Experts Reject Fire As Cause For 9/11 WTC Collapses


 


 

Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed symmetrically and in near-freefall as part of the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of World Trade Center (WTC) Building 7, portrayed in the 10:08 min. video above.

The 47-story steel-frame building was not hit by an airplane and was located 355 feet north from WTC 1 and 2, "the Twin Towers." It collapsed in 6.5 seconds seven hours after the Twin Towers fell. The first 2.5 seconds of the WTC 7 collapse exhibited absolute free fall, according to scientific measurements by physicist David Chandler.

World Trade Center 9/11 via Creative CommonsThe collapses exhibited so many signatures of controlled demolition that experts who have studied them are increasingly questioning the official claims of causation, which U.S. authorities and the mainstream media have ascribed to airplane impacts of WTC 1 and 1 and resultant fires.

Last month, Europhysics News published 15 Years Later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses. The report challenged U.S. government findings that the skyscrapers collapsed due to fire. The four co-authors noted that no other steel-framed skyscrapers in world history have ever collapsed from fire (and each of the Twin towers had been specifically designed to more than withstand the impact of a civilian airline like those on 9/11.

Instead, the authors cited compelling evidence that the collapses followed the physics of controlled demolition.

Similarly, the first day of the 9/11 Justice in Focus conference brought together prominent 9/11 technical and legal experts in New York City Sept. 10-11 for an in-depth examination of the physical evidence relating to the WTC collapses, as well as a variety of related issues, such as legal precedents in landmark cases. The second day was a symposium on which legal venues and legal procedures can best advance research and result in legal remedies congruent with forensic evidence evaluated by legal review panels. 

Dr. Leroy Hulsey, shown at right in a Justice Integrity Project photo, summed up the results of his University of Alaska team by telling noted public interest attorney  Daniel Sheehan that there is "zero" chance that WTC 7 collapsed due to fire, which is the official U.S. government explanation. Hulsey is the chairman of the civil and environmental engineering department at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks.

Leroy HulseyHulsey's remarks during the forum at New York City's historic Cooper Union typified other engineering experts' conclusions. The conference "Justice In Focus 9/11 2016" was co-sponsored by the 2,700-member group Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911 Truth), a non-profit, non-partisan body.

The group is led by founder Richard Gage, a major speaker at the conference and the featured narrator in the video above. AE911 Truth funded the Alaskan university's research and a free live stream video of the proceedings. The presentations are now available via YouTube, with donations requested here on a voluntary basis to cover costs.

Today's article focuses on these new technical findings regarding 9/11 research. It is part of new Justice Integrity Project "Readers Guide to 9/11 Research and Advocacy." That guide builds on our extensive previous coverage of the topic, and will soon include lists of vital books and films from varied viewpoints and coverage of important new legal advocacy on the issues, encompassed in part by the second day of the program at Cooper Union.

This "Readers Guide" is intended to make easily available in concise formats the major official and alternative studies, news items, commentaries, videos and films on the topic, with representation from diverse and reasonably credible viewpoints that attract significant support. This series thus parallels our three existing "Readers Guides," which separately provided similar arrays of research on the 1960s assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and New York Sen. Robert F. Kennedy.    

As in those efforts, this editor, a member of the Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry that co-sponsored the New York event, is involved in research, writing and speaking on those topics, including both days of the forum at the Cooper Union. Nonetheless, this column and our forthcoming coverage provides ample links to alternative viewpoints, as in the appendix below listing major government and popular reports supporting the official verdicts arguing that fire caused the WTC skyscraper collapses.   

Cooper Union David Shankbone

The Cooper Union in New York City, built in 1859 and photographed by David Shankbone

Physics, Law, Intelligence, Terror, and History

New technical findings about the WTC collapse are the main focus of today's report. But readers unfamiliar with the debate may appreciate first a brief backgrounder on legal, political, and historical Danny Shaheen NYC Sept. 10, 2016 JIP Photodimensions on the scientific debate, especially since the mainstream media seldom provide that context.

For such reasons, the New York conference organizers featured on the first day two lawyers famous for litigating historically important cases involving allegations of sinister crimes. One was Daniel Sheehan, shown at right in one of our photos, a noted public interest lawyer whose cases have included the secret "Pentagon Papers" history of the Vietnam War's beginning, the murder of nuclear power whistleblower Karen Silkwood as she sought to expose safety and national security issues, and exposure of the 1980s Reagan Administration Iran-Contra drug and arms smuggling scandal.

