The North Tower Exploding on 9-11-01 (*rt-click save or watch online).
David Chandler's commentary : The North Tower Exploding
Looking just at the North Tower for a moment. How can anyone imagine this massive (one acre x 110-story), highly-redundant office building converted itself into dust and fragments of steel, when there were only 10-13 floors above the impact zone and gravity was, supposedly, the only thing driving the destruction? The lightest part of any structure is the top, which is why the towers had tapered columns that got progressively thicker on lower floors. At their base, each of the larger core columns was nearly solid. What remained & surrounding areas.
Over 1100 people that were in the towers remain unaccounted for to this day. No one has asked or explained why it is that current DNA analysis has been unable to identify the 9000+ human remains that are still, 'frozen for future analysis'.
The NIST 'investigation' of the destruction of the Twin Towers, goes only up to the "conditions for collapse initiation having been reached" and ignores everything that followed as if, it were all somehow inevitable, and not even worth investigating. The 'pile driver' theory does not match observations. *NIST, at the time, was a nonregulatory agency of the Department of Commerce.
WTC7's implosion - [version II] speaks for itself: asymmetrical damage caused by office fires and localized failures, can not possibly account for the precipitous, high-speed, symmetrical collapse that occurred. One does not need to be an engineer or architect to know what happened to these buildings. We have a good idea what happened inside of them because we can see how they came down and what remained of them afterwards.
David Chandler WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part III) & WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial
South Tower Exploding
Real 911 Truth:
New Book: Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects by Kevin R Ryan
Journal of 911Studies
Dr. Steven Jones - 9/11 Science & Society: A Lecture to a Worldwide University
911Research.wtc7.net - Hidden In Plain Sight
Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Collapse? by Steven E Jones
Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth
Kevin Ryan's Blog
911SpeakOut.org - RememberBuilding7.org
911review.com - Scholars for 911 Truth & Justice - WTC7.net - TruthMove.org
Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories
9-11 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out (2011)
Jim Hoffman 9-11 Guilt: The Proof is in Your Hands Pt 1 of 3 (2005)
Hypothesis – Full-length Film 2011
Steven E Jones
Kevin Ryan: A New Standard For Deception
An Introduction to the JFK Assassination
Top Secret America: Washington Post
Vanity Fair: One Nation, Under Arms By Todd S. Purdum
The Power Principle by Scott Noble
War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us To Death
Lifting the Veil by Scott Noble
The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing. -Albert Einstein
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. -Winston Churchill
The stills below, of the North Tower exploding, were shot by
Noah K Murray(with a number of images from other sources), released through a FOIA request.
Short link to this page: http://smu.gs/19q1JlM
Getting to the bottom of what really happened:
NIST spokesperson Michael Neuman when challenged by Hartford Advocate reporter Jennifer Abel on a glaring omission in the WTC report.
ABEL: … what about that letter where NIST said it didn’t look for evidence of explosives?
NEUMAN: Right, because there was no evidence of that.
ABEL: But how can you know there’s no evidence if you don’t look for it first?
NEUMAN: If you’re looking for something that isn’t there, you’re wasting your time.
Ignoring precedence and standard operating procedure, NIST refused to test for explosive residues. Barring a cover-up, there is no logical reason for them not to have done so.
"To remain silent is to be guilty of complicity. He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.' -ML King
Over the years, we have heard a variety of 'experts' postulating a series of different hypothesis, in an effort to explain the rapid and complete destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11. All of them have overlooked a large body of legitimate, well-documented evidence, showing that, in all likelihood, all three buildings were brought down in controlled demolitions. Albeit, what was done to the Towers was unprecedented. Normally, the goal of hi-rise demolition is to 'put the building in it's basement,' -as seen in the collapse of Building 7.
The South Tower stood for 56 minutes and the North Tower for 102 minutes after being hit by individual commercial aircraft. Despite the radically different angles of the plane impacts, both Towers were destroyed in precisely the same manner. There is no question these were highly explosive events. They pulverized most of the 90,000 TONS of concrete in each building and converted all but the most robust metallic elements into small fragments and fine powder. Even the sixty-five miles of structural steel beams that made up the massive and elaborately cross-braced core structures, were violently blasted apart, strewing them hundreds of feet in every direction. All, in 12-15 seconds each. Most of the core columns were reduced to roughly 30' sections, ready for immediate removal to overseas recycling centers. Each, also produced massive pyroclastic clouds (another telltale high energy feature) that blanketed parts of lower Manhattan in fine powder, from 'river to river.'
Numerous well-documented anomalies were observed in lower Manhattan on 9/11 and in the months and years that followed. Alone, a number of these features (i.e. the squibs, pulverization of concrete, dismemberment of the superstructures, extremely powerful lateral energies from what were supposedly gravity-driven 'collapses,' excessive temperatures, molten steel and iron, building 7's implosion, and so on) would be powerful indicators of the presence of explosives.
'How could I be sure? Im not an scientist or an architect?' Jurors are also lay people, tasked with deciding between competing experts at criminal trials. A thorough review of the facts is a prerequisite to weighing all of the evidence carefully. Only then, based on a preponderance of reason in one or the other direction, can one make a decision. Look carefully at all of the photos and videos of these events you can find. Read and listen to the firsthand accounts, -the Oral Histories [NY Times] and the numerous news accounts from the day are good places to begin. Look at the reluctance on the part of the Bush administration to even investigate these attacks. To this day, no regulatory agency has investigated the attacks of 9/11. There have also been numerous examples of misdirection, ignoring evidence, and bad science, from FEMA, the 911 Commission, and NIST. -see work by David Chandler.
Facts that belie the official accounts :
-The speed and symmetry with which WTC 1, 2, & 7 came down.
-The level of destruction to towers 1 & 2, which left over 1/3 (1,120) of all victims 'unaccounted for' along with a host of other unprecedented anomalous features. (i.e so explosive they pulverized most of the concrete, disassembled superstructures, left massive debris fields, squibs, excessive temperatures, all of which would have been impossible without a lot of additional energy (beyond the structure's own gravitational potential), having been introduced. The lateral energies produced were so powerful they smashed windows and hurled multiton steel perimeter wall assemblies and core columns outward, hundreds of feet in every direction. Some embedded in the facades of neighboring buildings. Each of the Towers left a 1400' - 1600,' foot radial debris pattern and virtually no vertical columns remained standing.
-Watching Building 7's implosion, we must necessarily ask, how it was possible for a skyscraper to exhibit every feature of a planned implosion and yet not have been one, when the only time those features have ever been observed in the past were during controlled demolitions? Surely, the burden of proof lies with anyone claiming it was anything other than a controlled demolition. The 47-story tower was reduced to a remarkably neat 3-story pile of rubble, with large sections of the perimeter wall laying on its surface. NIST, in their 'final report' on WTC7 state, (after being called out on it by David Chandler "This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft).." So for the first 100' of this building's collapse (of the perimeter walls) the rate of fall of the roof line was indistinguishable from acceleration of freefall. Freefall, barring demolition, is impossible in any supported structure, because even a weakened structure will have some resistance. More recently, citing unstated 'public safety concerns,' NIST categorically refused to release the data inputs they used to make their computer model of Building 7's collapse. Even then, their results look nothing like the actual event. This is not how science is done. This directly undermines the crucial peer-review process which is central to the scientific process.
-Molten metal  found in small iron spherules so prevalent that investigators for RJ Lee labeled them a “signature component” of WTC Dust. Molten metal poured out of the southeast corner of the South Tower just below the point where moments later it came apart. Severely corroded remnants of structural steel beams documented in the BPAT Appendix C and repeatedly in witness accounts which describe, 'pools of molten metal in the basements and elevator shafts beneath all three towers.'
-100 day underground fires and excessive heat documented by numerous sources cannot be accounted for by any kind of uncontrolled hydrocarbon fire. Daily surface temperature readings taken by Bechtel for the ASSE [NASA and FDNY took their own readings] and nearly two later showed a surface temperature of 2800F 9 days after 09/11. Despite millions of gallons of water poured onto them. and numerous rainfalls, the fires could not be put out. It turns out that thermite burns even underwater because it provides it's own oxygen. Smoldering pits were what remained of all three skyscrapers.
-The red/grey chips. If explosives were used, Steven E Jones reasoned, there should be traces of them in the unprecedented amounts of dust these events generated. dust. Having already documented the iron micro-spheres (along with RJ Lee and USGS,) Jones was the first to document the presence of minute 'red/gray' chips in the dust and subsequently took part in the nearly 2 year, peer-reviewed study conducted at a number of different universities, and headed by Dr Niels Harrit, head of the Chemistry Dept. Copenhagen University, Denmark. Each of the four samples they tested, contained traces of a hi-tech (nano-engineered) thermitic material, they termed, nano-thermite.. Deniers have tried to explain these away as "paint primer chips" but those compounds are not highly energetic advance engineered materials, and will never leave elemental iron as a by-product when ignited, as the red/gray chips have been shown to do.
-Media blackout. Search for Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe in the NY Times and you will not find a word about it. Despite being ignored by most academic and corporate media sources, the paper's findings remain unchallenged within the scientific peer-reviewed literature.
-Who attacked us? By noon on that day Paul Bremer was on NBC naming Osama Bin Ladin & Saddam Hussein as likely culprits. Within 3 days the FBI presented photos of the 19 alleged hijackers. A good number of whom turned out to be innocent people living abroad. Soon afterward the FBI conceded, ‘we may never learn the actual identity of the perpetrators.’
-Cover-Up: investigations were postponed and underfunded. Numerous examples of deceit, the ignoring of evidence to make conclusions fit a preconceived narrative. Any criminal investigator will tell you the hours immediately following any crime are the most critical. Yet the first investigation into these unprecedented, world-changing, attacks consisted of12 "volunteers" who were not even allowed access to the site for 30 days. At which point they received what one described as, 'a guided tour.' The 156 samples of steel they did manage to obtain were mostly coupons cut at Freshkills Landfill where the smaller debris was taken and where, even pieces they had marked, "Save for Study" were "accidentally" discarded.
Even within the logic of the official story, these were easily the most catastrophic structural failures in all of engineering history. As such, they demanded the most rigorous and well-funded investigations possible. Yet we got the exact opposite; underfunding, delays, and bad science. The first 'investigation' was an investigation in name only. . FEMA issued it's report of May 2002. With regard to Building 7 they said : "Our best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation and analyses is necessary to resolve the issue." On the Twin Towers: "With the information and time available, the sequence of events leading to the collapse of the Twin Towers could not be definitively determined." [FEMA May, 2002]. The issue of FEMA's report coincided with completion of the clean-up and disposal of evidence at Ground Zero.
Missing Bodies: At Freshkills Landfill in Staten Island, the smaller debris was trucked and sorted into 3 content-based piles. What could, would for the next two years, be systematically loaded onto conveyor belts lined with gloved-attendants whose job it was to cull out any human remains they could locate. Despite two years of intensive searching and use of advanced DNA recovery techniques, over 1100 victims still remain unaccounted for. Many victims were identified from small fragments of bone or flesh, some found blocks away. 200 DNA tests matched a single individual. No one has addressed why current dna techniques cannot identify the thousands of unidentified human remain 'frozen for future analysis' and the NYC medical Examiner's Office refuses to answer direct inquiries on the matter.
There is more nonsense online regarding 9-11 than almost any other subject I can think of. See: The Pentagon & Disinformation **Also worth reading: Disinformation: Infiltration, Misinformation, Disruption
"The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Despite what we do not and may never know about attacks of 9/11, there is a relatively short list of well-documented facts that make the progressive collapse hypothesis untenable. There is nothing theoretical about any of the data that shows preplanted explosives destroyed these buildings.
Not every fact described above is referenced here but all are easily verified. Do your own research.
Start here: 911research.wtc7.net
Architects & Engineers For 911 Truth
Journal of 911 Studies
1. Molten Metal Testimony:
- WTC Chief Structural Engineer Leslie Robertson
- NIST's John Gross' denials contradicted by FDNY & others
- Fema BPAT Appendix C: A Limited Metallurgical Examination
- RJ Lee WTC Dust Signature Report, December 2003
3.Selling Out The Investigation by Bill Manning, Fire Engineering Magazine, January 2002
*WTC "INVESTIGATION"?: A CALL TO ACTION, Fire Engineering Magazine, December 2001
Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11 2001 by Allen M. Poteshman University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
On 911 Insider Trading: Detecting Informed Trading Activities in the Options Markets
*Newton's 3rd Law, "If a force acts upon a body, then an equal and opposite force must act upon the body that exerts the force." The law of momentum conservation derives from this law. Based on this law, the collapse of these structures should have been slowed by these opposing forces… However, scientific papers and video analysis of a number of videos show no observable deceleration of the antenna or the roof line as the upper sections impacted the standing structures below. In fact, analysis shows that both towers actually accelerated as they came down.
If one steps through them frame by frame, in some of the videos, it appears that the top sections were destroyed first, (from the point of impact, up) in what was possibly an attempt to create a curtain of debris behind which to hide the destruction of the remaining, intact, lower portions. According to findings based on analyses of the video evidence, the lower sections were destroyed at roughly 64% the acceleration of gravity. Each created a thunderous roar and volcano-like fountains of pulverized concrete, building contents, molten metal, squibs, flashes, and explosions, all documented (and then ignored in the official 'investigations) in numerous media and witness accounts.
this page: http://smu.gs/14kLypr