9/11: Shattering the Spell of Mythical Realities

This article reviews critically important evidence that contradicts key aspects of the official version of 9/11.

Frozen in time, a scene of horror no movie could ever begin to replicate, Americans felt kicked in the guts, and should.

(LONDON) - Have we been lied to about 9/11? What kind of world do you want your children to grow up in? By the end of this article you will have the answer to your first question. What you do with the answer will determine your answer to the second question.

Learning the truth about 9/11 is crucially important for several reasons. Two wars were started because of it. Between a hundred thousand and a million Iraqi civilians (1) and thousands of soldiers have been killed because of the so-called war on terror.

The government used 9/11 to grab many of our freedoms. The Patriot Act has gutted the Bill of Rights, as well as intrusive new government bureaucracies like 'Homeland Security' performing airport strip searches.

This article reviews critically important evidence that contradicts key aspects of the official version of 9/11. This evidence has either been ignored by the mainstream media or smeared with the mind-numbingly absurd label of 'conspiracy theory'.

Before moving on, it's worth familiarising yourself with the official version of 9/11. In an article by journalist Paul Craig Roberts titled 'Conspiracy Theory' he writes, (2)

'Let's take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy.

….a handful of young Muslim Arabs who could not fly air planes, mainly Saudi Arabians who came neither from Iraq nor from Afghanistan, outwitted not only the CIA and the FBI, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies and all intelligence agencies of US allies including Israel's Mossad.

...they outwitted the National Security Council, the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times in the same hour on the same morning and air traffic control...'

The Collapse of World Trade Center 7

U.S. Navy photo by Mate Eric J. Tilford An aerial view of the collapsed World Trade Center 7 building following the attacks on 11 September 2001

Many people are not aware that a third skyscraper collapsed on 9/11 along with the Twin Towers. World Trade Center 7 (WTC7) was a modern steel-framed 47-story building. It was not hit by a plane, yet at around 5.20 pm it collapsed straight down in about 7-seconds. For the first 2.5 seconds (about 100 ft), the top section of the building was in 'free fall.' (3)

Free fall means when an object is falling without any resistance to it. So the top part of the building was falling at the same rate as if you dropped a brick off the side of the building.

The only way the top section of WTC7 could go into free fall is if all of the concrete and steel below it was removed virtually instantly. All of the massive 82 support columns were severed within a fraction of a second. This can only be achieved by controlled demolition. (4)

You may have seen examples of controlled demolition on TV or YouTube of vacant buildings that are removed. In controlled demolition the building is not blown up, but blown inwards. Explosives are expertly placed on key columns and ignited with precise timing to make the building collapse in on itself, thereby doing little, if any damage, to surrounding structures.

If you compare controlled demolition videos with the collapse of WTC7, you will see they are the same. WTC7 collapses straight down, in absolute free fall for just over 2-seconds, and very close to free fall for the next 4-5 seconds. It would take experts weeks to plan and carefully place explosives within WTC7 to make it collapse as it did. (5)

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is the government agency that was in charge (took over from FEMA in 2002) of investigating why WTC7 fell. In November 2008 NIST released it's final report on the collapse of WTC7. It's conclusion was that WTC7 was 'the first known instance of the total collapse of a [steel framed] tall building primarily due to fires.' (6)

It's worth noting that earlier, in August 2008, NIST had released it's findings in a Draft for Public Comment. In it they stated that the WTC7 collapse was never in free fall, but 'was approximately 40% longer than the computed free fall time and was consistent with physical principles.' (7)

In a technical briefing NIST allowed people to pose questions to NIST investigators. High School physics teacher David Chandler has been investigating 9/11 for many years. Chandler posed a question to the board asking how they could state the buildings initial collapse was 40% longer than free fall, when anyone can easily measure it's collapse from available video. (8)

The fact is that NIST amended this part of the final report that was released in November. They admitted that WTC7 was characterized by 'gravitational acceleration' for 2.25 seconds (free fall) . They also removed all reference to 'consistent with physical principles', (basic Newtonian Physics) because it is not. (9)

As NIST admits, fire has never caused the collapse of any steel framed high rise in the history of their construction. In addition, the fires in WTC7 were small compared to the blazing inferno's that some high-rises have experienced over the decades. As David Ray Griffin writes:

'In 1991, a huge fire in Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza lasted for 18 hours and gutted eight of the building's 38 floors. In Caracas in 2004, a fire in a 50-storey building raged for 17 hours, completely gutting the building's top 20 floors. In neither case, however, did the building, or even a single floor, collapse.' (10)

University of Copenhagen Chemistry Professor Dr. Niels Harrit has been researching 9/11 since 2007. Harrit says:

'There is no doubt that this building was taken down in a controlled demolition. I consider this to be a mainstream scientific conclusion. There's no way around this conclusion.'