The other featured legal expert on the first day was Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, (shown below in a file photo). He is the honorary president of Italy's Supreme Court following his long career The Hon. Ferdinando Imposimatofighting the Mafia and other powerful, corrupt forces in Europe.

As technical experts provided their evidence, the former judge-prosecutor drew on experiences that included the Mafia murder of his brother to provide strategic guidance for the audience. That focus, like Sheehan's, was on how the emerging evidence might point the way to accountability for attacks that killed nearly 3,000 innocent victims at the World Trade Center.

The next segment of our Readers Guide series will focus more heavily on those legal accountability issues aimed in part to piece a cover-up apparently orchestrated by a few, but tolerated by my others in leadership and the public distracted by other matters.

Yet the attacks continue to serve as justification for what the Bush administration called the Global War on Terrorism.

The Obama administration, which began with the president-elect's famous vow in January 2009 to "look forward" not backward, has in essence continued fight wars in the Middle East and Central Asia against terrorists whose connection with 9/11 is highly strained.

James ClapperIndeed, White House Director of National Intelligence James Clapper this week confirmed at a Washington Post forum that the United States will be fighting in the Middle East for generations against what he described as terrorists.

This is merely one example of how the historical stakes remain high. Clapper is shown on stage in a Washington Post photo, with Post national security columnist David Ignatius to Clapper's right conducting the interview. The Justice Integrity Project was invited to attend the event in the Post's new headquarters, and this editor is shown in a tan jacket near the front at right.

Earlier this month, the 9/11 conference was convened in the Cooper Union, which was founded by inventor, industrialist and philanthropist Peter Cooper. It offers education in art, architecture and engineering, as well as courses in the humanities and social sciences.

Abraham Lincoln Feb. 27, 1860 day of Cooper Union speech, Matthew BradyOn Feb. 27, 1860, Abraham Lincoln spoke there in its same Great Hall as a dark horse candidate for the 1860 Republican nomination for president. Historians regard Lincoln's powerful pro-Constitution, anti-slavery speech as securing for him the nomination from the then-new party. He is shown in a Matthew Brady photo taken on the day of his speech.

On that same stage, experts convened this month to try to unravel for the audience remaining technical mysteries about 9/11.

Official U.S. Government Reports on WTC Collapses

The 9/11 terror attacks most memorably focused on the two WTC skyscrapers in New York, "The Twin Towers."

Each collapsed about an hour after what has been reported as airplane hijackings of American Airlines Flight 11 (containing the most notorious of the hijackers, Mohammad Atta, shown at right in a file photo) and United Airlines Flight 175 from Boston. Authorities said 19 radical Islamists recruited by Osama bin Laden undertook the hijackings as part of an Al Qaeda conspiracy against the United States and its prominent landmarks.

Mohamad AttaLesser known is that WTC 7, a 47-story structure about two football fields away from the other two towers, also collapsed about seven hours after the other two skyscrapers and without being hit by any aircraft.

Also, the Pentagon suffered a murderous attack and fire that morning from what was reported as the hijacking of American Airlines Flight 77, departing from Dulles Airport in Virginia. Hijackers also reportedly commandeered United Airlines Flight 93 departing from Newark, which crashed near Shanksville, PA that morning, killing all passengers and crew. 

A series of anthrax attacks began also of mailings of the spores in September, 2001 with discovery of victim targets extending between Oct. 3 and November. At least 22 people were known to have become infected, five fatally, according to Dr. Graeme MacQueen, a speaker at this month's Cooper Union conference and author of a concise, heavily endnoted book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception.

The best-known targets of the anthrax letters were the U.S. Senate offices of Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT), and news offices of ABC, CBS, NBC and the National Enquirer and its sister newspaper, the Sun. The only fatality among those prominent targets was a Sun photo editor. But the terror prompted major alarms in Washington just as Congress was passing the Patriot Act and authorizing a war of reprisal against Afghanistan for its role in hosting bin Laden, a Saudi national. 

Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) Aug. 31, 2016 at NPC (Noel St. John photo)As described more fully in an appendix below, the first government study was an inquiry completed in December by the Senate and House intelligence committees. It was led by their chairs, Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL, below at left in a photo by Noel St. John) and House Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL), shown at right in an official photo from his later post as Bush administration CIA Director.

