The Government Reports on 9 11 Did They

The Government Reports on 9 -11: Did They Get It Right? A presentation critical of the “Official Story” of What Happened on September 11 th, An open source project of Visibility 9 -11

Critique of the Official Government Reports on 9 -11 -01 This is an open source project of Visibility 9 -11 and is an attempt to build a solid Power. Point presentation for activists for use as an educational resource and specifically pointing out the large number of problems with the “official story” of September 11 th. All are invited to download this document and add to it. Where possible, please provide links to supporting documentation for the information presented. Please keep to the present format when making additions which will include: 1 - Try to find a nice graphic for most of your slides. Use what I have completed as a guide. 2 - Try to imitate the format of the work I have already completed, ie. Fonts, text color, formatting, background, etc. 3 - Source everything with embedded links in the text. 4 - Use the best possible source for your documentation. 5 - Please do not submit slides containing disinformation or controversial, unproven theories. If you have a question about what you might like to contribute, please send me an email. 6 - As the title and opening slides indicate, all fair and documented criticism of the FEMA Report, the NIST Report, and the 9 -11 Commission Report is welcome and encouraged. When you get an update worth sending, please email it to me for review. If I like your work, I will update the file at the website. -Michael Wolsey

The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Also known as The 9/11 Commission Report.

Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers Also Known as the NIST Report.

World Trade Center Building Performance Study Also Known as the FEMA Report.

Introduction “…regardless of one’s opinion about its historical accuracy, The 9/11 Commission Report is one of the most important documents ever produced in the United States. ” -David Ray Griffin, Author of The New Pearl Harbor; Disturbing Questions About The Bush Administration And 9/11

Why the 9/11 Commission Report is Important 9/11 was one of the most important events in modern world history. ► 9/11 was used as the excuse for the “war on terror” and the subsequent wars. ► Suggestions made by the report are being implemented, despite the obvious failings of the report. ► Did the 9/11 Commission Report dispel suspicions that the Bush administration, at some level, had a hand in the success of the attacks? Or was there evidence of a coverup? ►

The 9/11 Commissioners “We have sought to be independent, impartial, thorough, and non-partisan. ” The 9/11 . ” Commission Report, Preface, xv.

Was the 9/11 Commission “Nonpartisan”? Republicans ► Thomas H. Kean Chair ► Fred F. Fielding ► Slade Gorton ► John F. Lehman ► James R. Thompson Democrats ► Lee H. Hamilton Vice Chair ► Richard Ben-Veniste ► Jamie S. Gorelick ► Bob Kerrey ► Timothy J. Roemer 5 Republicans and 5 Democrats. That’s nonpartisan right?

Major Problems With The Commission ► The Chairman, Thomas H. Kean, is a Republican. ► More importantly, the commission’s Executive Director, Philip D. Zelikow, is a Republican insider. ► Republicans were in charge of both the investigation and the writing of the final report. ► Is this nonpartisan?

Philip Zelikow, Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission The most influential individual on the 9/11 Commission. ► Duties of the executive director included: ► § § § Setting the agenda Picking the areas to be investigated Choosing the briefing materials Choosing the topics for hearings Choosing the witnesses Directing the lines of questioning of the witnesses

Was The 9/11 Commission “Independent”? Philip Zelikow ► ► ► Has extensive ties to Condoleezza Rice, former National Security Advisor and current Secretary of State in the Bush Administration. Member of the National Security Council under Bush I where he served with Condoleezza Rice. Co-Authored a book with Condoleezza Rice, Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in State Craft, 1997. Director of the Aspen Strategy Group, which involved Rice, Cheney, and Wolfowitz. Served on the National Security Council’s transition team between the Clinton and Bush II administrations. Served under President Bush on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.

Other Conflicts of Interest ► Gorelick and Zelikow testifying at the commission.

Was the 9/11 Commission “Impartial”? ► Any impartial investigation would consider and investigate all possible suspects or theories. ► Two basic theories on 9/11: § The “Official Conspiracy Theory”, that the attacks were completely the work of Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network and 19 Arab extremists. § The “Alternative Conspiracy Theory”, that the attacks were only successful because the Bush Administration was complicit in allowing, facilitating, or engineering their success. ► The 9/11 Commission did not even consider any theory outside of the “Official Conspiracy Theory”, therefore negating any appearance of impartiality.

