Time for the truth about 9/11

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
Arthur Schopenhauer

The radical Bush Doctrine of foreign policy has its underpinnings in the official story of 9/11. The administration used our fear of terrorism to sway public opinion and justify its actions. We are slowly awakening to how the Bush administration manipulated our support for its preemptive invasion of Iraq, but most are still asleep.

According to a survey done by Stars and Stripes, 85% of our troops believe they are in Iraq because of Saddam Hussein’s involvement in the attacks of 9/11/01.

Much of the public believes the report of the 9/11 Commission provided a correct account of the events of that day. These beliefs are based on a misunderstanding of the facts.

Saddam Hussein was not connected to the 9/11 attacks, and the 9/11 Commission’s report is full of omissions and distortions. One of the largest is that it did not mention Building 7. This building was not hit by an aircraft, but it crumbled just the same. Evidence shows that Building 7 was demolished by pre-positioned explosives.

The Presidential 9/11 Commission report was more political exculpation than documentation of truth. It was subtitled “Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” They dismissed anything not fitting into that preordained paradigm. There was no mention of building 7 or the anthrax attacks.

The reason Building 7 is not mentioned by the Commission is that it’s hard to explain how a terrorist attack could have included pre-positioned explosives that brought down a 47 story concrete and steel building.

Dr. Steven Jones, a physics professor from Brigham Young University questions the official explanation of what happened at the World Trade Center. He is a member of a group of academics called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, calling for a fuller investigation of the collapse of the world trade center buildings.
911TrueStory.com

The official government story is a conspiracy theory, namely that 19 hijackers conspired, under the guidance of a man in a cave, to defeat the most sophisticated air defense system in the world.

The very day after 9/11, the media told us that the plot had been hatched by Osama bin Laden, and soon the FBI showed us photos of the 19 hijackers.

Several weeks later, many were puzzled by the BBC report of the apparently fireproof passport of one of the hijackers, found on a sidewalk several blocks from the Twin Towers. Some wondered whether the document had been planted after the BBC reported at least four of the nineteen hijackers had turned up alive and well in Saudi Arabia.

A month later, the anthrax panic paralyzed Postal operations. That was October, 2001, when the Bush administration was loudly pounding the war drums and trying to pass Patriot Act 1.

The BBC reported Dick Cheney’s comments - there “could be a connection between the anthrax cases and bin Laden’s terror network”. It seemed plausible at that time, and fueled the argument for our invasions.

Then, the FBI disclosed that Postal workers were killed by weaponized anthrax likely developed by the Army, or a scientist who worked at Fort Detrick. Many wondered how bin Laden got his hands on that. According to the Washington Post, the trail led the FBI to Steven Hatfill, a scientist with ties to our bio-weapons programs, and a popular seminar leader for the Defense Intelligence Agency. Remarkably, there were no arrests.

WTC 7’s destruction was broadcast by CBS. Dan Rather, uncensored live on 9/11, said it had the appearance of “A building deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite”. Real time videos and reports of eyewitness testimony from reporters and fire fighters have surfaced, demonstrating that a controlled demolition took place. These videos and testimony are available at
911TrueStory.com

Physical evidence including searing sub-basement temperatures and sulfur from cutting charges, shows explosives were used to cut through the core support columns below ground level.

The government’s own investigators admit they have no reasonable explanation for what happened to WTC 7. Alas, they did not consider controlled demolition.

Regarding WTC7, the FEMA report states "Prior to September 11, 2001, there was little, if any, record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings."

If you dropped a steel beam from the top of the 47 story Building 7, it would take about 6 seconds to hit the ground. WTC7 actually hit the ground in about 7 seconds, at nearly free fall speed. If each collapsing floor hit the floor below and paused for only 1/2 second, the time to crumble into a pile only 2 stories high would have been over 20 seconds. WTC7 had multiple steel core and perimeter support columns. In order for it to be brought down into its own tight footprint, all the core and perimeter columns would have to be broken at essentially the same time. The only way this can happen is through controlled demolition, using pre-positioned explosives. If WTC7 was brought down by explosives, what happened to the Twin Towers?

In a gross misrepresentatio n, the 9/11 Commission explained their version of the "pancake theory" collapse: The cores of the Twin Towers were hollow, comprised only of stairwells and elevator shafts. In truth, each of the Twin Towers contained dozens of solid central steel support columns.

The Commission’s report also failed to inform us of the contents of a video, broadcast in the Arab world on 9/16/01, in which Osama bin Laden says “I stress that I have not carried out this act”. Again, on 9/28/01, bin Laden stated “I had no knowledge of these attacks. There exists a government within the government of the United States. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks.”