Porter Goss CIA DirectorIts report is here under its formal name: The Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001. Inquiry members, especially Graham, repeatedly complained that their inquiry was artificially rushed and shortchanged in investigative resources by the Bush administration.

Its 28-page report on who funded the hijackers was suppressed until pressure by victim families and others forced President Obama and congress to make the report public in July, as reported here in Report On Saudi 9/11 Terrorists Prompts Outrage, New Questions. The report showed help to two accused hijackers from the San Diego area by entities associated with the Saudi Royal Family, including Saudi Ambassador to the United States Prince Bandar.

After the close in 2002 of the congressional Joint Inquiry, pressure from family members of the nearly three thousand victims resulted in the formation at year-end of "The 9/11 Commission" After Henry Kissinger withdrew as nominee for chairman, the commission's leaders were New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean (R) and deputy chairman Lee Hamiliton, a retired Democratic congressman from Indiana.

Commissioner Max Cleland of Georgia, a former Democratic senator from Georgia who had lost three limbs during Vietnam combat, came to criticize the commission's investigation as inadequate. But he resigned before completion when the Bush administration offered him a job he needed after losing his senate seat during a brutal election campaign when he was accused of being soft on terrorism. He is shown on the cover of his memoir below.

Max ClelandOther commissioners, most of them affiliated with law firm, government and foundation jobs heavily funded by intelligence and defense industries, ratified the 2004 report, available here. The commission prepared its conclusions under the tight control of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a University of Virginia professor and a past and future colleague of high-level Bush administration figures, including National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.

Rice, whose White House responsibilities included preventing terror attacks, was promoted to become Secretary of State during the second Bush term. She then brought Zelkow into the State Department as legal counselor after he completed his commission work.

The 9/11 Commission report skimped on technical reasons for the collapse of WTC 7, which remained little known to the public even though its collapse increasingly concerned those critics who knew of the strange circumstances of the collapse of the 47-story building in about 6.5 seconds.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provided the major technical reports on the WTC collapses. The first was a Final Report released in September 2005 primarily on World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2. The report, Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster, listed as its primary authors Dr. Sivaraj Shyam-Sunder, then-director of NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory.

In 2008, shortly before the end of the term-limited Bush administration, NIST issued a Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.  Its primary author was listed as Dr. Richard G. Gann, a senior research scientist at NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory.

Meanwhile, family members of victims, ailing first responders, insurers, building owners, and others pursued litigation that inevitably involved technical issues at times.

Many of the suits went before U.S. District Judge Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in Manhattan. A major insurance claim for $7 billion by WTC 7 leaseholder Larry Silverstein went before U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey. But relatively little of the technical aspects of the litigation  became resolved in public fashion, especially questions by critics with no formal role in the case.

One reason was because a major suit by family members against Saudi entities has been vacated because courts awarded the Saudi defendants sovereign immunity. Congress has voted unanimously to carve out an exception to help the families in legislation called JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act). But President Obama vetoed the bill Sept. 23. An influential congressman on the matter, who asked to speak on background, predicted to the Justice Integrity Project Sept. 22 that votes existed in both houses to override the president's vote, with that view repeated by other reporting.

Many other lawsuits have been settled, thereby avoiding litigation risk and public scrutiny.

Judge Alvin HellersteinThe New York Times reported Sept. 9 that Hellerstein, shown in a photo, believes the process has worked well. The story was Judge in 9/11 Suits Feels No Regret That None Ever Went to Trial by Benjamin Weiser. 

Families have amassed a trove of internal documents and depositions. "But none of the material was ever aired before a jury," the judge noted. "Each of the 96 victims’ cases filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan was settled confidentially...." The reporter quoted the judge as conceding that by not holding a trial, there was a “loss of information” to the public. “But it pales in my mind,” he said, “with the fact that the people who were suing for money got their money.”

Obstacles To Research

Sporadic questions, research and criticism of WTC collapses has occurred beyond that raised by litigants. But the research process has been extremely difficult.

rudy giulianiFor one thing, then-New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (shown in a file photo) oversaw a comprehensive and rapid clean-up undertaken under extraordinary security, purported to protect national security, privacy of victims, and crime scene evidence. Under this tight security, government and private workers carted away both evidence and debris to locales (including smelting factories in China) far beyond the reach of independent investigators.

