WAS 9 - 11 AN INSIDE JOB?

Happy New Year Folks. May it be a happy and productive one for you.

----------

“I know many qualified engineers and scientists have said the WTC collapsed from explosives. In fact, if you look at the manner in which it fell, you have to give their conclusions credibility.”
Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of Treasury under Reagan.

“What I saw on September 11th was a perfectly executed act that could have happened only with the support of the Intelligence services.”
Andreas Von Buelow, former German Secretary of Defence.

Before I arrived in the US, the only major article I had read which challenged the official version of events of 11th September 2001 was written by Michael Meacher, the British MP and Environment Minister between 1997 and 2003. In the Guardian newspaper of 6th March 2003, Meacher questioned the fact that not one single fighter plane was scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes until after the 3rd plane had hit the Pentagon at 9.38. He pointed out that between September 2000 and June 2001 fighter aircraft were launched on 67 occasions to chase suspicious aircraft.

Meacher recorded the fact that the FBI turned down the request of US agents to search the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker, after it was discovered that he had radical Islamist ties. A month before 9-11, one agent wrote that Moussaoui might be planning to crash into the twin towers. Meacher also quoted a whistle blowing FBI agent, Robert Wright, who revealed that the FBI had not wanted any arrests. In November 2001, the US airforce had apparently had Al-Qaeda and Taleban leaders in its sights at least 10 times in a 6 week period but had been unable to secure permission from on high to attack.

Shortly after I arrived in Tucson, I saw an advert in one of the local papers for a screening of a film called ‘September 11th Revisited - Were explosives used to bring down the buildings?’ (http://www.911revisited.com/) I went to see it and discovered that, far from being a fanciful conspiracy theory, it was a serious and credible piece of work. I found out that there is a huge body of work out there which falls within the ambit of the 9-11 truth movement. There are many scholars, politicians and intellectuals who believe that the US administration was complicit in the 9-11 attacks. The following link:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html contains the names, biographies and brief statements of 100 such professors. You can see straight away that these individuals are well respected, often brilliant people, who have reached the top of their fields of study. You may have heard of some of them. Not even the most militant defenders of the official line can dismiss this array of talent as crackpot conspiracy theorists.

There are scores of forceful arguments made by the 9-11 truth movement which cast serious doubt on the US government’s explanation of the events of 9 – 11. Here are some of the principal points:

1:
Office fires burn at temperatures of 600 – 800 F. Jet fuel is an ordinary hydrocarbon; its maximum burning temperature is 1200F. Steel melts at 2700F. Neither jet fuel nor the burning contents of the buildings could have caused the towers’ steel structures to melt and then fall.

2:
No steel framed building before or since 9-11 has ever collapsed due to fire. The Project manager of the World Trade Centre (WTC), Frank DeMartini, has confirmed that the buildings were designed to withstand the impact of planes hitting them.

3:
The collapse of the South Tower in 10 seconds and the North in 9 is even faster than free fall with only air resistance. Even if the steel had melted the buildings would have displayed completely different behaviour, in the manner of some asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow.

4:
Building 7, a 47 –storey skyscraper which was part of the WTC complex, but was not struck by a plane, collapsed symmetrically, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition, in 6.5 seconds, at 5.20 p.m. on September 11th. This event was, incredibly, omitted from the 9-11 Commission Report. It turns out to have been occupied by the Intelligence services.

5:
'Redundant’ welded steel buildings like the Twin Towers, built with more than 100,000 tons of steel, are not even capable of ‘pancake collapse’ which normally only occurs with concrete structures of ‘lift slab’ construction.

6:
The rubble from the Twin Towers’ collapse was carted away and the steel immediately sold and shipped overseas without examination.

7:
Prior to the attacks, enormous profits were made by insiders on the plummeting stock prices of United and American airlines. Why did the head of AB Brown Trust, where $5 million of those stock winnings were made, quietly resign on 9-11?

8:
The owner of the WTC, Larry Silverstein, insured the buildings against destruction by terrorist attacks for billions of dollars, weeks before 9 – 11.

9:
Multiple air – defence drills were planned for the morning of 9 – 11. These exercises left only 2 fighter jets available to protect the entire northeastern United States.

10:
The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757. No wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail. The Pentagon’s own videotape does not show a 757 hitting the building, even though, at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 71-foot Pentagon is high.

11:
The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory – flying at high speed barely above ground level – physically impossible; and if it had come in at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater.

12:
If Flight 93 had come down as advertised, then there would have been a debris field of about a city block in size. In fact, the debris was distributed over an area of about 8 square miles, explainable if the plane had been shot down in the air but not if it had crashed as required by the government’s official scenario. All that was visible at the crash site was a smoking hole in the ground.

13:
In his testimony to the 9 – 11 Commission, Transportation Secretary, Norman Mineta, stated that whilst in an underground bunker at the White House, he saw Vice-President, Dick Cheney, castigate an officer who, as a plane drew ever closer to the Pentagon, asked ‘Do the orders still stand?’

14:
Audio tapes of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9 – 11 were intentionally destroyed.

15:
William Rodriguez, the senior custodian in the North Tower, and the last man to leave the building, has reported massive explosions in the sub basements, prior to the airplane’s impact. This has now been corroborated in a study which shows that there was seismic activity some 14 to 17 seconds prior to the airplanes impacts.

16:
George Bush’s brother, Marvin P Bush, was a principal of Securacom, the company in charge of security at the WTC. The buildings were evacuated on several occasions in the weeks prior to 9 – 11.

It seems to me that the debate around conspiracy theories has long been skewed. Why are people who have the audacity to suggest that a state or government is behind a shocking event usually dismissed as a paranoid conspiracy theorists? As Scholars for 9 – 11 Truth (http://st911.org/ http://st911.org/petition/) have pointed out, the official line is no more or less a conspiracy theory than any alternative version of events.

Here is a link for an excellent fictional piece entitled ‘Confessions of a 9-11 hit man.’

http://www.rense.com/general73/confess.htm