Was the 9/11 Commission Thorough? “There a lot of theories about 9/11, and as long as there is any document out there that bears on any of these theories, we’re going to leave questions unanswered. And we cannot leave questions unanswered. ” -Thomas Kean, Chairman of the 9/11 Commission in the New York Times, October 26, 2003

Was the 9/11 Commission Thorough? ► The commission was very thorough on anything which was consistent with the “official conspiracy theory”. ► Everything which was inconsistent with the “official conspiracy theory” was either distorted or omitted entirely. ► This lack of due diligence calls the entire report into question and broke the law!

The 9/11 Commission’s Mandate The 9/11 Commission was created by Public Law 107 -306, 107 th Congress, November 22, 2002. * ► Under Title VI, section 602 the commission was required to: ► § “(1) examine and report upon the facts and causes relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001…; ” § “(2) ascertain, evaluate, and report on the evidence developed by all relevant governmental agencies regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding the attacks; ” § “(3) build upon the investigations of other entities, and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of–” ► “(B) other executive branch, congressional, or independent commission investigations into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, other terrorist attacks, and terrorism generally; ” *Note that this was 438 days, well over one year after the attacks of September 11 th, 2001.

Other Formal Disaster Investigations ► The sinking of the Titanic - 6 Days

Other Formal Disaster Investigations ► The Assassination of JKF - 7 Days

Other Formal Disaster Investigations ► The Challenger Disaster - 7 Days

Other Formal Disaster Investigations ► Pearl Harbor - 9 Days

th What About September 11 ? ► September 11 th, 2001 - 438 Days

What About Funding for the Investigation? Was the 9 -11 Commission given enough money to conduct a proper investigation?

The Clinton/Lewinski Scandal ► $40, 000. 00 spent on investigating Bill Clinton’s extra-marital affair.

Challenger Space Shuttle Disaster ► $50, 000. 00 spent on investigating the Space Shuttle Challenger.

The 2005 Presidential Inauguration Party ► $40, 000. 00 spent on Bush’s 2005 inauguration party.

How Much Did They Spend On Investigating September 11 th? Originally funded with just $3, 000. 00. ► Eventually increased to only $15, 000. 00. ►

Did The Bush Administration Really Want An Investigation? ► December 21, 2001: Senators Introduce Bills to Create Independent 9/11 Commission Two bipartisan pairs of senators introduce legislation to create independent 9/11 commissions. Senators Joe Lieberman (D) and John Mc. Cain (R) propose to create a 14 -member, bipartisan commission with subpoena power. At the same time, Robert Torricelli (D) and Charles Grassley (R) propose to create a 12 -member board of inquiry with subpoena power. White House spokeswoman Anne Womack is noncommittal about the proposals, saying, “We look forward to reviewing them. Right now, the president is focused on fighting the war on terrorism. ” [New York Times, 12/21/2001]

Did The Bush Administration Really Want An Investigation? January 24, 2002: Cheney and Bush Pressure Senator to Avoid 9/11 Inquiry Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D) later claims that on this day, Vice President Cheney calls him and urges that no 9/11 inquiry be made. President Bush repeats the request on January 28, and Daschle is repeatedly pressured thereafter. ► Newsweek summarizes one of these conversations: “Bush ► administration officials might say they’re too busy running the war on terrorism to show up. Press the issue. . . and you risk being accused of interfering with the mission. ” [Newsweek, 2/4/2002] ► Senator Daschle later got an Anthrax letter which effectively shut the Senator up.

Did The Bush Administration Really Want An Investigation? May 23, 2002: Bush Opposes Special Inquiry into Terrorism Warnings President Bush says he is opposed to establishing a special, independent commission to probe how the government dealt with terrorism warnings before 9/11. [CBS News, 5/23/2002] ► “President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday ► to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11. ”

Did The Bush Administration Really Want An Investigation? ► He [President Bush] later changes his stance in the face of overwhelming support for the idea. [CBS News, 9/20/02] Victims families are not convinced. ► "It's carefully crafted to make it look like a general endorsement but it actually says that the commission would look at everything except the intelligence failures. “ Stephen Push Lost his wife on AA 77

Did The Bush Administration Really Want An Investigation? ► For more information on how the Bush administration did not want an investigation, visit Jon Gold’s blog page titled “What Qualifies as Suspicious Behavior? ” at 911 blogger. com.