Furthermore, any such would-be researchers have been for the most part swept up in the horror of the event and patriotic themes of national unity, which is interpreted to include support for all levels of government and ostracism of those doubting the official story.

As time moved on, career and other economic pressures tended to prevent either experts or concerned citizens from pursuing inquiries.

A prominent factor limiting such inquiries at least since the mid-1960s has been fear of the "conspiracy theorist" smear, which is particularly effective against journalists, academics, and those who make their living (or who have spouses employed) in government-related sectors. Declassified documents indicate that the CIA and its allies in business, media, and the non-profit world developed the phrase to smear those who might question the veracity of the Warren Report blaming President Kennedy's assassination solely on Lee Harvey Oswald.

The insult is especially damaging to the careers of those in architecture and engineering. That's because those fields often involve government contracting work. Economic conditions since the 2008 recession remind everyone that financial security cannot be taken for granted. So, it takes a strong civic commitment for those working in such fields to work on such research. Almost no one would experience a career boost, and many might legitimately fear reprisals.

Nonetheless, members of the AE911 Truth group that Gage helped found have led the way in fostering rigor upon the many different theories regarding 9/11, some of which are likely wacko and some doubtless concocted by provocateurs (as in similar studies) to discredit legitimate independent researchers.

9/11 Trruth OutreachThey focus on the collapse of the three WTC towers as best within their technical expertise. Similarly, the conference in New York focused almost entirely on the WTC collapses, not the other events.

Even Professor MacQueen, author of the book on anthrax, devoted his time to his study of witness statements regarding WTC collapses.

He concluded that 156 witnesses are on record as saying they perceived an explosion, blast or similar occurrence emanating from WTC structures. By his tabulation, 120 of these 156 witnesses were fire department workers who can be presumed to have more experience than most witnesses in distinguishing between a "fire" and an explosion.  His point was that firefighters can distinguish between explosions that are natural in fires (to be expected, and structurally irrelevant) and explosions that are not expected and that are destroying the Towers. This is why he pointed out that 31 firefighters use the term "bomb" when describing what they witnessed.

C-SPAN, a public affairs service project of the cable industry, has proven far more open in sharing responsible criticism of 9/11 official reports, just as C-SPAN provides more informed discussion of 1960s assassinations issues than the corporate-controlled (and often government-regulated) media. Thus, a Gage C-SPAN appearance discussing the WTC collapse issues is reputed to be one of the most-viewed C-SPAN episodes in the network's entire four-decade history.

Consensus Evidence?

Another attempt at rigorous study of inherently complicated evidence is that by Consensus 9/11, a co-sponsor of the New York conference this month. Its website publishes what it calls a consensus of 9/11 best evidence. Here is a link, amplified below.

The 9/11 Consensus Points. The official claims regarding 9/11 are contradicted by facts that have been validated by a scientific consensus process, and which include the following points of “best evidence.” The 48 Consensus Points are divided into the ten categories below, which in turn link to the individual 48 points:

The "consensus" effort thus extends beyond the Architects & Engineers in focusing on events beyond the WTC collapses and in seeking to draw implications about those events, including the evolution of blame for hijackers into a still-ongoing Global War On Terror, a term devised by the Bush administration but carried on in effect by the Obama administration in many similar ways.

samantha power cass sunstein biden 8 14 13Many individual news articles, commentaries and videos have been published on these topics. But mainstream professional organizations have remained highly resistant to examinations of evidence.

Meanwhile, Harvard Law professor Cass Sunstein has led a legion of thought-leaders, Democrat and Republican alike, in denouncing "conspiracies." Sunstein, co-author of a widely used law school casebook on constitutional law and regarded as a liberal for most of his career, has served with his wife Samantha Power in enormously influential national security, legal, and media posts during recent years.

Sunstein is a friend of President Obama, and served during the first term as White House regulation czar at the Office of Management and Budget. In effect, he supervised all federal regulation on any topic, via the powers of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

In the 2013 White House photo at right, Vice President Biden is shown with him swearing Sunstein's wife Samantha Power as the current U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Power, also a high-ranking Obama aide during the first-term advocating for ramped up fights against "terrorists," made global news Saturday night by walking out of UN National Security Council speech by her Russian counterpart. He was complaining about a U.S.-led air attack killing or wounding approximately 200 Syrian soldiers fighting ISIS. Details: U.S. admits carrying out airstrike that Syria claims killed 62 soldiers. The attack helped lead to the breakdown of a ceasefire negotiated for months.