It has never happened in history that a steel framed high riser collapsed due to fire. This is a very basic thing in science...science is based on observation and experience. And since there have been maybe 400-600 reported fires in steel-framed high rises and on no occasion has it collapsed due to fire, means the experiment has been done, the conclusion has been drawn. Steel-framed high rises simply do not collapse due to fire.' (11)

In addition to the scientific evidence, there was also a key eyewitness who was in WTC7 on 9/11. Barry Jennings was the Deputy Director of Emergency Services Department for the New York City Housing Authority.

Barry Jennings and Michael Hess (New York City's corporation counsel ) were trapped in WTC7 for around three to four hours on 9/11. (12)

Jennings and Hess reach WTC7 just after 9am. Jennings said when they reached the 23rd floor, the place was empty. There was hot coffee and half eaten sandwiches lying around. Jennings started making some phone calls and one person told him to get out immediately.

They start walking down the stairs to to the lobby.

'When we reach the 6th floor, the landing that we were standing on gave way. There was an explosion and the landing gave way. I was left there hanging. I had to climb back up and I had to walk back up to the 8th floor.

...I was trapped in there for several hours, I was trapped in there when both buildings (twin towers) came down...all this time I'm hearing all kinds of explosions, all this time I'm hearing explosions. And I'm thinking that maybe its the buses around me that were on fire, the cars are on fire. I don't see no, you know (Jennings moves his arms out) but I'm still hearing these explosions.

When they finally got to us and they took us down to what, what they called the lobby, because I asked them when we got down there, I said where are we? He said 'this was the lobby'. And I said, you gotta be kidding me. It was total ruins, total ruins. Now keep in mind, when I came in there the lobby had nice escalators, it was a huge lobby, and for me to see what I saw, it was unbelievable.

And the fire-fighter that took us down kept saying 'do not look down' and I kept saying why?, he said do not look down, and we were stepping over people, and you know you can feel when you're stepping over people

...when I got home I sat down in front of the TV...I couldn't stop watching it, and that's when I found out Building 7 came down. I was so surprised, I was saying to myself, 'Why did that building come down?' And I knew why it came down, because of the explosions. (13)

Besides stating that he heard and experienced explosions within WTC7, Jennings testimony caused another problem for the official version. He also says that he was stepping over people, which leads to the conclusion that they were dead. The government says that nobody died in the collapse of WTC7. *

Several other witnesses reported either seeing or hearing explosions just before WTC7 collapsed. (14)

The irrefutable fact is that you cannot reduce a 47-storey steel-framed high rise building into a pile of rubble in about 7 seconds unless explosives are used. No amount of denial, sophistry or attempts at misdirection can change this.

Removal of Forensic Evidence

In any bombing, investigators keep a large amount of the debris in order to carry out forensic studies to determine exactly what happened. But in the case of WTC7 and the Twin Towers, virtually all of the steel was immediately trucked away and shipped off to China and India for recycling.

An article from 'Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth' writes:

'The structural steel was extremely important evidence. Yet this evidence was quickly hauled away by up to 400 trucks per day and taken … where? Not to a secure place to await inspection, but to barges where it was readied for shipping. (15)

Vitally important evidence was destroyed of the most appalling terrorist attack (and one of the most important political events) in world history.

As the Journal Fire Engineering writes, (16)

For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China.

Architects, Engineers and Scientists

In the last few years hundreds of experts in engineering, building design, physics, chemistry and many more disciplines have stepped forward and stated that the government version is wrong.