To Summarize… The Bush Administration did not want a formal investigation into the events of September 11 th. ► 438 days after September 11 th, a formal investigation was finally authorized. ► The Bush Administration fought the creation of the 9 -11 Commission, and later refused to cooperate with the Commission. ► The 9 -11 Commission was vastly under-funded. ► The Commission itself was compromised, with many conflicts of interest within its’ membership. ► The 9 -11 Commission failed in their mandate to provide the fullest possible account of the events of September 11 th. ►

Part One: The Commission’s Omissions and Distortions

The “Hijackers” At least six of the nineteen men identified by the FBI as the suicide hijackers have turned up alive and well after 9/11.

Waleed al-Shehri Alleged to have been on Flight 11 which struck the North Tower at the WTC. ► The BBC reports al-Shehri is one of 4 alleged hijackers who have “…turned up alive and well. ” September 23, 2001. ► The Daily Trust reports “A Saudi Arabian aircraft pilot who was named ► as one of five suspects on board one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Centre, has turned up alive and well in Morocco. ” September 24, 2001. ► On Sept. 22, 2001 Associated Press reported that al- Shehri had spoken to the U. S. embassy in Morocco.

Saeed al-Ghamdi and Ahmed al-Nami ► ► ► Both alleged to have been on Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania. “The Saudi Airlines pilot, Saeed Al-Ghamdi, 25, and Abdulaziz Al-Omari, an engineer from Riyadh, are furious that the hijackers' "personal details" including name, place, date of birth and occupation - matched their own. ” Ahmed al-Nami said, "I'm still alive, as you can see. I was shocked to see my name mentioned by the American Justice Department. I had never even heard of Pennsylvania where the plane I was supposed to have hijacked. ” Telegraph September 23, 2001.

Mohand al-Shehri, Salem al-Hazmi, Abdulaziz al-Omari It is reported that the Saudi embassy said that Mohand al-Shehri is "not dead and had nothing to do with the heinous terror attacks in New York and Washington. " ► Shortly after the attacks, several sources reported that Salem al- Hazmi, 26, was alive and working at a petrochemical plant in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia. ► Abdullaziz al-Omari said "I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on ► their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this. " Telegraph September 23, 2001, BBC September 23, 2001.

What Did The 9/11 Commission Report Say About This? The report regurgitates the FBI’s original list of 19 names (pp. 1 -5) and their pictures (pp. 238 -39). ► The report fails to mention any of these errors, even though they were widely available on the Associated Press, Telegraph, and the BBC. ► The report contains many details of these 6 men, even theorizing that Waleed al-Shehri was the hijacker who stabbed one of the flight attendants on Flight 11. ► Is this “exacting investigative work” described by Kean and Hamilton as “superb”? * ► *The 9/11 Commission Report, Preface, xvii.

What Does The 9/11 Commission Report Say About Mohamed Atta? ► The report identifies Mohamed Atta as the ringleader of the hijackers. ► Atta is portrayed as a devout Muslim. ► The report describes Atta as “fanatically” religious.

The 9/11 Commission Omitted All Evidence Contradicting Their Version Evidence, reported by Newsweek and the San Francisco Chronicle, indicate that Atta enjoyed gambling, alcohol, and lap dances. ► Daniel Hopsicker has discovered that while living in Florida, Atta lived with a hooker, used alcohol and cocaine regularly and ate pork chops. ►

Are These The Behavior’s of “Fanatical” Muslims?

Are These The Behavior’s of “Fanatical” Muslims? A Wall Street Journal editorial from October 10, 2001 titled “Terrorist Stag Parties” alleges that several of the hijackers including: “…Atta—spent $200 -$300 each on lap dances…” in Las Vegas strip clubs.

The 9/11 Commission Report Admits Atta Met With Other Operatives in Las Vegas Shortly Before 9/11 The 9/11 Commission Report concludes that they saw “…no credible evidence explaining why, on this occasion and others, the operatives flew to or met in Las Vegas. ” (pp. 248). ► The report failed to mention any of the other mainstream reports indicating Atta was not a “fanatical” Muslim. ►

More About Atta: Planted Evidence? Two of Atta’s bags failed to make it onto the doomed flight. These bags contained items such as Atta’s international driver’s license, passport, flight manuals, a copy of the Koran, and his last will and testament. ► On October 1, 2001, Seymour Hersh wrote in the New Yorker that it appeared to investigators that these items were “meant to be found”. ► How would Atta be able to board a flight without his identification and why would he bring his will on a flight doomed for total destruction? ► None of this was even mentioned by the 9/11 Commission Report. ► ►

