9/11 - Key Issue of our Time
9/11: More than meets the eye
Discussion of the very real doubts over the World Trade Center attacks was conspicuously absent from the US presidential race. But America's international image will always be tainted as long as the uncertainty remains
Sunday 09 November 2008, The Journal Issue 13
Every so often attention is called anew to the doubts surrounding the true character of the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Recently, the report of the collapse of Building 7 represented such an occasion. Any close student of 9/11 is aware of the many serious discrepancies between the official version of what took place and the actual happenings on that fateful day in 2001. David Ray Griffin and others have analyzed and assessed these discrepancies in such an objective and compelling fashion that only wilful ignorance can maintain that the 9/11 narrative should be treated as a closed book, and that the public should move on to address the problems of the day.
To accept such a view is to acquiesce in what can be described at best as governmental evasiveness and irresponsibility, a resolve to leave the discrepancies unexplained. It is not paranoid under such circumstances to assume that the established elites of the American governmental structure have something to hide, and much to explain. What has not been established by the “9/11 Truth Movement” is a convincing counter-narrative – that is, an alternate version of the events that clears up to what degree, if at all, the attacks resulted from incompetence, deliberate inaction, and outright complicity.
9/11 truth and other social taboos
Several days ago I reported on the the Papal rehabilitation of Bishop Richard Williamson.
At that time I believed that the development was a positive one, however subsequent denunciations from Pope Benedict as well as apologies from three other traditionalist Bishops has changed this assessment.
Mainstream news stories reporting on the Bishop's views now simplistically conflate 9/11 truth with Holocaust denial and this cannot be a good thing.
The editorial position of this website is as follows: while I abhor censorship and affirm the basic human right of every citizen to ask difficult questions on any issue, I don't support Holocaust revisionism and I see no valid reason why questions regarding 9/11 should ever be paired with questioning the Holocaust. These are separate issues which have no similarities other than that they are "taboo" in certain circles.
To illustate how absurd and outrageous it is to use this "taboo" quality as a point of similarity, imagine if articles appeared comparing 9/11 truthers with pedophiles or terrorists.
The use of "taboo" labels by the corporatist media is a conscious, deliberate and malicious strategy to stifle dissent.
However, the way though is not to embrace the label but to deconstruct the malicious strategy of those who would silence us.
Terrifying slideshow on major U.K. news website
"Art Exhibit" visualises nuclear terrorism and fascist world government
The Murdoch owned telegraph.co.uk is featuring a fictional slideshow presentation in the arts and culture section which graphically depicts a series of nuclear terror attacks in the the UK, Canada, US and Mexico, leading to the creation of a Union of North America under a patently fascist New World Order.
The final images in part two of the slideshow depict a flag with a Nazi eagle and the phrase Novos Ordo Seculorum, and the last image is of a UK policeman with the same fascist symbol on his helmet.
Part three is yet to come.
Paul Watson of Prison Planet has noted the similarity between the eagle in the slideshow and the Nazi eagle:
Sydney 9/11 Truth Street Action - 11 December 2008
I am trying to clear a back log of video footage. The following is from 11 December 2009 when the Sydney 9/11 Truth Action group were outside Parliament house, Sydney.
More coming soon (:
Bishop and 9/11 Truther Richard Williamson reinstated by Pope
Richard Williamson and three other ex-communicated traditionalist bishops, have been officially rehabilitated by the Pope, sparking outrage among Jewish lobby groups.
The fact that Bishop Richardson has gone on record quesioning the official view of 9/11 is overshadowed by his highly controversial views on the Holocaust which are now the subject of heated controversy in the media.
The video presented below is from a sermon where the Bishop urges his congregation to question all aspects of the official 9/11 story, and to be critical of the evolving police state and erosion of civil liberites in many western countries.
9/11 eye witness Anthony Cipriano speaks out
Anthony Cipriano was working at Madison Square Garden on the morning of september 11th 2001. He witnessed the first plane fly over his head and hit tower 1. Several weeks later he worked clean up near ground zero. He recalls his thoughts about the steam that was rising from the pile in mid October the plight of the first responders and the need for a new investigation into 9/11.
