the collapse of the towers looked like a “classic controlled demolition”

102: The Israelis thought missing on 9-11 dwindled from hundreds to three, then only one: Daniel Levin, a member of Israel’s top commando team Sayeret Matkal Unit 501in Lebanon, and a Hijacking Expert. (Jerusalem Post 10/16/’02)

103: Daniel Levin was AKA MIT scientist Daniel Lewin, a dual Israeli/American encryption specialist who developed the key algorythms for Akamai (Haaretz 7/22/’04)

104: FBI believed that bombs in the buildings brought the buildings down (USA Today)

WTC 2, South Tower (Flt. 175)

105: At least 4 videos show a bright flash at the nose and slightly to the lower right of Flight 175 just before it enters the South Tower

106: A police officer testified to numerous HUGE explosions at the top 15 minutes apart pre-collapse

107: The only publically accessable thermograph, by Carol Ciemiengo, shows external columns scarcely hot enough to fry an egg 15 mins after impact

108: James Seffrin, Ciemiengo’s employer, says the temperatures shown are completely inaccurate because Carol, having more important work that day thermographing electrical panels, could not be bothered to set the camera to the correct range for a useful thermographic survey (telephone conversation)

109: Video evidence of molten steel pouring from tower just prior to collapse and solidified under rubble

110: An Electro-Magnetic Pulse blacked out rescue personnel’s radios at the exact moment when the tower started to fall, so rescuing firefighters were not warned to evacuate – their radios had mysteriously quit working

111: Tower fell at free-fall speed in less than 11 swconds

112: First steel-framed skyscraper in history to collapse ‘due to fire’

113: Peter Jennings, live from Ground Zero: “anybody who ever watched a building being demolished on purpose knows .. that if you’re going to do this you have to get at the .. at the under infrastructure of a building and bring it down.” (ABC News)

114: “We think there were bombs set in the building.” Ð Louie Caachioli, New York Fire Department (People Weekly 9/24/’01 )

115: WTC Ground Zero workers claim they helped FBI find 3 of the 4 black boxes from planes that struck WTC (Philadelphia Daily, 10/28/’04)

116: Satam Al Suqami’s passport was claimed found on Sept 17, but officially no black boxes were (CNN)

117: Red-hot steel fragments pulled from Ground Zero, and molten metal under the pile up to 6 weeks after attack (Steven E. Jones)

118: Sulfur residues on columns indicates use of thermate, an oxidative pyrotechnic used in controlled demolition

119: Only existing photo of ‘Flight 175’ windowed fuselage atop WTC5, featured in Popular Mechanics, was not taken until Oct 25, and was found ON TOP of cladding from the collapse of WTC1, not under it, 6 feet from the roof access door (FEMA)

120: FEMA photo 4210 shows photographic evidence of thermate slag in columns (FEMA)

121: Forensic Seismology Of 9/11 supports controlled demolition (Geologist & Researcher Steve Davis)

122: Ellen Mariani said that she was the only relative of all the passengers that died on Flight 175 that she or her lawyer, Phil Berg, could find (Black Op Radio # 156)


123: Two huge holes in WTC5 extending thru building opened up where only sheet aluminum cladding fell. Overhanging penthouse suggests hole created from below, not above. (FEMA)

WTC6, the Customs Building

124: Hole in WTC6 extending thru building not well correlated to falling debris from WTC1

125: A CNN video taken at 9:04 a.m shows a massive dust cloud rising (CNN)

126: WTC6 shown already ‘blown out’ as WTC2 begins to collapse (Photo by Bill Biggart)

127: Within minutes after the South Tower collapsed, Ground Zero EMT Patricia Ondrovic witnessed explosions in WTC 5, parked cars and inside the WTC 6 lobby

128: Loose Change: Video indicates cladding on northwest corner is damaged before either tower collapses, possibly from a bomb in WTC6 (Loose Change video)

WTC 7 (no plane)

129: 6:47am, WTC 7’s fire alarm was set to 8 hr TEST mode in which alarms are ignored (NIST report 6/’04)