Was Hani Hanjour The Best Pilot? The report identifies Hani Hanjour as being the pilot on Flight 77 which allegedly was flown into the Pentagon (p. 225). ► The report asserts that Hanjour was specifically picked for this role because he “was the operation’s most experienced pilot ” (p. 530, n 147). ► The implication that Hanjour was a good pilot, in fact, the “most experienced pilot” of the 9 -11 hijackers, is directly contradicted by the report itself in 3 different places (pp. 25 -26, p. 242, p. 520, n 56). ►

The Amazing Maneuver To Hit The Pentagon “… just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west…Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm. . . ” Washington Post September 12, 2001.

The Amazing Maneuver To Hit The Pentagon The 9/11 Commission itself admitted, “American 77 was then 5 miles south-southwest of the Pentagon and began a 330 -degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2, 200 feet, pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington. The hijacker pilot then advanced the throttles to maximum power and dove toward the Pentagon. ” (p. 9)

What did Hani Hanjour’s Flight School Teachers Have to Say? The BBC reported on May 17, 2002 that: “Instructors at a flying school in Phoenix, Arizona express concern to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) officials about the poor English and limited flying skills of one of their students, Hani Hanjour. ”

What did Hani Hanjour’s Flight School Teachers Have to Say? In a New York Times story from May 4, 2002, Jim Yardley writes, “Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. ‘I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon, ’ the former employee said, ’He could not fly at all’. ”

What did Hani Hanjour’s Flight School Teachers Have to Say? On May 10, 2002, CBS News reported, “Months before Hani Hanjour is believed to have flown an American Airlines jet into the Pentagon, managers at an Arizona flight school reported him at least five times to the FAA. . . They reported him not because they feared he was a terrorist, but because his English and flying skills were so bad, they told the Associated Press, they didn't think he should keep his pilot's license. ‘I couldn't believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had, ’ said Peggy Chevrette, the manager for the nowdefunct Jet. Tech flight school in Phoenix. ”

Did The 9/11 Commission Prove That The Alleged Hijackers Were On The Four Flights?

The Shocking Answer Is: No. ► The flight manifests which have been released show no Arab names and no names of the hijackers. § § ► American Airlines Flight 11 United Airlines Flight 175 American Airlines Flight 77 United Airlines Flight 93 Researchers attempting to get flight manifests directly from the airlines have been spurned.

Letter From American Airlines to Elias Davidsson Re: Flight Manifests Dear Mr. Davidsson: Thank you for your email dated August 5 [2004]. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to you. At the time of the incidents we released the actual passenger manifests to the appropriate government agencies who in turn released certain information to the media. These lists were published in many major periodicals and are now considered part of the public record. At this time we are not in a position to release further information or to republish what the government agencies provided to the media. Instead, should you require a copy of these lists may we suggest that you research major periodicals for copies of their publications containing the information you seek. Mr. Davidsson, I trust this information will be of use to you. Sincerely, Karen Temmerman Customer Relations, American Airlines

Did the 9/11 Commission Get The Flight Manifests? ► The report does not include any copies of the flight manifests. ► Further, the report does not suggest this issue was ever discussed or investigated. ► The 9/11 Commission simply parroted the line from the FBI about the 19 hijackers without question. ► Is this a report that is providing the “fullest possible account” of the events of September 11 th 2001?

Three Buildings “Collapse” At The World Trade Center on September 11 th 2001

The Official Story of How the Twin Towers “Collapsed” The impact of large jet-liners, together with the jet fuel heating the steel is blamed for the “collapse” of Towers 1 and 2. Many of these theories have been compiled by Jim Hoffman.

Six Problems With The Official Story of The “Collapses” Fire has never before, or since, caused the collapse of a modern steel framed high-rise. ► The fires at the WTC were relatively small, especially at the South Tower. ► If fires were responsible for the collapse, the wrong tower “collapsed” first. ► Ordinary carbon based fires do not get hot enough to significantly weaken or melt structural steel. ► The problem of explaining the mysterious collapse of building 7, a 47 story tower which had small fires, but was not hit by an aircraft. ► The “collapses” of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 exhibited 10 features which are characteristic of controlled demolitions. ►

Can Fire Cause The Collapse Of a Modern Steel Framed High-Rise? Never in the history of modern steel high rise construction has fire caused a building to collapse. Chicago Tribune November 29, 2001. ► In the 1990’s, tests on steel framed buildings revealed that “Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800► 900 degrees C (1500 -1700 degrees F) in three of the tests…no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments. ” FEMA Report #403, World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix A, May 2002. ► There are many examples of large high rise fires which, unlike the Twin Towers and WTC 7, did not collapse.