For such careers, 9/11 has provided talking points justifying many proposals normally regarded as unconstitutional police state tactics.

In 2008, Sunstein co-authored a working paper "Conspiracy Theories" that argued that the government so badly needs to fight bad ideas that it should recruit journalists and professors on a covert basis to disrupt circles where bad ideas exist, especially criticism of official accounts of the 9/11 attacks. The alternative, he suggested, would be for the government to forbid bad ideas or to tax their proponents heavily.

Although the proposed program would seemingly affirm the darkest fears of those who far a police state, Sunstein amplified his argument in his 2014 book Conspiracy theories and Other Dangerous Ideas, published by Simon & Schuster. The book was filled with brief references to topical and academic matters. It failed to address 9/11 WTC evidence at all, much less in a sustained manner.

Nearly all such advocates rarely if ever address specific "theories," but instead smear opponents on a personal basis, as in a 2011 book from HarperCollins Among the Truthers by Jonathan Kay, a Yale Law School graduate and a managing editor at the National Post newspaper. The well-connected conservative pundit Kay, like his neo-liberal counterpart Sunstein, advocates for the official government's story and avoids any attempt at addressing opposing evidence, even in Kay's 340-page book.

Given the vast power of the government, the intimidation factor against witnesses, researchers and whistleblowers is hardly theoretical.

What's New

EurophysicsThat recap of history is necessary to show why independent research and news reporting on it have moved so slowly even on such a pivotal world event, and why it is largely (but not exclusively) pursued by professionals who are not at the vulnerable early stages of their careers, or are based outside of the United States.

We can now be relatively brief in citing new research from technical experts, whose work speaks for itself.

Europhysics News, the publication of a prominent society of physics experts in Europe, published in August a report, 15 Years Later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses co-authored Steven Jones, Robert Korol, Anthony Szamboti, and Ted Walter.

Jones is former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University. Korol is a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada. Szamboti is a mechanical design engineer with over 25 years of structural design experience in the aerospace and communications industries. Ted Walter is  the director of strategy and development for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

They concluded that the WTC collapses could not have been caused by fire, as NIST and other conventional wisdom had argued. Instead, the said say “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.”

Also, they said: “Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities.”

The report received straightforward coverage by the conservative site World Net Daily (WND) in 9/11 conspiracy gets support from physicists' study and from the left site Global Research in Fifteen Years Later, Physics Journal Concludes All Three WTC Towers Collapsed on 9/11 Due to Controlled Demolition, but little coverage in the mainstream media. 

Global Research summarized findings this way:

The comprehensive study in Europhysics Magazine directly challenges the official narrative and lends to a growing body of evidence that seriously questions the veracity of the government narrative.

In 2002, the National Institute of Standards and Technology remarked that the case was exceptionally bizarre. There were no other known cases of total structural collapses in high-rise buildings caused by fires and so it is deeply unusual that it should have happened three times in the space of one day, noted NIST.

Official investigations have never been able to thoroughly and coherently explain how this might have happened and various teams tasked with examining the collapse have raised difficult questions about the veracity of the government’s story.

David ChanderPerhaps most damning of all, the experts claimed that after a thorough forensic analysis of video footage of the building’s collapse, it revealed signs of a controlled implosion. Additionally, Jones has co-authored a number of papers documenting evidence of unredacted nano-thermitic material in the WTC dust.

The authors of the study note that the buildings fell with such speed and symmetry that they there was no other feasible explanation for the sudden collapse at free fall speeds – directly refuting studies that attempted to debunk the idea that the building fell without resistance. These respected experts’ new forensic analysis only adds to the growing movement of people calling for a new and impartial investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center.

Revealing the scope and breadth of public disbelief in the official government narrative surrounding the events of 9/11, even presidential candidate Jill Stein has recently called for a new investigation.

Europhysics co-author Anthony Szamboti drew on his experience Sept. 10 to join the speaking faculty at Cooper Union. Among other technical speakers was David Chandler, a high school physics teacher shown at right and credited with exposing NIST claims about the WTC 7 collapse that required NIST to issue a correction.

