BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!

WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google

9/11 Truth: How I Came To Distrust the Official Version

Sunday, January 27th, 2008

From 2001 through most of 2007, I didn’t think much about this subject. I had casually wondered if the fires could actually be responsible for bringing the towers down, thinking about the heat and thermodynamics necessary to weaken the steel columns. I have an undergraduate degree in chemistry, and find thermodynamics very interesting. The idea that fires fueled by office materials and jet fuel (enhanced kerosene) could weaken steel beams, resulting in total failure of the entire structure seemed vaguely unlikely. After all, there have been other large steel-structured office building fires that had not resulted in complete, catastrophic collapse, but I didn’t dwell on my vague doubts.

I have since learned there have been no complete, catastrophic collapses of steel-framed buildings due to fire recorded, ever, like these. There have been partial collapses, involving a few floors, and considerable damage due to fire, but no complete collapses ever of steel-framed buildings. On 9/11, we are given to believe there were three.

In September of last year I read an article on “conspiracy theories” about 9/11, and I learned of the website I wrote about this past October, www.patriotsquestion911.com. This site is nothing more than a compilation of names of people who have publicly questioned the official account, and their statements. It is not an organization, or membership association; the people on the list are not necessarily associated with one another in any way, except for having doubts about 9/11 and having made public statements to that effect. Names on the list include Louis Freeh, former FBI director, Wesley Clark, Ron Paul, Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Sec. Of the Treasury, Curt Weldon, Mary Shiavo, former Inspector General US Dept of Transportation, Col. Robert Bowman, Dennis Kucinich, Morgan Reynolds, former Chief Economist in the Bush Labor Department, with about one thousand other people who have doubts about the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks. A quick look at this list will give you a sense of the caliber and qualifications of those who have spoken out in one way or another about these events.

Two other names on this list are men I have read extensively in the past four months: Dr. David Ray Griffin, and Dr. Steven E. Jones. Dr. Griffin is a PhD professor emeritus of religion and philosophy at Claremont College in Calif. Dr. Steven Jones is a PhD physicist formerly with Brigham Young. Both have long established academic careers, have published numerous books or articles, and are respected intellectuals in their fields.

Dr. Jones has well established academic and research credentials for his work with metal-catalyzed fusion. His work has been reproduced and confirmed by independent labs in a couple of countries. Overcoming initial controversy to his findings, his fusion results are now considered the basis for further work. Examining evidence taken from the World Trade Center site he employs the accepted forensic techniques of analysis arson investigators use. He has confirmed a “eutectic” of sulfur in once-molten steel, which a FEMA analysis also found but did not explain, and confirmed the presence of once-molten iron spheres the USGS discovered in dust samples. These samples contain evidence suggestive of explosives: sulfur, aluminum, barium, manganese, with other compounds, in unusually high concentrations.

Dr. Griffin has exhaustively examined the 9/11 Commission report. Comparing known reports gathered from the news media, from authors, academics, government documents, Dr. Griffin has written extensively on the evidence the Commission focused on in great detail, and the evidence it inexplicably omits. And the devil really is in those details. Many people hold the Commission report in high regard as the most complete investigation of the events of 9/11. Dr. Griffin’s books convincingly show that the evidence in support of the official conspiracy theory received special treatment, while witnesses who brought contrary testimony, along with those who came forward but were ignored, are inexcusably rejected or marginalized, their evidence unreported.

Scant mention is made in the Commission report of the documented meetings of the chief of Pakistani intelligence at the time, General Mahmoud Ahmad, with CIA director Tenet, officials from the Pentagon, the State Department, and National Security Agency from Sept 4 through Sept. 13, 2001. The report completely denies what the Times of India discovered, and which the Wall Street Journal editorialized, “…US authorities sought [Ahmad’s] removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen. Mahmoud…” Instead the Commission report states, “…we have seen no evidence that any foreign government – or foreign government official – supplied any funding.”