9/11 suspects declare guilt at Gitmo war court
By BEN FOX
GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (AP) Two alleged orchestrators of the 2001 attacks on America casually declared their guilt on Monday in a messy and perhaps final session of the Guantanamo war crimes court. This week's military hearings could be the last at Guantanamo as President-elect Barack Obama has said he would close the offshore prison and many expect him to suspend the military tribunals and order new trials in the U.S.
Ramzi Binalshibh and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed architect of the terrorist attacks, were unapologetic about their roles during a series of outbursts as translators struggled to keep up and the judge repeatedly sought to regain control.
"We did what we did; we're proud of Sept. 11," announced Binalshibh, who has said he wants to plead guilty to charges that could put him to death. The judge must first determine if he is mentally competent to stand trial.
Mohammed shrugged off the potential death sentence for the murder of nearly 3,000 people in the Sept. 11 attacks.
"We don't care about capital punishment," said Mohammed, whose thick gray beard flows to the top of his white prison jumpsuit. "We are doing jihad for the cause of God."
Mohammed, representing himself, insisted that a uniformed lawyer assigned to assist him be removed from his defense table, saying he represents the "people who tortured me."
In another diatribe over secrecy, the acknowledged terrorist ridiculed the government's position that national security had to be protected. "They want to hide their black sites, their torture techniques," he said.
Told by the judge to limit his remarks to a legal issue being discussed at that moment, Mohammed bristled: "This is terrorism, not court. You don't give me the opportunity to talk."
Mohammed has openly sought to become a martyr at the hands of the Americans. He threw his death-penalty trial into disarray in December when he declared that he would confess to masterminding the Sept. 11 attacks. In March 2007, he told a military panel that he played a central role in about 30 other terrorist plots around the world.
Separately, a judge held pretrial hearings for Omar Khadr, who was 15 when he allegedly killed a U.S. soldier, Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer of Albuquerque, New Mexico, with a grenade during a battle in Afghanistan in 2002.
Lawyers for the Toronto, Canada native want to exclude statements they say Khadr made through torture and coercion. Prosecution witnesses denied their allegation. One, identified only as "interrogator 11," characterized some sessions as "lighthearted," and testified that "he always came in smiling and very willing to talk to us."
In both cases, judges denied defense requests to make the Pentagon arraign the men all over again after withdrawing and refiling charges in about 20 cases, a step the Pentagon described as merely procedural.
The judge in the Sept. 11 case, Army Col. Stephen Henley, acknowledged doubts about the future of the hearings, saying one legal matter could be addressed "at later sessions, if later sessions are scheduled."
Lawyers and representatives of human rights groups who observed the hearings believe Obama will suspend the military commission system created by Congress and President George W. Bush in 2006 to prosecute dozens of men held at Guantanamo.
Obama's nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder, in his confirmation hearing, said the commissions lack sufficient legal protections for the defendants, and said they could be tried in the United States.
"The military commissions should be at the very least suspended immediately," said Gabor Rona, observing as the international legal director of New York-based Human Rights First. "I'm certainly optimistic and hopeful that it will happen as one of the first orders of business."
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2009
TV show portrays 9/11 truthers as dope smoking terrorists
Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, January 19, 2009
A new FBI drama currently showing on A&E portrays 9/11 truthers as dope smoking terrorists in its pilot episode, a ploy made all the more interesting for the fact that A&E is part-owned by Hearst Corporation, which has also attempted to debunk 9/11 truth with savage hit pieces via its subsidiaries The History Channel and Popular Mechanics.
The plot of the show, which stars Patrick Swayze, centers around an attempt to infiltrate a group who are suspected of smuggling Rocket Propelled Grenade launchers into Iraq. In one scene, a member of the group talks with an FBI agent who is operating undercover.
“Are you a truther or a sheep?” the man asks the FBI agent.
He continues, “9/11 was a false flag operation man, wake up, a self-inflicted wound to control the masses, you know there was no planes, all of them were holograms and CGI.”
The man then takes a drag on a marijuana spliff and gives the FBI agent a crazed look.
The insertion of the 9/11 truther caveat in the episode serves no purpose except seemingly to convince the viewer that the man is unstable and dangerous. The mention of CGI and holograms, an obsessive tenet of an extreme fringe that attempted to hijack the 9/11 truth movement a few years ago, also serves only to detract more credibility from the subject.