WTC 7 was a special focus of discussion. Indeed, an entire website devoted to evidence about its collapse.

More generally, Gage argued that even if the three WTC buildings were destroyed by fire (which he does not believe) it would remain baffling that government authorities would not study the situation more since destruction by fire, he said, would mean that existing fire prevent building codes throughout the nation would need to be revised.

One unannounced speaker was Karl Golovin, a retired U.S. Customs agent who had been assigned with his colleagues after 9/11 to search WTC rubble that had been shipped to a New Jersey landfill.

He was invited to the stage in part to describe how he had bought a full-page advertisement in the Washington Times casting suspicion on the 9/11 official accounts. The ad on Page 3 of the newspaper's Sept. 9 edition was headlined: Congress Receives '48 Pages' 9/11 Reading Assignment. That referenced a 48-page AE911 Truth booklet. Golovin had purchased enough copies to personally deliver one to each of the nation's 541 U.S. Senators and House members, including those from territories.

Golovin used his brief slot at Cooper Union to suggest that he thinks he and his former law enforcement colleagues had been assigned clean-up duties to help dispose of evidence of controlled demolition.

He attempted also at a Sept. 20 forum at the Newseum to persuade CNN to investigate such evidence, as shown here in a video excerpt of the program “CNN Politics Campaign 2016: Like, Share, Elect” With Wolf Blitzer at Newseum. A transcript of the dialog is at the bottom of this column's appendix.

Daniel Sheehan and Ferdinando Imposimato Sept. 11, 2016 JIPWe close today's segment of this Readers Guide by reporting Daniel Sheehan's examination of Leroy Hulsey, the engineering department chairman at the University of Alaska.

The purpose was to prepare for a court or other kind of formal hearing if the government ever permitted testimony by independent experts on new evidence. Sheehan is shown at right with Judge Imposimato in our photo taken of the Cooper Union stage.

Sheehan: "If one of your Ph.D. students had submitted this (the NIST reports on the WTC 7 collapse] would you have flunked them?"

Dr. Hulsey: "Yes. My conclusion is the fire did not bring this building down."

Sheehan: "On a scale of one to 100, how likely do you think it is that this building came down because of fire?"

Dr. Hulsey: "Zero."

 
This column was updated Sept. 26. Coming next: Our report on 9/11 Truth Action Projects to create a "Truth-friendly Congress" and on the new litigation strategies proposed at the "Justice in Focus" conference this month
 
 
 
Contact the author Andrew Kreig
 
 
 

Justice Integrity Project Readers Guide To 9/11 Research (Previous segments arranged In reverse chronological order)

Justice Integrity Project, Experts Reject Planes, Fire As Cause For 9/11 WTC Collapses, Andrew Kreig, Sept. 23, 2016. [This column.] Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed symmetrically and in near-freefall as part of the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Former Senate Intelligence Chair Graham Seeks More 9/11, Saudi Disclosures, Sept. 1, 2016. Former Senator Bob Graham urged pressure on Congress for more disclosure about Saudi Arabian interaction with 9/11 hijackers at an NPC Newsmaker event on Aug. 31. The U.S. House of Representatives, he said, must enable 9/11 victim families to sue Saudi entities suspected of complicity. “These almost 3,000 Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) Aug. 31, 2016 at NPC (Noel St. John photo)American victims and their families deserve justice,” said Graham, shown in a photo image by Noel St. John. “They deserve the right, in a court of law, to present the evidence they have gathered, which is voluminous, that will link the kingdom and other entities of Saudi Arabia to the 19 hijackers.”

Readers Guide To Suppressed Report On Funders Of 9/11 Hijackers, July 18, 2016. A Readers Guide summarizing news coverage during 2016 of the so-called "28 Pages" (actually 29 pages) is provided below to show the background of the controversy that prompted authorities to release on July 15 a redacted version of the 2002 Senate-House Inquiry on who funded 9/11 terrorism hijackers.

Report On Saudi 9/11 Terrorists Prompts Outrage, New Questions, July 18, 2016. Some of the 9/11 hijackers received support from individuals probably connected to the Saudi government, according to a long-classified 2002 Senate-House report released in redacted form on Friday, July 15. But Karen Breitweiser and four other prominent 9/11 widows aptly responded with a hard-hitting Huffington Post column “29 Pages Revealed: Corruption, Crime and Cover-up Of 9/11.”