130: Rudi Giuliani’s 22nd-floor command center, secured against aerial attacks by bulletproof windows and fireproof doors, was abandoned BEFORE he was warned of impending collapse (Newsday)

131: Landlord Larry Silverstein said he recommended to “pull it” due to lack of firefighting resources and after they “decided to pull,” they all watched it collapse at 5:20 PM (PBS video)

132: Four WTC rescuers say they were waited around for WTC 7 to collapse (New York Times)

133: 4:54PM EST: Time stamp confirms that BBC reported WTC 7 collapse 26 minutes before it actually happened! CNN also reported this collapse prematurely. (BBC, CNN)

134: BBC claimed they ‘lost the tapes’ showing this report (BBC 03/07)

135: Video evidence of sequenced ‘squibs’ extending up northeast corner

136: Building free-fell into its own footprint in under 7 seconds, classic presentation as controlled demolition with building center falling first and sequenced squibs from the sides (Dan Rather, CBS News)

137: CBS News anchor, Dan Rather: “Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.” (CBS)

138: First steel-framed skyscraper in history to collapse solely from an alleged fire (Chicago Tribune, Stanford Report)

139: Destroyed in the collapse were ~3,500 SEC investigation files such as WorldCom & CitiGroup

140: Officially, collapse remains unsolved. Writing of NIST report, still pending, has been outsourced to private firm (FEMA 5/’02, NIST)

141: The amnesiac 120-page 9/11 One Year Later A Nation Remembers magazine from America Media Inc utterly ignores the collapse (2002)

142: The 911 Commission completely ignored the collapse of the 47 story WTC7, as if it never occurred (Final Report, undated (internal references suggest late 2004))

143: Joel Meyerowitz did not take a single photo of the rubble of WTC 7 for inclusion in his monumental 350-page “extraordinary archive” of Ground Zero, nor make any text reference to its existence or collapse, despite a high aerial NOAA photo clearly showing its remains on p. 342 (Aftermath, 2006)

The Pentagon (Flight 77)

144: Donald Rumsfeld announced Pentagon had lost track of $2.3 trillion on Sept 10 (CBS 1/29/’02, DoD)

145: The military had conducted drills of planes crashing into the Pentagon

146: On Sept 8, Marine Aviation group moved further away from where explosion at the Pentagon would happen (Leatherneck)

147: Barbara Olson’s airphone calls from 35,000 feet are the only indication humans played a role in the hijacking of four aircraft. She is the one showcased death, and was writing a book about President Clinton pardoning terrorists

148: Barbara Olson had been scheduled to take a different flight, but cancelled and booked herself on Flight 77 on that Tuesday in order to celebrate her husband’s birthday on Monday, September 10, but his birthday was actually September 11! (Wikipedia)

149: Barbara Olson’s phone call to her husband Ted could not have been made on a seat-back airphone, because flight 77 did not carry any (David Ray Griffin, Debunking 9/11 Debunking)

150: Mineta testimony on 5/23/03 indicates Cheney issued a ‘stand down’ order

151: ‘Hani Hanjour’ the pilot of ‘Flight 77’, was so incompetent he could barely land a Cessna in August, yet managed to fly at the limit of the 757 airframe in a spiraling, 270-degree descent and a level impact of the first floor of the Pentagon

152: Attack plane made a U-turn in order to hit the side directly opposite office of Donald Rumsfeld and other Pentagon top brass, leaving an 18ft diameter hole that penetrated 3 rings of the reinforced concrete building, but no wings, engines, seats, luggage or passenger remains were found on the lawn outside (SF Bay Guardian)

153: Pentagon parking lot camera video shows white trail of smoke, characteristic of Thiokol powered craft, not passenger jets

154: Pentagon hit on a side largely unoccupied, save fiscal records and accountants who died trying to straighten out the Pentagon budget mess at the end of the fiscal year (Pittsburg Post-Gazette, 12/20/’01)