The back-stories of halted FBI investigations, credible whistleblowers silenced by federal gag orders, FBI field agents’ reports of suspicious behavior ignored, or requests for warrants altered or denied, all make compelling arguments for foreknowledge and complicity by some in the administration. But all these are difficult to prove to the satisfaction of a court of law.

The science, though, is compelling. Pools of flowing molten iron were found under the rubble of the three World Trade Center buildings. They persisted for 100 days. Office material fires simply cannot produce heat to melt steel or iron. Both the National Institute of Standards and Technology and FEMA studies clearly state that fact in their reports, and neither study so much as attempted to answer the question of what caused those pools of molten metal. And then there is Building 7. Not hit by a plane, not substantially damaged by the other collapses, Building 7 fell straight down in the exact same manner as if by controlled demolition. To this day, no official explanation has been issued explaining how this happened.

I no longer have vague doubts. I have important questions. Nearly 3000 people were murdered on September 11, 2001, and even the accused perpetrators have not been brought to justice. I am one of many calling for a new, independent investigation into 9/11. The elaborate cover up we have now is an utter disgrace to this country, and the basis for what many scholars consider near tyranny.

Have Your Say: 9/11 Truth: How I Came To Distrust the Official Version
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

9 Responses to “9/11 Truth: How I Came To Distrust the Official Version”

marc awodey
Posted: Jan 28th, 2008 at 4:10 am

sir - it’s illogical to leap to the conclusion that all who question the 9/11 commission finding accept exotic hypotheses for destruction. many question the report as a result of the perceived cover-ups; which were covering incompetence more than anything. i was invited to appear on patriots question 9/11, but declined because among it’s members are judy wood - who claims laser beams destroyed the towers, and other extremists who have no empirical evidence for their claims. dr. jones, for example, hasn’t submitted 1 single article for peer review (and i don’t mean by his own group of 9/11 scholars for truth and justice). he only forwarded the the iron spheres finding after his thermite hypothesis was debunked by a researcher in italy. Jones’ hypothesis for the spheres ignores (or his statements about it don’t disclose) several possibilities consistent with the methods of collapse accepted by mainstream science. and if he’s such a well respected scientist, why was he fired from brigham young university? there are hundreds of far more credible scientists who’ve worked on WTC issues - and occam’s razor remains in effect.
before you feel wedded to the “truth” movement please read this review of griffin’s new pearl harbor, http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/dubious_claims.html
this is from a well respected left leaning site. you will also find griffin’ response to the review - and it demonstrated the theologian had a tenuous grasp on logical fallacies. his teaching career was spent at the same college that gave him his phD. and the whole field of theology is pretty suspect to begin with. are there other contemporary theologans you like? one of the sources he cites is eric hufstead, a notorius halocaust denyer and anti-semite. Griffin is probably a nice fellow - his scholorshi, and OBJECTIVE fact checking are non-existant.
you should also read the national institute of standards and technology’s site explaining it’s 9/11 findings http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm and a PDF from them reporting their findings on building 7 http://wtc.nist.gov/media/ScheuermanStatementDec2006.pdf
Regarding the collapse of towers 1 and 2 - their construction was unique. truss supported floors spanned the space between the inner core, and the exterior load bearing wall, column free. the amount of fuel caused massive fires and the impact of the crashes undoubtedly knocked fireproof cladding off of the core beams and floor trusses. steel buckles at 1200 degrees, and the heat was unevenly distributed, thus causing severe stresses which initiated the collapses - pulling the trusses away from the load bearing walls, already weakened by the impacts. helicopters surveying the buildings when they were burning reported deformations of the exterior walls. also contrary to truther claims, seismic data, as well as on site reports do tell that the inner cores stood longer than the walls - i believe up to 25 seconds longer in one case. momentum, and the weight of the 20-30 stories above the burning floors provided power that crushed the floors below. and keep in mind that a skyscraper is 95% air to begin with. to say “no steel frame building has collapsed as a result of fire” ignores the fact that the WTC designs were unique. also no other buildings in history have had fully fueled large passenger jets slammed into them at 550 mph.
so sir - please ask questions and look for answers on neutral NON CONSPIRACY web sites. the motives of jones, griffin, morgan Reynolds and all of the other conspiracy stars are nothing more noble than profit. and what has 9/11 “truth” accomplished other than make these people wealthy?