One Meridian Plaza Philadelphia, February 23, 1991 One Meridian Plaza is a 38 story steel framed high rise in Philadelphia. The fire burned for 18 hours and gutted eight floors causing an estimated $100 million in property loss. ► A FEMA report produced in 1991 for the Philadelphia fire said, “ Beams and girders ► ► sagged and twisted…under severe fire exposures…Despite this extraordinary exposure, the columns continued to support their loads without obvious damage. ” ► ► ► Three fire fighters lost their lives fighting the blaze. Described by officials as "the most significant fire in this century". The building did not collapse.

The Windsor Building Madrid, February 13, 2005 The Windsor Building was a 32 story high rise in Madrid, Spain constructed of steel reinforced concrete. ► The fire raged for nearly 24 hours and gutted the entire top section of the building. ► “The office tower was heavily damaged but did not collapse. . . ” Madrid skyscraper fire under control, February 14, 2005. ►

Now That’s a Towering Inferno! Windsor Building, Madrid February 13, 2005

Parque Central East Tower Caracas, October 15, 2004 Parque Central East Tower is South America’s and Venezuela’s tallest building at 56 stories tall, framed with steel beam construction. ► The fire raged for over 27 hours and gutted 17 floors before it finally burnt itself out. ► “During the fire, two steel decks partially collapsed; other than that, there was ► no collapse inside the building. However, deflection in some steel beams was severe. ” NFPA Journal, March/April 2005 ► Despite this real life “towering inferno”, the building did not collapse.

The fires at the WTC were relatively small, especially at the South Tower ► ► ► The fires were relatively small compared to other high rise fires we have observed in this presentation. The fires omitted copious amounts of black smoke which indicates a cooler, oxygen starved fire. Note that in the photo above, it is very clear that the fire at the South Tower (left) had died down considerably prior to the building’s “collapse”.

The Hit On The North Tower was the first one hit by UA Flight 11 at 8: 46 am. The aircraft hit the tower straight on at about the 96 th floor. Most of the jet fuel was consumed directly in the building as opposed to exploding outside as in the case of the South Tower. ► The building stood for 102 minutes after being hit before it too “collapsed”, 46 minutes after the South Tower came down. ► Fires in the North Tower were much more severe than in the South Tower. ► ► ►

The Path of Flight 11 Into The North Tower A diagram from NIST shows the trajectory of Flight 11. This aircraft struck a more direct blow, straight on and into the center of the buildings core structure. ► The building sustained more damage to its’ core, AND had stronger, hotter fires, and yet “collapsed” 46 minutes AFTER the South Tower. ► Note: NIST’s own estimates of temperatures within the towers doesn’t show any temperatures above about 400 degrees C. ► ►

The Hit On The South Tower was the 2 nd tower hit at 9: 03 AM The aircraft came in at an angle and hit the tower near the corner at about the 80 th floor. ► A significant portion of the jet fuel exploded outside of the building in the huge fire ball everyone is familiar with. This left less fuel inside the building. ► The tower stood for 56 minutes before it was the first of the Twin Towers to “collapse” at 9: 59. ► ►

The Path of Flight 175 Into The South Tower ► The above image put out by NIST (National Institute on Science and Technologies) attempts to show the estimated temperatures of the steel columns. * It also shows the trajectory of the aircraft with estimated damage to the impact area, the core structure, and the hotter temperatures depicted on the exterior columns located in the aircraft’s path. *These diagrams grossly misrepresents the actual construction of the towers, showing only 21 exterior columns on each side when in fact there were 59. It can therefore be assumed that the damage depicted here could be slanted toward the official story as well. Nevertheless, it does show a good representation of the aircraft’s trajectory.