Physics professor Steven Jones is one of these experts. Jones started investigating 9/11 after he watched a presentation in 2005. In November 2005 Jones published his first paper questioning the official version of the collapse of the three buildings, called, 'Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?' It was because of Jones continued investigation into 9/11 that Brigham Young University forced him into early retirement in 2006. (17)

In 2009 Jones and 8 other scientists published a peer-reviewed scientific paper in 'The Open Chemical Physics Journal.' (18) The scientists studied four different samples of WTC dust. The chain of evidence for the collection of the dust and who gave it to them is documented in the paper.

(* Barry Jennings died under unusual circumstances a few days before the final NIST report was published. His death has never been explained. See footnote 13)

The scientists observed red/gray chips in all four samples of WTC dust. The red/gray chips were analysed using a variety of devices. In their report the scientists state, 'The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.' (19)

Their conclusion is that the red portion of the chips is a modern version of thermite, called nano-thermite or super-thermite. One of the scientists, Niels Harrit, says nano-thermite 'can be used as an explosive or an incendiary for cutting steel structures'. (20)

Nano-thermite is extremely hard to make (especially circa 2001) and is created starting at the atomic level. It is almost exclusively created by western military laboratories.

The scientific paper, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' was published in February 2009 and circulated to many scientists and politicians through the world. As of this writing (April 2012) it's findings, or an alternative reason for nano-thermite to be found in the WTC dust, has not been published by any scientist in a peer reviewed paper.

People have asked if nano-thermite could be created spontaneously as the buildings collapsed, or if the red/gray chips are from the steel or primer paint used in the building. Jones states that they compared the chemical composition of the unreacted chips against the primer paint and steel. They are completely different. Besides, it is impossible for an explosive/pyrotechnic material as complex as nano-thermite to be created from particles of a falling building. As Niels Harrit states, they should never find nano-thermite in the WTC dust. (21)

The scientists also found large amounts of tiny, spherical, iron-rich microspheres in the WTC dust. The finding of microspheres is verified by two other independent studies of the WTC dust; by the RJ Lee Group (22) and the U.S. Geological Survey. Iron microspheres are a by-product of the thermitic reaction. The tiny droplets of melted metal become round as they move through the air.

A BBC program 'The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – The Third Tower' suggested that the iron-rich microspheres were produced from cutting tools used to break up the steel in the clean-up after 9/11. But one of the samples of WTC dust was collected about 10-minutes after the collapse of the second tower, long before the clean-up started. (23)

In addition, pools of molten metal was reported by fireman and other eye-witnesses in the basement rubble of the twin towers and WTC7. (24)

Dr. Keith Eaton toured Ground Zero and stated in The Structural Engineer,

‘They showed us many fascinating slides’ [Eaton] continued, ‘ranging from molten metal which was still red hot weeks after the event, to 4-inch thick steel plates sheared and bent in the disaster’ (25)

For six months after Sept. 11, the ground temperature varied between 600 degrees Fahrenheit and 1,500 degrees, sometimes higher. “In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel,” Fuchek said. (26)

The government has ignored these eyewitness statements because molten metal does not fit in with there explanation. It is impossible for office fires (or jet fuel) to produce anywhere near the heat necessary to melt steel. But thermite and nano-thermite can.

Richard Gage founded 'Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth' (AE9/11Truth) in 2006 after hearing a radio interview with author David Ray Griffin. The group's mission statement 'is to research, compile, and disseminate scientific evidence relative to the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers, calling for a truly open and independent investigation and supporting others in the pursuit of justice.'

The group now represents over 1600 architects and engineers who have independently reviewed the evidence for all three building collapses. They all conclude that explosives were used to cause their collapse. Below are two statements.

Kathy McGrade B.S. Metallurgical Engineering with 30 years of experience states:

The way I got into doing 9/11 research was when a friend asked me if [office] fires could melt steel...no, it can't, not an office fire. A blast furnace can melt steel because you are driving lots of oxygen into a closed furnace. In an office fire you cannot generate enough heat to melt steel.

...yet we have evidence of molten iron in the microspheres, in the rubble pile and the metal pouring out of the side of the tower. And the more and more I looked into it, the more I was horrified by what I saw.

...I believe there are three smoking guns, and one of them is the microspheres that were found in three different samples from three independent researchers. The R.J Lee Company, the USGS and Dr. Stephen Jones work, all three separately found these microspheres. They are perfectly round, you cannot get a perfectly round sphere of metal from the building tearing apart. The only way you can get that is by starting with a molten liquid. A liquid will create the perfectly round sphere as it solidifies. There's no other way you could get that. That's one of the smoking guns.