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

roman szylo
Posted: Jan 28th, 2008 at 12:27 pm

Marc, I doubt you can read any article properly to glean information from. Your freaking English is primary school level.

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

marc awodey
Posted: Jan 30th, 2008 at 4:15 am

thanks roman. and i appreciate your info on truthdig.org that “In Hebrew, George Walker Bush reduces to 666, and FOX = 666 sport, news.” you are indeed quite a scholar…

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

pingback:
Posted: Jan 30th, 2008 at 8:09 am

The Eclectic Blog

[...] Original Article: http://rinf.com/alt-news/911-truth/911-truth-how-i-came-to-distrust-the-official-version/2308/ [...]

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

roman szylo
Posted: Jan 30th, 2008 at 8:47 am

Judy Wood is an Angel

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

insider
Posted: Jan 30th, 2008 at 9:48 am

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB
but
Judy Wood is insane

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

River
Posted: Jan 30th, 2008 at 6:14 pm

Marc,

“so sir - please ask questions and look for answers on neutral NON CONSPIRACY web sites. the motives of jones, griffin, morgan Reynolds and all of the other conspiracy stars are nothing more noble than profit. and what has 9/11 “truth” accomplished other than make these people wealthy?”

If the sites are ‘NON CONSPIRACY’ then they are not neutral - it seems you seem to have a bit of a deficit in the logic department yourself. Further if you advocate that somebody look specifically at sites that don’t claim a consipracy, you are effectively asking people to only consider one point of view. Bravo.

Finally, Steven Jones was not fired for any form of professional misconduct or incompetence, therefore it is rather disingenuous to imply that this dismissal was related to anything other than doing unwelcome research and making controversial statements whilst working for a university dependent on government grants.

You brilliant logic cannot helped but have failed to notice that losing tenure is not regarded is the optimal method for getting rich.

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

viiv
Posted: Feb 4th, 2008 at 8:34 pm

Are these blog-rants useful? This is an honest question. To me, it seems that it is always the well informed (those who have done their homework and are smart enough to connect the dots) versus those who are blinded by fear, their self-important egos, their idiocy, their susceptibility to propaganda or their fox-news-cultured apathy. Is it really possible to change people’s minds? How does that work? The science in this case is SO obvious and yet the majority of Americans are willing to believe that a massive 757 fit into a 16 foot wide hole?! Who are these people, and why do they make up most of the U.S. population?! More importantly, what does that make the U.S?! If this were a true democracy, the public would be in the position to decide what should be done about the lack of a serious investigation into the events of 9/11, but they are too lazy or stupid to take action. If this were a true Republic, then the lawmakers of our government would have a duty to reopen the investigation based on the egregious errors in the official story, but they are too cowardly or corrupt. It is clear that we do not live in a democracy or a republic. We live in a plutocracy, or an aristocracy, or an oligarchy. Anyone who denies this is living in a dreamworld. The Military Industrial Complex has been in power since before Eisenhower warned us of its danger. ‘It’ has been wreaking havoc on the world as the Presidents come and go. And yet we ramp up to vote soon, when the government can’t even guarantee that our votes will be counted. But maybe it turns out that this IS a democracy. The public believes the lies, thus, the decision to do nothing has been made and everyone can get back to the important stuff in life, like rampant consumerism, cultural hatred, and mind-numbing over indulgence.

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

Blake
Posted: Feb 26th, 2008 at 8:29 pm

You are all nuts, except that guy Marc. He’s alright. O, about the wings of the plane. Ever gotten a hard boiled egg in a bottle? There’s an army simulation on you tube of a jet plane hitting a wall. Very small impact hole. Laws of physics. That sort of thing.

Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

SexyComments by BorkWeb

RSS TrackBack URL

Related News

This entry was posted on Sunday, January 27th, 2008 at 8:50 pm and is filed under 9/11 Truth, General, Latest News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Translate: