he report from the University of Alaska Fairbanks has come out, and it is states, that WTC7 did not collapse due to fire.
by Joshua Caplan, The Gateway Pundit:
Fox News reports:
Fresh evidence submitted in a major 9/11 lawsuit moving forward against the Saudi Arabian government reveals its embassy in Washington may have funded a “dry run” for the hijackings carried out by two Saudi employees, further reinforcing the claim employees and agents of the kingdom directed and aided the 9/11 hijackers and plotters.
Two years before the airliner attacks, the Saudi Embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, living undercover in the US as students, to fly from Phoenix to Washington “in a dry run for the 9/11 attacks,” alleges the amended complaint filed on behalf of the families of some 1,400 victims who died in the terrorist attacks 16 years ago.
The court filing provides new details that paint “a pattern of both financial and operational support” for the 9/11 conspiracy from official Saudi sources, lawyers for the plaintiffs say. In fact, the Saudi government may have been involved in underwriting the attacks from the earliest stages — including testing cockpit security.
“We’ve long asserted that there were longstanding and close relationships between al Qaeda and the religious components of the Saudi government,” said Sean Carter, the lead attorney for the 9/11 plaintiffs. “This is further evidence of that.”
As TGP reported last year, lawmakers called on the Obama White House to release redacted pages from the 9-11 Commission Report.
The report shows Saudi official Fahad al-Thumairy met with 9-11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar upon their arrival in Los Angeles in Jan. 2000.
Nawaf Alhazmi (left), and Khalid Almihdhar (right). [Source: FBI]
CBS Local reported:
Lawmakers are calling on the White House to declassify more than two dozen pages in the 9/11 Commission report that they say outlines evidence for possible support from the Saudi government for two hijackers who settled in Southern California.
A CBS News “60 Minutes” report quoted officials familiar with the 2003 report as saying 28 pages of redacted information raises questions over whether Saudi officials were involved in assisting Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar upon their arrival in Los Angeles in Jan. 2000.
Former Democratic congressman and U.S. ambassador to India Tim Roemer told “60 Minutes” the two Saudi nationals found a way to gain access to housing and flight lessons upon their arrival despite “extremely limited language skills and no experience with Western culture.”
“L.A., San Diego, that’s really you know, the hornet’s nest,” said Roemer. “That’s really the one that I continue to think about almost on a daily basis.”
According to the report, witnesses say both al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar met at the King Fahad mosque in Culver City with Fahad al-Thumairy, “a diplomat at the Saudi consulate known to hold extremist views.” He was denied reentry to the U.S. in 2003 for suspected terrorist ties.
Thumairy was a “a ghost employee with a no-show job at a Saudi aviation contractor outside Los Angeles while drawing a paycheck from the Saudi government”, according to the report.
Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com
by Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research:
This CBS Report suggests that Osama bin Laden had been admitted to a Pakistani Military hospital in Rawalpindi on the 10th local time, less than 24 hours before the terrorist attacks.
The report does not mention when he was actually released.
Nonetheless, this report casts doubt on the official narrative to the effect that Osama bin Laden was responsible for coordinating the 9/11 attacks.
From where? From his hospital bed? From his laptop or his cell phone?
The Pakistani military headquarters located in Rawalpindi is integrated by resident US military and intelligence advisers working with their Pakistani colleagues, who routinely report to Washington. It would be impossible for Osama bin Laden to enter a Pakistani military hospital unnoticed. Osama is a CIA “intelligence asset”. His whereabouts are known.
If this CBS report is correct, this confirms that the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden on September 10 were known to the Bush Administration.
Did “intelligence asset” Osama bin Laden have a GPS “Embedded Locator Chip” within his body, or a GPS in his laptop or cell phone which would have enabled US intelligence to establish his precise location in real time? (That GPS technology including the embedded locator chip was readily available to US intelligence and law enforcement well before 2001).
Osama could have been arrested on the 10th of September 2001. But that did not happen.
Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly claimed that the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden were unknown: “It is like looking for a needle in a stack of hay”. It’s an outright lie. Needless to say, “Going after bin Laden” in the wake of 9/11 has served to sustain the legend of the “world’s most wanted terrorist”.
The complete transcript of the CBS report is given below (emphasis). The original CBS video is also provided.
Excerpt from Michel Chossudovsky’s presentation to McMaster University, Ontario in 2002.
Bin Laden Whereabouts Before 9/11
CBS Evening News with Dan Rather; Author: Dan Rather, Barry Petersen
CBS, 28 January 2002
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), globalresearch.ca , 28 March 2002
DAN RATHER, CBS ANCHOR: As the United states and its allies in the war on terrorism press the hunt for Osama bin Laden, CBS News has exclusive information tonight about where bin Laden was and what he was doing in the last hours before his followers struck the United States September 11.
This is the result of hard-nosed investigative reporting by a team of CBS news journalists, and by one of the best foreign correspondents in the business, CBS`s Barry Petersen. Here is his report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BARRY PETERSEN, CBS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Everyone remembers what happened on September 11. Here`s the story of what may have happened the night before. It is a tale as twisted as the hunt for Osama bin Laden.
CBS News has been told that the night before the September 11 terrorist attack, Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan. He was getting medical treatment with the support of the very military that days later pledged its backing for the U.S. war on terror in Afghanistan.
Pakistan intelligence sources tell CBS News that bin Laden was spirited into this military hospital in Rawalpindi for kidney dialysis treatment. On that night, says this medical worker who wanted her identity protected, they moved out all the regular staff in the urology department and sent in a secret team to replace them. She says it was treatment for a very special person. The special team was obviously up to no good.
“The military had him surrounded,” says this hospital employee who also wanted his identity masked, “and I saw the mysterious patient helped out of a car. Since that time,” he says, “I have seen many pictures of the man. He is the man we know as Osama bin Laden. I also heard two army officers talking to each other. They were saying that Osama bin Laden had to be watched carefully and looked after.” Those who know bin Laden say he suffers from numerous ailments, back and stomach problems. Ahmed Rashid, who has written extensively on the Taliban, says the military was often there to help before 9/11.
AHMED RASHID, TALIBAN EXPERT: There were reports that Pakistani intelligence had helped the Taliban buy dialysis machines. And the rumor was that these were wanted for Osama bin Laden.
PETERSEN (on camera): Doctors at the hospital told CBS News there was nothing special about that night, but they refused our request to see any records. Government officials tonight denied that bin Laden had any medical treatment on that night.
(voice-over): But it was Pakistan`s President Musharraf who said in public what many suspected, that bin Laden suffers from kidney disease, saying he thinks bin Laden may be near death. His evidence, watching this most recent video, showing a pale and haggard bin Laden, his left hand never moving. Bush administration officials admit they don`t know if bin Laden is sick or even dead.
DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: With respect to the issue of Osama bin Laden`s health, I just am — don`t have any knowledge.
PETERSEN: The United States has no way of knowing who in Pakistan`s military or intelligence supported the Taliban or Osama bin Laden maybe up to the night before 9/11 by arranging dialysis to keep him alive. So the United States may not know if those same people might help him again perhaps to freedom.
Barry Petersen, CBS News, Islamabad.
Read More @ GlobalResearch.ca
by James Perloff, JamesPerloff.com:
Since publishing “9/11 Simplified,” I’ve received emails from six pilots, none of whom accept the official 9/11 story. Two were scheduled to fly in Boeings on the morning of 9/11.
Another is a UK-born pilot with about 20 years of flight experience. He is still actively flying as a captain on Airbus A300s, and spent many years training airline pilots. He has provided me with so many technological insights into aviation and 9/11 that I felt I should publish excerpts from our exchanges. For enhancement, I have added a few graphics and embedded some of the video clips he referred me to. For clarity, my comments are in bold and his in normal font. Of course, what we originally said has been rearranged into a more orderly sequence.
To keep his identity confidential, I’ll call him “Pilot A.” Some of his remarks bear on 9/11 in general, and some are specific to my article “9/11 Simplified,” so it will be helpful to readers if they are familiar with that post, which I may eventually republish in a revised edition.
Pilot A greeted me saying:
Great shows about “9-11 simplified” and I agree with most of your analysis so far, so please keep up the good work.
He knew from personal experience that the U.S. government’s theory of how the Twin Towers collapsed is bogus.
I know, like many others do, that heavy fuel like diesel and jet fuel cannot melt steel. Even Oxy-Acetylene or Oxy-Propane cutting torches require large amounts of high pressure oxygen injected into the fuel stream to melt steel, and it takes some time to get thick steel up to a softening/melting state. I went to tech college in the 90s to qualify as a welder and gas cutting was one of the disciplines. I’ve spend countless hours cutting and fabricating steel. I had an experience with an old 600 gallon diesel tank which I was cutting the top off to convert into a storage box. In the bottom below the drain plug level was some remaining fuel and sludge, but as I got about 3/4 of the way through cutting the lid off, the molten metal ignited the fuel in the bottom. The dirty fire that poured out the top burned for about 30 minutes, but the wafer thin (3 mm) steel didn’t even glow.
Pilot A agreed with my article’s 10-point proposal that small nuclear weapons had destroyed the Towers, and also agreed with the thesis that pre-planted thermite had indeed been used at the level of the “airplane strikes.” Most of us in the 9/11 community have seen the famous footage of molten steel dripping from a corner of the South Tower:
However, Pilot A had an insight about this I had not thought of:
Now I do think they used thermite as it was probably part of the structural weakening component, but could also have been part of the show to try and prove that “Look, jet fuel does melt steel!”
In my article I had discussed various evidences against jetliners striking the Towers, such as the uncontrollable speeds, and the impossible physics of an aluminum tail and wings and flying through 14-inch steel columns without breaking off. I had concluded that cloaked missiles, or possibly drones, were better explanations. I ask Pilot A what the likelihood was of commercial jetliners hitting the Towers:
Well, I have a couple of extra variables to your main idea for you to play with so here goes:
If you’re going to plan a dastardly event like a “New Pearl Harbour” to achieve all the things like more war, military spending, contracts for the corporate criminals, police state etc., then you want as much shock and horror as possible which includes, noise, fire, smoke and destruction on steroids. The planners would need this area of the operation a guaranteed certainty, no chance of foul-ups anywhere, total control, no variables, flawless. You wouldn’t use actual commercial jetliners piloted by humans to achieve this, too much to go wrong. E.g., the pilots could “chicken-out,” miss the towers, partially hit the towers, passengers could over-run the cockpit, the jet fuel might not ignite so no fire and explosion (more on that later), the damage to the building might be too little, pathetically small even, rogue military pilot ignoring orders to buzz off somewhere else might actually shoot the planes down . . . and on and on it goes.
What’s better than planes flying into buildings? The illusion of planes flying into buildings. Especially if it’s a high explosive/incendiary guided missile with some sort of holographic projection device strapped to its back. Better still let’s have 3 or 4 of them for damage consistency to really make a statement. These can be controlled by a central source, have a known and guaranteed outcome because the military has umpteen thousand examples of the destructive power of missiles, and they can be sent to a specific target with pin point accuracy and timing – perfect.
Passenger planes are very difficult to fly accurately with only external visual reference. With no electronic guidance or without heads-up display technology it’s too risky to try and fly into a specific point by line of sight. Not all pilots have the same level of skill or experience, and this sort of thing you only get to practice for real once!! Simulators have their limits as well for this sort of practice. I can almost see the pilots that have probably tried this in the simulators and predict the outcomes. An educated guess would be overcompensation to try and maintain an accurate flight path at high speed. The air that planes fly through isn’t always constant. There are pools and eddies like a river with rocks, changing currents and speeds. All these require constant adjustment which is easily achieved on approach at 140 knots, with all the control surfaces moving at their full potential and the aircraft slow enough to keep inertia to a minimum. But completely impossible for a novice pilot with only some light aircraft flight experience.
I don’t know how you could do a last-minute modification to a flight path to achieve this accuracy at the speed they were supposedly traveling. Once you get above 200 knots all the moving surfaces (Ailerons, Elevators, Rudder) are in high speed mode and become either artificially loaded or movement restricted to prevent excessive loading and structural damage. If you were slightly off course, you couldn’t make any large corrections to the trajectory at the last minute; everything is done gently. Plus eye-balling your way around a city you’ve never flown over before (if you believe the Muslim hijacker theory) is near impossible, even for a local city dweller! The city layout is different when looking down on it and the view from the flight deck is very limited, unlike a Cessna which has great views. And traveling at hundreds of knots makes this all the more idiotic to achieve.
So if the planes missed the towers, or partially struck the towers, or the jet fuel failed to ignite, then the Hollywood-style fireball scene is a flop. Jet fuel, which is basically paraffin, needs certain requirements to burn. Unlike the petrol gas (95/98) stuff that you put in your Chevy, Avtur (Aviation Turbine Fuel) won’t ignite if you pour some on the ground and throw a match or lighter into it. I know, I’ve tried it. It usually requires heat (compression chamber) and/or pressure (injector nozzle) to combust. The likelihood, though, is that it would probably ignite because the engines were hot, but not guaranteed especially if the engines sheared off on the outside of the building. Yet more variables.
But the main problems I have with the plane crashes shown on TV is the lack of fuselage crumpling effect, therefore showing no deceleration at all and the complete melting of the entire machine into the buildings with no debris shattering off on the outside and dropping to the street. The wing’s strength is primarily in the vertical axis, they’re built for lifting so they would shear off at the root upon contact with anything solid. That large leading edge surface area and leverage against the wing root would rip them completely off. Try walking through a doorway with your arms stretched out and feel the force on your shoulders as your arms try to go through the wall. Now the fuel tanks might rupture and some of the fuel might go into the building, but no way the entire plane would.
Also aeroplanes are a semi-monocoque construction like an egg (monocoque) with a frame inside it. But the skin is pulled over the frame under a lot of tension to maintain aerofoil shape and increase strength. But when this highly strung aluminium skin is ruptured; it springs off as the tension is released. In fact it almost explodes off if a large enough area is damaged. Watch the wing and tail of this ATR as it clips a bridge in Taiwan shortly before crashing:
by Shepard Ambellas, Intellihub:
MANHATTAN (INTELLIHUB) — Patrick Dillon was one of the first responders who arrived at the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, and helped to rescue a key survivor who was injured from falling debris while protecting a high-level official in the Emergency Command Center bunker.
Engulfed in a cloud of hot dust, looking for survivors, the brave first responder had worked his way down into the “smoking ruin of steel” by traversing piles of concrete and other obstacles.
During his descent Dillon recalls noticing that most of the steel in ‘the pile’ seemed to be cut at a “45-degree” angle and was primarily found “in about 30-foot sections,” which is atypical of a gravitational collapse from a fire. That’s when Dillon received a call on his radio to go help rescue an injured woman from the control bunker where a counter-terrorism team had assembled after the North Tower collapsed.
The woman was a Czech National who was employed by the New York Port Authority as a “bodyguard” for the Port’s new security chief John P. O’Neill.
“At one point before the South Tower had been hit by an airplane, apparently, she [the Czech National] saw John O’Neill get a call on his cell phone inside the bunker. He listened to the call, clicked off the cellphone and then said to everyone else around the command table, quote, unquote, ‘They are controlling the planes from the ground’,” Dillon explained.
Dillon said that he found out the shocking information months later after being approached by the same woman at a book launch who told him the chilling details as she was “chain smoking.”
Dillon believes that there were a number of explosions which detonated that day which were “designed to weaken” the towers before their collapse and said that he thinks that “nano-thermite” was used as well.
So who was John P. O’Neill?
John P. O’Neill was a Special Agent in Charge of an FBI counter-terrorism team until late 2001 when he took a job as head of Port Authority security systems and was sworn in on Sept. 10, 2001, just one day before the attacks where he perished on the 49th floor trying to rescue survivors.
Read More @ Intellihub.com
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were not planned and directed from Afghanistan, as US President Donald Trump has claimed; rather, they were orchestrated by certain elements in Washington, DC and Tel Aviv, says Dr. Kevin Barrett, an American academic who has been studying the events of 9/11 since late 2003.
“[The] Zionist coup d’etat of 9/11 was done by the combination of Israelis and neo-conservative Americans along with hard-line right-wingers in the American military and the intelligence establishment who pulled off this coup d’etat in America,” Dr. Barrett said.
Dr. Barrett, a founding member of the Scientific Panel for the Investigation of 9/11, made the remarks in an interview with Press TV on Tuesday while commenting on a statement Trump made on Monday during his policy speech about Afghanistan.
Speaking from Fort Myer, Virginia, Trump unveiled his much-anticipated agenda for Afghanistan.
During his speech, Trump said, “The consequences of a rapid exit [from Afghanistan] are both predictable and unacceptable. 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, was planned and directed from Afghanistan because that country was ruled by a government that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists. A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11th.”
‘Trump sending US to graveyard of empires’
“Donald Trump has just committed the United States to an endless quagmire in Afghanistan — the graveyard of empires. And Trump’s rationale is the same one that has been in force for the past sixteen years which is that Afghanistan was somehow responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington on September 11, 2001,” Dr. Barrett said.
“It is amazing how this gift of 9/11 keeps on giving. And Trump is the last person one would have normally expected to do this,” he stated.
“When Trump was running for office, he was skeptical about foreign wars, open-ended engagements. He recognized that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have destroyed America’s economy and infrastructure,” he said.
‘Trump a 9/11 skeptic’
“And what’s more, Trump is also a 9/11 skeptic. On September 11th itself Trump immediately said that there must have been explosives used. He said there is no way that a plane could possibly take down these buildings. And he was right, as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have proven. Thousands of architects and engineers are on record having put their careers and livelihoods and reputations on the line to state that what happened to the three skyscrapers, including the Building 7, on 9/11, was clearly controlled demolition” Dr. Barrett said.
“So the official narratives of hijacking by people who were supposedly being commanded by a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan are utterly ludicrous and have been fully disproven on hundreds and hundreds of grounds,” he stated.
“And now Donald Trump, who has expressed skepticism about all of this in the past, and who drove (Jeb) Bush out of the presidential nomination by attacking (George W.) Bush, his brother, as the likely culprit or at least someone who is responsible for 9/11—now Trump who we all hoped might be an ‘irresponsible’ truth teller, that is, someone who would tell the incredibly subversive truth about what has really happened to America since the false flag attack of September 11th—all those hopes are now dashed,” he noted.
‘Trump under control of Deep State’
Dr. Barrett said now “Trump is clearly under the control of the elements of the Deep State that murdered three thousand Americans in an act of high treason on September 11, 2001.”
“So those of us who care about the truth and care about the core values that made America great in the first place are now going to have to view Trump as well as the rest of the American leadership as treasonous enemies,” he concluded.
Read More @ PressTV.com
by Aaron Kesel, Activist Post:
Britain’s Labour Party is supporting the demands of U.S. 9/11 survivors demanding that Prime Minister Theresa May release a suppressed report into the extent of Saudi Arabia’s financing of Islamic extremism within the UK, The Independent reported.
Last week, May’s Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, stated the report would not be released “for national security reasons.” A few days later a group of survivors and relatives of those who died in the attacks on New York and Washington, wrote to May encouraging her to release the report.
“The public has a right to know how extremism in the UK is funded,” they said in a statement.
by James Corbett, The International Forecaster:
In part, this points to the fundamental problem of attribution in the age of cyberterror. It’s one thing to attribute a physical attack to an enemy… But in the cyber sphere, there’s nothing at all for anyone to examine.
As Al CIA-da become the “good guys” (again), and I-CIA-SIS starts to fall apart, and the latest boogeymen fail to strike a chord of panic in a boogeyman-weary public (remember the fearsome Khorasan Group, anyone?), it is safe to say that the old war of terror paradigm is falling by the wayside. Lucky for the multi-trillion dollar global terror-industrial complex, then, that the spiffy new cyberterror paradigm is waiting in the wings to take its place!
from How To Live in the US:
Steven Jones is a former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University, his major research interests have been in the areas of fusion, solar energy, and archaeometry. He has authored or co-authored a number of papers documenting evidence of extremely high temperatures during the WTC destruction and evidence of unreacted nano-thermitic material in the WTC dust.
Robert Korol is a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, as well as a fellow of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering and the Engineering Institute of Canada. His major research interests have been in the areas of structural mechanics and steel structures. More recently, he has undertaken experimental research into the post-buckling resistance of H-shaped steel columns and into the energy absorption associated with pulverization of concrete floors.