The other I think is David Chandlers work which is excellent, the 2.25 second free fall of building 7...then the third one is, it is very well explained in the article 'The missing Jolt.' (27)

Michael Donly is a structural engineer,

When news came that the towers had been hit by an air plane we put on the television and proceeded to watch...I never suspected that the towers were going to collapse; none of us in that room, none of the experienced engineers that I work with made a comment that 'wow, I think those towers are going to come down...none of us felt that that was going to happen. For months after that I felt that my engineering judgement was called into question, why didn't I realize that was going to happen.

About 2-years later I had a friend that asked me if it was possible for the twin towers to achieve near free-fall speed when they collapsed. And I thought about that, I have a physics background...that made me think and it led me into doing my own research into the FEMA report, the 9/11 Commission Report; finally the NIST report.

I went through those reports exhaustively; I wanted to know what happened. You know, my country was attacked, I'm a structural engineer and I want to know the facts. So I did my own research and quickly realized that you know, my judgement wasn't suspect, that the towers should not have collapsed.

...there were a lot of reasons we didn't think the towers were going to collapse. We weren’t alone. The chiefs of the FDNY (Fire Department of New York) sent there men into those buildings because they didn't suspect those buildings would collapse. We've never had a steel-framed skyscraper collapse in the United States, or internationally (due to fire).

...with regard to building 7...building 7 was not hit by an air plane, yet it came down later in the day, apparently due to small fires spread throughout the building, and fell into its own footprint, at near free-fall acceleration. This is the smoking gun of 9/11. (28)

The hundreds of engineers, scientists and other experts have all independently researched the collapse of the three towers and concluded that the official version is impossible. Decades of experience tells them that WTC7 could never collapse straight down in under 7-seconds due to scattered office fires.

They know these facts to such a certainty that they have risked their careers and reputations to inform us about it. They didn't do it only from a scientific and engineering point of fact, but also to help their country.

So what do we hear from the mainstream media? They try to write these courageous American's off as 'conspiracy theorists'. This label has been redefined to mean that the critic is delusional.

It's really appalling, but this is the degenerate point at which the mainstream media finds itself these days. Instead of a vigilant 'Fourth Estate' keeping us informed about government malfeasance, they work tirelessly in lock-step with the government in enforcing the official lie about 9/11. They omit facts that contradict it and try to silence all dissent with worthless name-calling. As Saman Mohammadi writes in his blog Truth Excavator,

The most dangerous and anti-democratic rhetorical tool of thought control is the blanket label of "conspiracy theory." This thought-killing label is repeated in the mainstream chorus...it is anti-reality, anti-truth, anti-debate and anti-democracy...

The only way the government could maintain their lie about 9/11 for over ten years is with the obsequious subservience of the mainstream media. They haven't been in the journalism business for a very long time; their business is the dissemination of government lies and propaganda.

Denial and Logical Fallacies
'We are addicted to our beliefs'
Michael Talbot

We all have a tendency to ignore or deny facts that challenge deeply held beliefs and world-views. We have a deep emotional connection to 9/11. To find out that the government has been lying about it can cause cognitive dissonance; we subconsciously suppress it.

But we all know where denial will lead us; more government lies to start more murderous wars in our name. And keeping us in a panicked state with claims about false terrorist threats in order to take more of our civil liberties.

Researcher David Chandler talks about how he had to go through a certain amount of conscience raising before he could grasp the gravity of the truth about 9/11. Niels Harrit also states that it took him about 2-weeks and watching the collapse of WTC7 many times before he could come to terms with what it meant.

Sometimes we are misdirected from the truth by deceptive arguments. A logical fallacy masquerading as an argument has arisen in recent years and goes something likes this. If the government is covering up that explosives caused the collapse of WTC7 then they must be in on it.

Governments cannot keep large secrets, there would always be whistle-blowers. So the official version must be right.

This is of course complete speculation. How many people in the government who might be in on it or how many whistle-blowers there should be has absolutely nothing to do with the fact of an explosive induced virtual free-fall collapse of WTC7.

Who did it and why?