Daniel Sunjata puts 9/11 truth message into TV show
In episode 2 of the fifth season of the popular TV show "Rescue Me", the character played by Daniel Sunjata presents the case for 9/11 as an inside job to a French documentary film maker. His diatribe, which goes for several minutes and includes many of the major planks of the 9/11 truth movement, ends with the question "are you single?" thus putting the whole scene into the context of "humour" and defusing some of the tension raised by the preceding monologue. Nevertheless the episode has generated some attention on the blogosphere.
"9/11? Inside job. Plain and simple. And all you gotta do is connect the dots. ... I am talking about a massive neoconservative government effort, been in the works 20 years. Ever heard of PNAC? Project for a New American Century? According to them, the end goal of their effort is American global domination. Full spectrum dominance, they call it. Now, first question that pops into my mind is: How do you pull that off in this day and age?"
EXCERPT FROM INTERVIEW:
DANIEL SUNJATA: I'm really gratified that they allowed that to be focused through my character, because I happen to subscribe to a lot of those theories and beliefs that 9/11 was an inside job.
TVB: You're serious?
DANIEL SUNJATA: Oh, absolutely, 100 percent, yeah.
PETER TOLAN (show co-creator): That's part of the reason why we wrote it, is because Danny actually has -- is actually well-read on -- he's done a lot of research on this and has told us about it. And, you know, look, obviously not all of us buy in. But we went, wow, that's interesting, and he's passionate about it. Let's use that.
DANIEL SUNJATA: I mean, if it weren't for the structural constraint of consicion and speaking in a sound-bite format, you know, there are some very, very well-thought-out ideas and theories that seem to me to make a lot more sense than the ones that are popularly espoused. And anyway, the fact that they've allowed that conversation to be had within the world of RESCUE ME, I think, is admirable and should be applauded.
Building 7 collapse foreknowledge - what does it really tell us?
After seven years, the sudden collapse of WTC Building 7 on the afternoon of September 11 2001 remains the most controversial "smoking gun" of the 9/11 truth movement. The appearance of yet another another video indicating foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 drives another nail in the coffin of the official NIST finding that the collapse was an essentially random event.
Yet there is one possible explanation for the foreknowledge which has so far been neglected. We have the testimony of Barry Jennings that explosions were taking place in WTC7 in the morning, well before the towers had collapsed. These explosions early in the day may have resulted in the building becoming "unstable" - and thus would have fed reports such as the above that rescue workers were concerned the building might eventually come down. Thus the supposed evidence of foreknowledge may have an innocent explanation, and we should be cautious about pointing the finger at those who may have in good faith made statements about the building's impending collapse.
It may be that WTC7 was meant to come down just after the collapses of the towers while shrouded in the dust cloud. If it had happened this way we would never have seen the collapse at all.
The primary evidence for the explosive demolition of the building is the actual collapse footage, which proves that the building collapsed in freefall. This is all we really need. Evidence of foreknowledge, while interesting, is less powerful than applying established laws of physics to verifiable live data. We really need no more evidence than this.
Deaths from terrorism have skyrocketed since 9/11
by Eric Brewer
Saturday January 10, 2009
One of the many sad ironies of the Bush era that is rapidly and mercifully drawing to a close is that after the president created a “central front in the war on terror” by invading Iraq, the amount of “terrorism” in the world skyrocketed. I call it the Bush Bubble:
At first, the administration seemed a little embarrassed by this result, and it engaged in various attempts, which I’ve documented over the years and summarized here, at disguising the increase. Interestingly, the public face for many of those shenanigans was John Brennan, formerly head of the National Counterterrorism Center and currently Obama’s transition intelligence adviser and pick for the newly created position of deputy national security adviser for counterterrorism.
G.W. Bush: I Authorized Torture Of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
11 Jan 2009
In an interview with Brit Hume that aired today on Fox News Sunday, President Bush admitted that he personally authorized the torture of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He said he personally asked “what tools” were available to use on him, and sought legal approval for waterboarding him:
BUSH: One such person who gave us information was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. … And I’m in the Oval Office and I am told that we have captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the professionals believe he has information necessary to secure the country. So I ask what tools are available for us to find information from him and they gave me a list of tools, and I said are these tools deemed to be legal? And so we got legal opinions before any decision was made.
Bush staunchly defended the program, saying it saved American lives — despite interrogators’ claims to the contrary. He waved away the debate over torture by saying dismissively, “Look, I understand why people can get carried away on this issue.”
Last year, Bush admitted that he was “aware” that his national security team met to discuss KSM’s interrogation, and that he approved of the meeting. His admission today suggests Bush had a far more direct role in developing the specific torture program, which included waterboarding, a freezing cell, and long periods of standing and stress positions (all of which have long been considered torture).
What’s more, a former Pentagon intelligence analyst told Vanity Fair that “K.S.M. produced no actionable intelligence“; another former CIA official, who read all the reports from KSM’s interrogation, said, “90 percent of it was total f*cking bullsh*t.”
Please donate to www.TruthAction.org
www.TruthAction.org needs your help! The founder of the "Eleventh Day of Every Month" Campaign is without funds to maintain the "International Network" that has grown from eleventh day activism world wide.
If you think of TruthAction as a garden that encourages the growth of the 9/11 Truth Movement and demonstrates it's achievements on it's front page every month, then please realize that garden cannot grow without help.
I will be donating $500 AUD(direct) to get this fundraising drive going and I hope others may find a few dollars to help as well!
You may or may not be aware that Cosmos left his job well over a year ago to work full time for 9/11 Truth and he has been running on empty for many months now! So now is the time to dig deep, please! Cosmos was on of the first 9/11 Truth Activist and has been devoted to this cause for 5 plus years.....he is the "real deal"!
To make a payment please go to www.paypal.com and select firstname.lastname@example.org as the account you wish to pay into or go to www.truthaction.org and simply click on the donate button on the left of the screen...
Truth Action Australia
Newsweek 9/11 puff piece: Remains of the Day
Nineteen hijackers died on 9/11. What should be done with what's left of them?
Eve Conant, NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Jan 12, 2009
In the grim, sleepless months of excavation after the September 11 attacks, forensic pathologists in New York City worked day and night to identify the dead. They didn't have much to go on. The collapsed World Trade Center towers had burned at temperatures reaching 2,000 degrees, incinerating those trapped inside. Many of the bodies of the passengers aboard the two airplanes that struck the buildings were consumed by burning jet fuel, leaving only traces of DNA, much of it so damaged that it was impossible to read. Few bodies were found intact. Most of the human remains culled from the vast wreckage at Ground Zero were little more than tiny fragments of charred tissue and bone. The volume was overwhelming. Robert Shaler, who headed the city's Department of Forensic Biology and was a leader of the identification effort, worried his lab would be paralyzed if it tried to identify every piece. At first, they decided they would only attempt to test samples that were "the size of a thumb or larger," he says. But when they saw how small many of the fragments were, they changed their minds. "If we were really going to make an honest effort," Shaler says, "we had to do everything that came along."
Shaler and his colleagues at the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner gave weekly updates to family members of the victims, reporting how many of the dead had been identified and reassuring them that the city was doing everything to identify their loved ones. But the families weren't only concerned with their own dead. In meeting after meeting, Shaler says, relatives would ask about the hijackers. Had the scientists identified any of their remains?
"They did not want the terrorists mixed in with their loved ones," says Shaler. The families said, "These people were criminals and did not deserve to be with them." The families asked for the remains of the hijackers to be separated out and kept someplace else. Shaler shared their frustration. Now 66, his hair and beard a grandfatherly white, Shaler says he could not always separate his duties a scientist from his own emotions: a little more than a year into the investigation, he suffered a heart attack. At the early meetings, he told the families he didn't think it would be possible to sort out the remains; by the spring of 2002, Shaler and his staff of 105 scientists had yet to identify any of the New York hijackers. "I thought we'd never find remains from anyone on the planes," he says. But he promised to try.
Holocaust Denied: The lying silence of those who know
by John Pilger
8 January 2009
"When the truth is replaced by silence," the Soviet dissident Yevgeny Yevtushenko said, "the silence is a lie." It may appear the silence is broken on Gaza. The cocoons of murdered children, wrapped in green, together with boxes containing their dismembered parents and the cries of grief and rage of everyone in that death camp by the sea, can be viewed on al-Jazeera and YouTube, even glimpsed on the BBC. But Russia's incorrigible poet was not referring to the ephemeral we call news; he was asking why those who knew the why never spoke it and so denied it. Among the Anglo-American intelligentsia, this is especially striking. It is they who hold the keys to the great storehouses of knowledge: the historiographies and archives that lead us to the why.
They know that the horror now raining on Gaza has little to do with Hamas or, absurdly, "Israel's right to exist." They know the opposite to be true: that Palestine's right to exist was canceled 61 years ago and the expulsion and, if necessary, extinction of the indigenous people was planned and executed by the founders of Israel. They know, for example, that the infamous "Plan D" resulted in the murderous depopulation of 369 Palestinian towns and villages by the Haganah (Jewish army) and that massacre upon massacre of Palestinian civilians in such places as Deir Yassin, al-Dawayima, Eilaboun, Jish, Ramle and Lydda are referred to in official records as "ethnic cleansing." Arriving at a scene of this carnage, David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, was asked by a general, Yigal Allon, "What shall we do with the Arabs?" Ben-Gurion, reported the Israeli historian Benny Morris, "made a dismissive, energetic gesture with his hand and said, ‘Expel them'. The order to expel an entire population "without attention to age" was signed by Yitzhak Rabin, a future prime minister promoted by the world's most efficient propaganda as a peacemaker. The terrible irony of this was addressed only in passing, such as when the Mapan Party co-leader Meir Ya'ari noted "how easily" Israel's leaders spoke of how it was "possible and permissible to take women, children and old men and to fill the roads with them because such is the imperative of strategy … who remembers who used this means against our people during the [Second World] war … we are appalled."
Every subsequent "war" Israel has waged has had the same objective: the expulsion of the native people and the theft of more and more land. The lie of David and Goliath, of perennial victim, reached its apogee in 1967 when the propaganda became a righteous fury that claimed the Arab states had struck first. Since then, mostly Jewish truth-tellers such as Avi Schlaim, Noam Chomsky, the late Tanya Reinhart, Neve Gordon, Tom Segev, Yuri Avnery, Ilan Pappe and Norman Finklestein have dispatched this and other myths and revealed a state shorn of the humane traditions of Judaism, whose unrelenting militarism is the sum of an expansionist, lawless and racist ideology called zionism. "It seems," wrote the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe on 2 January, "that even the most horrendous crimes, such as the genocide in Gaza, are treated as desperate events, unconnected to anything that happened in the past and not associated with any ideology or system … Very much as the apartheid ideology explained the oppressive policies of the South African government, this ideology – in its most consensual and simplistic variety – has allowed all the Israeli governments in the past and the present to dehumanize the Palestinians wherever they are and strive to destroy them. The means altered from period to period, from location to location, as did the narrative covering up these atrocities. But there is a clear pattern [of genocide]."
In Gaza, the enforced starvation and denial of humanitarian aid, the piracy of life-giving resources such as fuel and water, the denial of medicines and treatment, the systematic destruction of infrastructure and the killing and maiming of the civilian population, 50 per cent of whom are children, meet the international standard of the Genocide Convention. "Is it an irresponsible overstatement," asked Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and international law authority at Princeton University, "to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not."
In describing a "holocaust-in-the making," Falk was alluding to the Nazis' establishment of Jewish ghettos in Poland. For one month in 1943, the captive Polish Jews led by Mordechaj Anielewiz fought off the German army and the SS, but their resistance was finally crushed and the Nazis exacted their final revenge. Falk is also a Jew. Today's holocaust-in-the-making, which began with Ben-Gurion's Plan D, is in its final stages. The difference today is that it is a joint US-Israeli project. The F-16 jet fighters, the 250-pound "smart" GBU-39 bombs supplied on the eve of the attack on Gaza, having been approved by a Congress dominated by the Democratic Party, plus the annual $2.4 billion in war-making "aid," give Washington de facto control. It beggars belief that President-elect Obama was not informed. Outspoken on Russia's war in Georgia and the terrorism in Mumbai, Obama's silence on Palestine marks his approval, which is to be expected, given his obsequiousness to the Tel Aviv regime and its lobbyists during the presidential campaign and his appointment of Zionists as his secretary of state, chief of staff and principal Middle East advisers. When Aretha Franklin sings "Think," her wonderful 1960s anthem to freedom, at Obama's inauguration on 21 January, I trust someone with the brave heart of Muntadar al-Zaidi, the shoe-thrower, will shout: "Gaza!"
The asymmetry of conquest and terror is clear. Plan D is now "Operation Cast Lead," which is the unfinished "Operation Justified Vengeance." The latter was launched by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001 when, with Bush's approval, he used F-16s against Palestinian towns and villages for the first time. In the same year, the authoritative Jane's Foreign Report disclosed that the Blair government had given Israel the "green light" to attack the West Bank after it was shown Israel's secret designs for a bloodbath. It was typical of New Labor Party's enduring, cringing complicity in Palestine's agony. However, the 2001 Israeli plan, reported Jane's, needed the "trigger" of a suicide bombing which would cause "numerous deaths and injuries [because] the 'revenge' factor is crucial." This would "motivate Israeli soldiers to demolish the Palestinians." What alarmed Sharon and the author of the plan, General Shaul Mofaz, the Israeli Chief of Staff, was a secret agreement between Yasser Arafat and Hamas to ban suicide attacks. On 23 November, 2001, Israeli agents assassinated the Hamas leader, Mahmud Abu Hunud, and got their "trigger"; the suicide attacks resumed in response to his killing.
Why I am convinced
By David Chandler
David Chandler is a member of the American Association of Physics Teachers and a member of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth. He has a BS from Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA (IPS major–independent program of studies with emphasis in physics and engineering); MA in education from Claremont Graduate University; MS in mathematics from Cal Poly, Pomona and has taught Physics/Mathematics/Astronomy at K-12 and Jr. college levels. He is also an author and served formerly on the editorial board of The Physics Teacher, an AAPT journal. David is also an active designer and inventor of educational materials emphasizing quantitative visualization.
The events of 9/11 were huge. The body of evidence that the administration, or other agencies within the US government, were involved is also huge. The problem with summarizing the information is that the scale of the operation and its cover-up are so vast. Finding smoking guns is like picking up litter on a field. It's hard to move in a straight line. It is difficult to create a simple narrative.
My personal questioning of the events of 9/11 began when my sister went to a 9/11 conference and brought back books, DVDs, and enthusiasm. I watched the DVDs and became especially fascinated with one clip where the North Tower appeared to be literally erupting as it fell. One streamer caught my eye because I was able to follow its trajectory. I did some measurements right on the TV screen and estimated that the horizontal ejection velocity of that stream of debris was over 60 mi/hr. This hooked me. I later analyzed the same video clip with the Physics Toolkit software and found the horizontal component of velocity for that stream to be in excess of 70 mi/hr. ( YouTube: High Speed Ejection from WTC1 ) These ejections of material were from high in the building, which seemed inconsistent with purely gravitational collapse.
Several videos of the collapse of both towers show waves of horizontal mass ejections that race down the faces of the buildings, keeping pace with material falling outside the building, well in advance of the actual collapse of the structure. (YouTube: South Tower Coming Down and Race with Gravity ) The ejections appear to come from many floors at the same time, which contradicts the idea that the ejections consisted of debris blown out as the floors pancaked together. In addition to the massive waves of ejections , there are many photographs and videos showing individual "spurts" of material many floors below the point of collapse, identified by experts familiar with demolitions as "squibs," which are commonly seen during controlled demolitions.
The lack of sufficient cause for the collapse has been thoroughly documented, disputed, rationalized, and obfuscated. The jet fuel would have burned off within the first ten minutes. In the case of the South Tower, most of the fuel burned up in a fireball outside the building. The fires in the buildings, beyond the first few minutes, were essentially office fires, and not very large ones at that. Temperatures from kerosene fires are insufficient to melt, or even catastrophically weaken, the massive steel columns running up the core of the building. Even if the flames were maximally hot, the large mass of steel would wick away the heat energy and not raise the steel temperature sufficiently, especially since the duration of the fires was only on the order of an hour. Furthermore, there are photographs and video footage of a woman leaning on a girder and waving in the hole where one of the airplanes crashed into the building . This would seem to be direct testimony that the fires, by that point, at least, were relatively localized and certainly not large enough or hot enough to cause failure of the structural steel columns. The fact that the fires were emitting black smoke is a sign that they were not burning at high efficiency, so high estimates for fire temperatures are unwarranted. Furthermore, no steel beams recovered during the investigation showed temperatures over a few hundred degrees, far below the weakening point. (The small sample of steel studied after the event is a problem in establishing this conclusion definitively, but by the same token it speaks to the rapid and near total destruction of the crime scene.)
Babes in bikinis say it like it is: 9/11 was an inside job
This is an old clip but it's new to me and kind of cool so I cannot resist the temptation to post it here.