155: Live at the scene, Jamie McIntire said “from my close-up inspection, there’s no evidence of a plane … crash … anywhere near the Pentagon” (CNN video)

156: Sam Danner reported smell of cordite, a military high-explosive, not jet fuel (American Free Press)

157: FBI confiscated gas station and hotel security cameras that recorded crash (CNN, National Geographic)

158: Donald Rumsfeld in Oct magazine interview: Pentagon was hit by a “missile” (DoD)

159: Construction worker Mike Flocco said on Larry King Live that plane that hit Pentagon had ‘fewer engines’ than the other 9/11 planes (CNN, 9/8/’02)

160: The official computer simulation of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon omits the plane’s engines because they would have dug two observable long trenches in the immaculate Pentalawn (Purdue University, 9/10/02)

161: Jamie McIntire recanted testimony, saying “I can tell you that’s nonsense” (5/18/’06)

Shanksville (Flight 93)

162: Tape transcript quotes hijacker as saying demands were met, now returning to airport

163: The planning of passengers to retake the plane are heard on the cockpit voice recorder over the roar of the engines from the other side of the barred cockpit door (CNN)

164: Cell phone calls not likely possible from that altitude and speed

165: Evidence suggests that Flight 93 was demolished in-flight by high explosives, but that the site itself was faked. Human remains were not identifiable (Various sources)

166: Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller said ‘It was as if the plane had stopped and let the passengers off before it crashed’ (Post-Gazette, 10/15/’01)

167: Mayor of Shanksville quoted as seeing no wreckage or bodies on the site of the abandoned strip mine in Somerset County, even though the passports of hijackers Ziad Jarrah and Saeed al Ghamdi WERE found (Jarrah had reported his stolen in 2/’00)

168: Creases in ground allegedly made by wing impacts contained tall grass shortly after impact

169: Eyewitness accounts of a low-flying white jet with 2 rear engines overhead

170: Yearly-renewable registration for United Flight 93, tail number N591UA was not cancelled until 9/28/05. Reason for Cancellation: Cancelled

Financial Fraud

171: Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, the firm that placed the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the no. 3 man at the CIA, who resigned shortly after Goss arrival in December 2004, A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard (Michael C. Ruppert, 10/9/’01)

172: An SEC investigation into profits from prior put options on United, Boeing and American stock was halted on finding none of the trading was by al Qaeda (Foxnews.com story 0,2933,34910,00)

173: Twin Towers were money-losers allowed to remain standing because of prohibitive asbestos removal costs, subsidized by the State (Baltimore Sun, Salon, Front Page)

174: A gold heist spiriting precious metals from the basement of the World Trade Center by rail up to Canada was taking place before the attack (New York Times, 11/1/ 01)

175: After trying unsuccessfully to negotiate a lower bill, the biggest insurer of the World Trade Center went public with a conflict. The insurer, Swiss Re, sued to limit how much it will pay to half of what the buildings’ managers are asking. (New York Times, 11/23/’01)

176: Larry Silverstein profited over $1.5 billion from his entire WTC being destroyed (ABC, Wall St Journal)

Anthrax Attack

177: White House staff was given Cipro a full month before first cases of anthrax (Washington Post)

178: The bacteria were of militarized type genetically traced to a single US military source: the Army’s Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah, the only facility known to have processed anthrax into the highly lethal powder form found in the letters.

179: The New York Post, whose Deborah Orin published an article, Boozing Bush Twin Nearly in the Clear, one of several describing the inebriated adventures of Jenna Bush, was the second anthrax target. (New York Post, 9/7/’01; pg. 015)

180: Two of the primary intended victims – Senators Daschle and Leahy – were holding up the speedy passage of the pre-planned USA Patriot Act

181: Judith Miller opened an anthrax letter, of a strain much weaker than what killed 5 others 4 days earlier, only 10 days before her deeply researched book Germs on bio-warfare hit bookstores (Germs, 10/2/’01)

Response to Attack/Coverup

182: Chronology places George Bush in Jeb Bush’s video monitor-equipped limo at 8:46 am during first plane strike, which George twice claimed to have seen on a live video feed, and his arrival at Booker Elementary at 8:52 (CBS News)

183: George Bush continued reading “My Pet Goat” for 7 minutes, then gave a 20 minute press conference after the attack, contrary to SS protocol

184: The White House alleges that Bush “didn’t want to upset the children by leaving abruptly” (The Nation, 10/6/’03)

185: Rumsfeld was told of the second plane hitting the WTC while in his office with a CIA briefer, but went ahead with a meeting in his private dining room at the Pentagon with Paul Wolfowitz and Christopher Cox discussing missile defense.