The Wrong Tower “Collapsed” First The South Tower was struck by United Flight 175 at 9: 03 AM, 17 minutes after the North Tower was hit at 8: 46. ► The South Tower stood for only 56 minutes before its sudden, unexpected “collapse” at 9: 59. The North Tower did not “collapse” until 10: 28, only 102 minutes after it was hit. CNN, September 11 th, 2001. ► Fires in the North Tower were much more extreme than the fires in the South Tower. Because it was hit more directly by the aircraft, more of the jet fuel stayed inside the building. ►

Can Carbon Based Fires Get Hot Enough To Melt or Weaken Structural Steel? Ordinary hydrocarbon fires under optimal circumstances reach temperatures of around 1700 Fahrenheit. ► Steel begins to melt at about 2770 Fahrenheit. ► The hottest fires fall well short of temperatures required to melt steel. ► Many news reports initially claimed the steel in the towers was melted and many people still believe this the cause of the “collapses” of the 3 buildings, contributing to the myth that heat and fire brought the buildings down. ►

How Bad Were the Fires in the Towers? Taken from the FDNY 9 -11 recordings, we can clearly hear from firefighters ON THE SCENE in the South Tower how bad the fires actually were. ► Click the sound icon to hear the actual FDNY recording which took place at approximately 9: 50, just 9 minutes before the “collapse” of the South Tower. ► § “Ladder 15: We’ve got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78 th Floor…”

Does This Look Like a Raging Inferno? ► This is a photo of the South Tower just moments before it came down.

Experts Promote the Myth of Raging Fires and Melted Steel at the World Trade Center In the days and weeks following the 9 -11 attacks, the media promoted “experts” who severely over rated the fires and temperatures and those effects of the steel structure of the fires. ► Effects described were not only false and unrealistic, but described conditions only obtained in a blast furnace. ►

Stanford University News Service In a news release dated 9 -11 -01, Professor Steven M. Block over exaggerates the damage to the towers by comparing the impacts from the jets to “nuclear bomb explosion[s]. ” § "Next to an atomic weapon, this is the most [energy] that you can pack in one punch. " ► The report also introduces the myth that the fires “ melted the buildings’ cores”. § “Although the World Trade Center was designed to withstand "amazing kinds of forces" and even an aircraft collision, architects may not have taken into consideration the enormous amount of heat a plane loaded with enough fuel to fly across the country would generate. The intense heat could have melted the buildings’ cores, allowing for the collapses , he suggested. ” ►

Hyman Brown ► A September 12, 2001 AP article, in part read: “Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the Trade Center's construction manager, speculated that flames fuelled by thousands of litres of aviation fuel melted steel supports. "This building would have stood had a plane or a force caused by a plane smashed into it, " he said. "But steel melts, and 90, 850 litres of aviation fluid melted the steel. Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that fire. "

New Scientist Online Publication ► On September 12, 2001, New. Scientist. com endorses the fire melts steel myth. § “Each Tower was struck by a passenger aeroplane, hijacked by suicidal terrorists, but remained upright for nearly an hour. Eventually raging fires melted the supporting steel struts, but the time delay allowed hundreds of people to escape. ”

Was Any of the Steel Tested to See How Hot the Fires Were? ► Paint tests…. . Kevin Ryan stuff here

Tampering with evidence ► Removal of steel.

Remember The Caracas Fire? ► IF fires were responsible for bringing the towers down, the wrong tower “collapsed” first.

Remember The Caracas Fire? ► No steel framed high-rise, IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD, has ever collapsed due to fire.

But, But…. . …on 9 -11, the towers had been significantly weakened by the impact of the jetliners. ► Together with the fires, the buildings just couldn’t have stood for long. ► Right? ►

This Is What Many “Experts” Told Us ► Gene Corley, a structural “expert” with the American Society of Engineers said in a PBS NOVA special titled Why the Towers Fell, said: “It was the combination of the impact load doing great damage to the building, followed by the fire, that caused collapse. We need to look for types of fireproofing that can take the impact and can stand up to the impact and stick to the steel after the impact. ”

What’s That About the Fireproofing? According to the NIST Report, loss of fireproofing on the steel is what facilitated the “collapses”. ► “The towers would not have collapsed under the combined effects of ► aircraft impact and the subsequent multi-floor fires if the insulation had not been widely dislodged or had only been minimally dislodged by aircraft impact. ” NIST Report, Executive Summary

How Did NIST Prove Their Theory of the Dislodged Fireproofing? ► They shot a series of 15 shotgun blasts onto flat plates covered with fireproofing. NIST Report Debris Impact Tests, Appendix C