The Bush administration urged our media not to broadcast bin Laden’s words, arguing they might contain secret signals to Al Qaeda cells within the U.S. But suddenly, in December 2001 the administration urged our media to broadcast words from a video tape fortuitously discovered by our military in Afghanistan.

This is the video in which bin Laden supposedly confesses to organizing the 9/11 attacks. Many doubted that this video released by the Pentagon actually showed Osama bin Laden, as a side by side examination of the image of the fellow in this tape clearly shows he does not look like the bin Laden seen in numerous other tapes. Videos of bin Laden before and after December 2001 had been broadcast on Al Jazeera. In those tapes, the ratio of the distance from tip-of-nose to ear lobe, and from nose-length to nose width is very different from the Pentagon tape’s bin Laden.

There is a widespread cultural taboo against noticing the inadequacy of our government’s explanations. This is because the implications are too horrific for most to consider.

In March 2003, Dick Cheney summarized the myth used to justify the Bush Doctrine: “We saw on 9/11 nineteen men hijack aircraft with airline tickets and box cutters kill more than 3,000 Americans in a couple of hours.”

Once the facts are widely known, future generations may point to Cheney’s statement as the Big Lie of our time. It fooled our citizens into supporting actions they otherwise would have opposed.

Hitler was very good at manipulating the citizens of Germany. In some ways, he tricked them into war. Hitler said that people are unable to believe their government could tell them a Big Lie. This is how the government can fool the people.

But the lie must be very, very big. So big, that it seems impossible. Most people are unable to believe the official story about 9/11 is a lie. People are unable to believe that our government could be complicit with a plan that harmed any Americans. They may think it’s just a coincidence that the events of 9/11 advanced the administration’s agenda.

If the public discovers the 9/11 Big Lie, the political ramifications could be more earth shaking than the collapsing towers. The time is now for a truly independent look at the evidence. It’s time for a special prosecutor.

---------------- ---------------- ---------------- -----

REFERENCES -

(1) http:// www.estripes.com /article.aspsect ion=104& article=35385

"85 percent believe a major reason they were sent into war was “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the Sept. 11 attacks.”

(2) http:// news.bbc.co.uk/ 1/hi/world/ americas/ 1546927.stm

(3) http:// news.bbc.co.uk/ 1/hi/world/ middle_east/ 1559151.stm

(4) http:// news.bbc.co.uk/ 1/hi/world/ americas/ 1596675.stm

(5) http:// www.washingtonpo st.com/wp-dyn/ articles/A58250- 2004Jul17.html

(6) http:// www.washingtonpo st.com/ac2/wp- dyn/A49717- 2003Sep9? language=printer

http:// www.guardian.co. uk/anthrax/ story/ 0,1520,653082,00 .html

(7) P. 541 “The interior core of the buildings was a hollow steel shaft, in which elevators and stairwells were grouped.”

http:// a257.g.akamaitec h.net/7/257/ 2422/ 22jul20041130/ www.gpoaccess.go v/911/pdf/
notes.pdf

(8) “While the exterior provided protection against the winds,
the interior served as the main support for the building. The internal columns formed a core that took care of the weight.”

http:// www.unc.edu/ courses/ 2001fall/plan/ 006e/001/ engineering/ index.html

(9) Vivisimo search engine index of 9/11 Commission’s Report at
http:// demos.vivisimo.c om/projects/911- demo

(10) http:// www.911truestory .com

(11)
http:// graphics8.nytime s.com/packages/ html/nyregion/ 20050812_WTC_GRA PHIC/ met_WTC_historie s_full_01.html

and

http:// www.911truth.org /article.php? story=2006011810 4223192

(12) BYU Physics Professor, Dr. Steven Jones:

http:// www.physics.byu. edu/research/ energy/ htm7.html

(13) The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse [“official theory”] remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/debris- damage-caused collapse] has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue. (FEMA, 2002, chapter 5.)

http:// www.fema.gov/ pdf/library/ fema403_ch5.pdf

(14) http:// www.fema.gov/ pdf/library/ fema403_ch5.pdf

(15) Judy Wood, Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University. The Case for Controlled Demolition, paper at
http:// janedoe0911.trip od.com/ BilliardBalls.ht ml

Analysis done for WTC1. A similar argument applies to WTC7.

(16) http:// www.mtholyoke.ed u/acad/intrel/ bush/ cheneymeetthepre ss.htm

(17) Daily Ummat, Pakistani newspaper, 11/28/01.