186: A joint FBI/CIA anti-terrorist task force that specifically prepared for this type of disaster was on a training exercise in Monterey, Calif (USA Today 9/11/’01)

187: Shoot-down authorization not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes after Flight 93, allegedly piloted by Ziad Jarrah, crashed at 10:06, and NORAD did not accept offers from Air National Guard units until about 10:01 (9/11 Commission, Seattle Post, Toledo Blade, 12/9/’01)

188: At 9:26 AM on 9/11 all US fights were grounded except mercy flights for bin Laden family members and Saudi royals (FAA, Time magazine)

189: A recording made Sept 11 of 6 air traffic controllers describing what they had witnessed, was destroyed by an FAA official who crushed by hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in different trash cans around the building (Washington Post, 5/6/’04)

190: NYC officials decided that the NYFD’s 9/11 audio & text records should never be made public (New York Times, 7/23/’02)

191: CIA Dir. Tenet blamed bin Laden for attacks even before 2nd plane crashed (ABC News)

192: Five illegal immigrant Israeli ‘movers’ with links to military-intelligence, arrested on Sept 11 videotaping and celebrating the attacks from Liberty Park, were later quietly deported with 200 other Israeli spies (Sunday Herald)

193: George Bush was flown around on Air Force One for ten hours before being permitted to return to Washington DC (Associated Press, 9/12/’01)

194: Florida Huffman Aviation flight school records disappeared when Jeb Bush loaded them onto a C-130 military cargo plane bound for Washington in early morning hours of Sept 12 (Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland, p. 31)

195: Taliban rulers condemned attacks and said Bin Laden didn’t have the means to carry out such well-orchestrated attacks (TCM News)

196: Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said of the attack, “It’s very good… Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy”. (New York Times 9/12/’01)

197: A tape ‘found’ by US forces in Afghanistan depicts a fattened, right-handed Osama with a broader face, a wedding ring and a flatter nose claiming responsibility. No one who speaks Arabic agrees with the US translation (CNN 12/09/’01)

198: Eric Haney: Bin Laden was killed in the massive bombing of Tora Bora, Afghanistan 12/15/01. FOX News has him dying of a lung infection on 12/26 (Inside Delta Force)

199: The EPA found the air around Ground Zero too toxic, but the Bush White House re-worded the report to assure New Yorkers on September 18 that it was safe. 57 first responders have now died from lung illness, with a high estimate of 50,000 New Yorkers dying in the next 5 years. (USA Today 06/25/’06)

200: The 342 page USA PATRIOT Act was presented to a House and Senate frightened by the 9/11 attacks and by the anthrax introduced into their chambers by someone still not discovered on 10/23, and was made law largely unread just before the weekend on 10/26/’01 (Wikipedia)

201: WTC surveillance tapes and maintenance logs are among the missing evidence (Ft Wayne Sentinel)

202: Van Romero, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology research vice president: “… after the [diversionary] planes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse.” (Later recanted) (Albuquerque Journal, 9/14/’01)

203: Company hired to help clean up Ground Zero was Controlled Demolition Inc., also the contractor for the Oklahoma City bombing cleanup (Waste Age magazine)

204: Even tho Ground Zero was not treated as a crime scene, a strict ban on tourist & media fotos was imposed by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (AP, 9/27/’01)

205: The corrosion on an engine shown at the Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island indicates it crashed well before 9/11, and it was never photographed actually being removed from Ground Zero. Compare with the core that landed at Church & Murray streets (FEMA 10/16/’01)

206: Two of 9/11 Commission Chair Thomas H. Kean’s Hess-Delta business partners, Mohammed Hussein al Amoudi and Khalid bin Mahfouz, had business ties with bin Mahfouz, suspected conduit of $millions to Al Qaeda (Boston Herald, 12/11/01)

207: Within 2 weeks, steel evidence from Ground Zero was being hastily shipped to China as scrap for re-melting, in violation of Federal law. (New York Times, 12/21/’01)

208: Tho deemed valueless to investigators, the trucks hauling Ground Zero rubble away were equipped with $1K GPS trackers (Access Control & Security Systems)

209: FEMA Ground Zero investigation limited to a guided 4-day walk thru, without subpoena power or the ability to examine the blueprints, which have since been leaked to the public by a whistleblower (New York Times 12/25/’01)

210: Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle told moderator Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press (May ’02) Cheney on 1/24/02 urged him not to investigate 9/11, and 4 days later Bush did too. “It was ‘No investigation by anyone, period’?” Daschle replied: “That’s correct.” (NBC 5/’02)

211: White House refused to release part of the 900-page Sept. 11 congressional report in May ’03 (CBS News)

212: The 9-11 Commission refused to examine a vast body of 9/11 evidence, and even the former director of the FBI says there was a cover up

213: $3 million and 16 month time frame investigating 9/11 was much less than Ken Starr’s $40 million spent on Clinton/Lowinsky affair (Washington Times)

214: In October 10, Robert S. Mueller appointed FBI director 4 months earlier, called off 9/11 investigation. FBI: “We’re not trying to solve a crime now.” (New York Times)

215: Of the 266 purported passengers killed on 9-11 planes, only 11 relatives have applied for compensation

216: Fire Engineering’s Bill Manning: ASCE investigation is a ‘half-baked farce’ (Fire Engineering magazine 2/2002)

217: Big American bases set up in Afghanistan are almost identical to the projected route of the oil pipeline to go through the country. (Chicago Tribune, 3/18/’02)

218: UL tests under Kevin Ryan showed steel quality did not contribute to twin towers’ collapse (Boston Globe, Pittsburg Live)

219: Kean Commission found Condoleeza Rice’s disclaimer on 5/16/’02 that “who could have predicted that planes might be used as weapons?” was a bald lie. (White House)

220: On May 17, 2002, Bush said “Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on that fateful morning, I would have done everything in my power to protect the American people.”

221: Agent Coleen Rowley penned a memo to FBI Director Mueller charging a headquarters “roadblock” to the Minneapolis detention of Moussaoui (TIME magazine 5/26/02)

222: Relatives of 9/11 victims grilled Bush Administration on 9/20/’02 over footdragging (CBS News)

223: Oct 2002: Sniper killings by Special Ops veteran John Muhammad and sidekick Malvo blew the Iraq war debate right off the front page. (CNN)

224: No-one reprimanded for 9/11 incompetence but Homeland Security Dept was created Nov ’02 to add a layer of expensive bureaucratic bungling (CBS)

225: Henry A. Kissinger, a business associate of Larry Silverstein, the WTC leaseholder, and a consultant to the Bin Laden family, resigned his appointment by George Bush as the first head of the 9/11 Commission. (NY Times 12/14/’02)

226: FBI agents Robert Wright and John Vincent said supervisor yelled “You will not open criminal investigations!” into the money trail leading to al Qaeda (ABC, 12/19/’02)

227: Philip Zelikow was chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice (Omissions and Distortions by David Ray Griffin )

228: Bush: “Had I any inkling whatsoever that the people were going to fly airplanes into buildings, we would have moved heaven and earth to save the country.” (White House 4/19/’04)

229: Bush admin gagged FBI translator Sybil Edmonds from speaking to 9/11 Commission about attack foreknowledge in April 2004 (London Independent 4/27/’04)

230: Bush, Cheney met behind closed doors with 9/11 Commission without recorders, stenographer, or being under oath (CBS 4/29/’04)

231: Alvin ‘Buzzy’ Krongard, the CIA’s departing executive director said the world may be better off if Osama Bin Laden remains at large (Sunday Times -World,1/9/05)

232: 10/1/04: Judge Thomas Hogan found Judith Miller in contempt for refusing a federal grand jury investigating the Valerie Plame CIA operative leak (CNN 7/6/05)

233: Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) was among 100 prominent Americans and 40 victim family members signing the 9/11 Truth Movement statement calling for new investigations on 10/26/04 (Washington Post 4/11/’02)

234: Rice promoted to Secretary of State 1/26/’05 rather than fired for her failure to protect America (US State Dept)

235: S. Hunter Thompson was working on a 9/11 exposé the night of his death 2/20/’05 by two bullets in the head, after warning he would be ‘suicided’ (Globe and Mail 2/26/’05, p. F9)

236: Afghan President Karzai said Afghan pipeline to deliver oil to Americans was a ‘top priority’ in May ’05 (Christian Science Monitor)

237: A fictional “scenario” of multiple bomb attacks on London’s underground took place at exactly the same time as the bomb attack on 7/7/’05

238: Rudolph Giuliani, NYC mayor during 9/11, was staying at the Great Eastern hotel in London, where the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange was holding a conference

239: Numerous, credible ex-government officials are warning that the U.S. government might very well attack its own people to justify a further clampdown on civil rights and to justify additional wars (George Washington Blog 12/12/’05)

240: On 8/8/2005 Peter Jennings, who had reported live from Ground Zero, died of lung cancer, even though he had stopped smoking 20 years previously

241: Officially, four Israelis died in the US on 9-11, and were eulogized on 9/11/05 by American Embassy Tel Aviv Deputy Chief Gene Cretz (Tel Aviv US Embassy)

242: Rowley shows that the break with our [European] allies hurts the war on terrorism, since the great majority of Al Qaeda operatives are based in Europe [, not Afghanistan or Iraq]

243: FBI has no 9/11 evidence against Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda. Director Mueller: “In our investigation, we have not uncovered … either here in the U.S. or in … Afghanistan … any aspect of the September 11th plot” (Ed Haas)

244: “Shreveport Dentist Dr. David Graham who met three of the 9/11 hijackers and tried to warn the FBI about them was poisoned two years ago and became fatally ill. He died this week. He was scheduled to testify at the trial of a Pakistani man, Jamal Khan, who had hosted the three hijackers.”

245: On 2/3/’06 13 Al-Qaeda members convicted for the USS Cole bombing escaped from jail in Yemen (NPR Morning Edition 2/6/’06)

246: Dr. Steven E. Jones, BYU physics professor debunked the U S Govt FEMA and NIST reports. His analysis, with finding of iron microspheres in the dust, shows buildings were demolished with thermite and explosives

247: NIEHS report on the dust composition fudged the shape of iron particles and the amount in the samples (Fe) (Environmental Health Perspectives, July 2002)

248: 7/3/’06: The CIA closed the unit that for a decade hunted Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants (New York Times 7/4/’06)

249: Bill Doyle, of the largest group of 9/11 families, says that the official version is false

250: Joe Picurro, an ironworker with two 14-day shifts at Ground Zero sees bits of his throat when he throws up and coughs so hard he sees stars (Newhouse News, 9/5/06)

251: Ground zero hero Major Mike McCormack, who now has extreme respiratory sensitivity, was targeted by a swat team for helping expose EPA cover-up (Colorado Indymedia, 9/15/06)

252: All the dogs used to sniff out survivors have died of respiratory failure and other illnesses

253: “Khalid Sheikh Mohammed … told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a … point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.” (G W Bush, 9/15/’06)

254: Members of the Sept. 11 commission said on 10/2/’06 that they were told nothing about a White House meeting 7/’01 at which George J. Tenet warned Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, about an imminent Al Qaeda attack and failed to get her to act. (New York Times, 10/2/’06)