Did NIST Prove Their Theory of the Dislodged Fireproofing? ► ► NIST failed to prove that impact from an aircraft would transfer into x number of shotgun blasts. Certainly, many thousands of shotgun blasts would be needed to simulate an aircraft crash. Most of the energy involved in the impact was used up in the destruction of the aircraft and the obvious damage to the tower itself. * There simply was not enough energy available to account for the energy required to knock off all the fireproofing. *Calculations performed by Tomasz Wierzbicki of MIT

Do the Architects of High Rise Buildings Design for Jetliner Impacts? The Answer is YES, they do! ► In 1945, a B-25 bomber, in thick fog, struck the Empire State Building. ► By the way, despite causing damage and a raging fire, the building did not collapse and was repaired within 3 months. ►

The WTC Towers Were Designed to Withstand the Impact From Large Jetliners ► On January 25, 2001 Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers.

The WTC Towers Were Designed to Withstand the Impact From Large Jetliners ► “The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting. ” Frank A. De. Martini 1/25/01

The WTC Towers Were Designed to Withstand the Impact From Large Jetliners John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. ► In 1993 he said, “Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, . . . The building structure would still be there. ” ►

More problems…

Were the Towers Designed to Withstand the Impact From Large Jetliners?

The Upper Block of Floors Began to Tip As The Tower Explodes The upper block of floors tipped approximately 23 degrees to the South East. ► The Law of Conservation of Momentum would dictate the section of floors would topple over independently, not act as a “pile driver”. ► In mid-air, this block of approximately 30 floors was pulverized to fine powder. Nothing was left from the upper section in the rubble pile. ►

The Official Story Also Ignores the Law of Conservation of Energy ► ► ► The Law of Conservation of Energy says that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only converted from one form to another. “Within some problem domain, the amount of energy remains constant and energy is neither created nor destroyed. Energy can be converted from one form to another (potential energy can be converted to kinetic energy) but the total energy within the domain remains fixed. ” Where did the energy come from to pulverize both of the Twin Towers?

Where Did the Energy To Do This Come From?

Where Did the Energy To Do This Come From? ► Notice that in all three of these photo’s, the tipping top 30 floors of the South Tower are pulverized in mid air.

building 7, a 47 story tower which had small fires, but was not hit by an aircraft. ► http: //web. archive. org/web/200202141829 21/http: /www. chicagotribune. com/news/loc al/chi-0111290236 nov 29. story

The collapse of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 exhibited 10 features which are characteristic of controlled demolitions

Twin Towers: Omitting the Core ► http: //news. bbc. co. uk/1/hi/world/americas/15400 44. stm

Eyewitness’s Report Explosions

Was Osama bin Laden Responsible For the Crimes of 9 -11? Within hours of the attacks in New York and Washington, we were told that Osama bin Laden was responsible. ► The media told Americans repeatedly that Osama and Al. Qaeda attacked America on September 11 th. . ► How could the FBI be so incompetent when it came to preventing 9 -11, yet be so efficient at pointing the finger? ►

Has Osama Been Indicted For the Crimes of September 11 th? The shocking answer is NO! ► As of the creation of this presentation (1 -07), NO ONE has in any way been held responsible for the crimes of 9 -11. ►

Surely the FBI Has Evidence Linking Osama to 9 -11? ► According to the FBI’s own website, Osama isn’t even wanted in connection to the events of September 11 th.

Are You Kidding Me? ► This must be some sort of mistake on the website, right?

No Hard Evidence? On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report’s Ed Haas contacted the FBI Headquarters and spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. ► Ed asked Chief Tomb why Osama’s wanted poster did not include the crimes of September 11 th. ► Tomb replied that, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned ► on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11. ”

Wait A Minute! Didn’t we GO TO WAR with Afghanistan because they wouldn’t hand over Osama? ► Didn’t we NOT INVESTIGATE any of the other theories about what happened because we were so sure Osama did it? ► The 9 -11 Commission told us Osama and 19 Muslims did it. They wouldn’t lie, would they? ►

North Tower Antenae Drops first ► GENE CORLEY: Looking at the films of the North Tower, it appears that the antenna starts down just a little bit before the exterior of the building. That suggests the core went first.

Dr. David Ray Griffin Special thanks to Dr. Griffin for all his hard work exposing the lies of the “Independent” 9/11 Commission Report.

Recommended Reading and Resource The 9/11 Commission Report; Omissions and Distortions

Special thanks to ► Dr. David Ray Griffin ► Dr. Steven E. Jones ► Kevin Ryan ► Jim Hoffman ► Jon Gold