255: The U S Embassy in the fortified Bagdhad Green Zone is the largest U S embassy in the world

256: New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle was killed in an airplane that crashed into a 55-story Manhattan apartment building on 10/12/’06 and caused what a federal official described as “incredible” damage. The building did not collapse (CBC Television)

257: In October 2006 George Bush is rumored to have bought a 173,000 acre (70,000 hectare) ranch in the “chaco”, a semi-arid lowland in Paraguay’s north, an area that grants U.S. troops immunity from national and International Criminal Court (ICC) jurisdiction. (Prensa Latina)

War on Afghanistan/Iraq

258: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Woolsey, Bolton, Zakheim, Khalizad and others were calling for a military takeover of Iraq as early as Jan ’91.

259: Afghanistan stood for justice when it said it would need to see the evidence before turning over Osama bin Laden, which the US refused to provide (London Times, 9/22/’01 p. 1)

260: Army Gen. Wayne A. Downing presented to congress in a secret session, summer ’98, a plan to topple Sadaam Hussein (Washington Post, 12/27/’01)

261: Prior to Bush’s inauguration Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute for ICC jurisdiction in cases of genocide & war crimes, but 5/’02 Bush reversed it and cut military aid to ~36 countries refusing give US war crime immunity (Washington Post 6/22/’04)

262: Prior to 9/11 Clinton and Bush military plans against Afghanistan for oil (Various sources)

263: Treasury Dept memo in Jan ’01: Bush had pre-9/11 Iraq war plan (CNN)

264: Deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz called Army Gen. Eric K. Shinseki’s estimate of 100,000s of troops for Iraq, “wildly off the mark” (too high) (New York Times 2/28/’03)

265: “F*ck Saddam,” Bush said to 3 U.S. Senators, 3/02. “We’re taking him out.” (TIME, 3/23/’03)

266: Upper estimate for the Iraq invasion was $100 billion. Pentagon’s top budget officer, Dov Zakheim, refused on 2/3/’03 to set a price (CBS News 2/21/’03)

267: Journalist Judith Miller falsely reported metal tubes bound for Iraq to enrich nuclear material (New York Times, 9/7/’02)

268: Dr. David Kelly, UK’s leading bio-war expert, died of a slit wrist 7/17/’03 after being outed as the source for a BBC story on false WMD claims, but none of his own fingerprints were found on the ‘suicide’ knife

269: No WMDs have been found in Iraq, save expired chemical munitions the US and allies sold to Sadaam Hussein (War Made Easy by Norman Solomon)

270: There is still no evidence of any involvement of Iraq in the 9/11 attack (Newsweek 7/17/’04)

271: Poll found 70% Americans erroneously believe Saddam-9/11 link (CNN, White House)

272: Terrorism expert Loretta Napoleoni: US created the myth around Iraq insurgent Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and reality followed (UPI, 11/10/05)

273: The detainee who supplied the sole source of the Bush administration’s pre-war claims linking al-Qaida to Iraq was named as a subject of “extraordinary rendition” and did so in Egyptian custody. (Gurdian, 12/9/’05)

274: The US response to the attack works out to the government spending over one billion dollars of taxpayer’s money per al Qaeda member

275: George Bush, the great born-again Christian who consulted Jesus with his war plans, is presiding over the death of Christianity in Iraq. Christian refugees are fleeing to Syria and Lebanon in vast numbers. Their churches are being burned, and their priests are being murdered. Iraq’s one million Christians — who have survived on that land for 2,000 years — are in mortal peril. (Bill Gallagher, NiagraFallsReporter.com)

276: Afghanistan is once again the world’s principal opium producer (AP 8/16/’06)

Last updated on Oct 18, ’07


Chemical Engineer Mark Basile also Finds Thermite in the 9/11 WTC Dust




2 Responses to 9/11 Truth Movement and evidence for controlled demolitions

  1. Sheree Morreale says:

    Most what i read online is trash and copy paste but your blog is different. Bravo.

  2. Fernando Nokleby says:

    Greetings! Very good tip on this page!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s