 Mark Crispion Miller Justice in Focus promo Sept. 11, 2016


JUSTICE IN FOCUS HIGHLIGHTS:
Mark Crispin Miller Kicks Off Landmark
15th Anniversary Symposium

We at AE911Truth are pleased to begin releasing full-length speeches and presentations from last weekend’s historic Justice In Focus symposium. Today, we invite you to watch [on a complimentary basis] the incisive opening remarks of Day One Master of Ceremonies Mark Crispin Miller. Mark is a professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University and the celebrated author of such books as Boxed In: The Culture of TV and The Bush Dislexicon.

You may also watch the entire 16 hours of proceedings in the Justice In Focus video archive by making a suggested donation of $10, though any amount is welcome. Details here

On behalf of all the sponsors, we thank you for attending and supporting what will surely be a milestone in the pursuit of 9/11 Justice.

Sponsors
•    Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
•    Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry
•    NY State Legislative Action Project for 9/11 Justice
•    9/11 Consensus Panel
•    9/11 Truth Action Project

 

Recent Technical Criticism of Official Reports

EurophysicsEurophysics News, 15 Years Later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses, Steven Jones, Robert Korol, Anthony Szamboti, and Ted Walter, Volume 47, No. 4 (August 2016). In August 2002, the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) launched what would become a six-year investigation of the three building failures that occurred on September 11, 2001 (9/11): the well-known collapses of the World Trade Center (WTC) Twin Towers that morning and the lesser-known collapse late that afternoon of the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7, which was not struck by an airplane. 

NIST conducted its investigation based on the stated premise that the “WTC Towers and WTC 7 [were] the only known cases of total structural collapse in high-rise buildings where fires played a significant role.” Indeed, neither before nor since 9/11 have fires caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise — nor has any other natural event, with the exception of the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which toppled a 21-story office building. Otherwise, the only phenomenon capable of collapsing such buildings completely has been by way of a procedure known as controlled demolition, where-by explosives or other devices are used to bring down a structure intentionally. Although NIST finally concluded after several years of investigation that all three collapses on 9/11 were due primarily to fires, fifteen years after the event a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists are unconvinced by that explanation.

Preventing high-rise failures

Steel-framed high-rises have endured large fires without suffering total collapse for four main reasons:

1) Fires typically are not hot enough and do not last long enough in any single area to generate enough energy to heat the large structural members to the point where they fail (the temperature at which structural steel loses enough strength to fail is dependent on the factor of safety used in the design. In the case of WTC 7, for example, the factor of safety was generally 3 or higher. Here, 67% of the strength would need to be lost for failure to ensue, which would require the steel to be heated to about 660°C);

2) Most high-rises have fire suppression systems (water sprinklers), which further prevent a fire from releasing sufficient energy to heat the steel to a critical failure state;

3) Structural members are protected by fireproofing materials, which are designed to prevent them from reaching failure temperatures within specified time periods; and

4) Steel-framed high-rises are designed to be highly redundant structural systems. Thus, if a localized failure occurs, it does not result in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

Throughout history, three steel-framed high-rises are known to have suffered partial collapses due to fires; none of those led to a total collapse. Countless other steel-framed high-rises have experienced large, long-lasting fires without suffering either partial or total collapse (see, for example, Fig. 1a and 1b) [1].

In addition to resisting ever-present gravity loads and occasional fires, high-rises must be designed to resist loads generated during other extreme events—in particular, high winds and earthquakes. Designing for high-wind and seismic events mainly requires the ability of the structure to resist lateral loads, which generate both tensile and compressive stresses in the columns due to bending, the latter stresses then being combined with gravity-induced compressive stresses due to vertical loads.

Consensus 911, The 9/11 Consensus Points. Factual Evidence Contradicts the 9/11 Story. The official claims regarding 9/11 are contradicted by facts that have been validated by a scientific consensus process, and which include the following points of “best evidence.” The 48 Consensus Points are divided into the ten categories below, which in turn link to the individual 48 points:

A. General Consensus Points
B. Consensus Points about the Twin Towers
C. Consensus Points about the Collapse of World Trade Center 7
D. Consensus Points about the Pentagon
E. Consensus Points about the 9/11 Flights
F. Consensus Points about US Military Exercises On and Before 9/11
G. Consensus Points about the Political and Military Commands on 9/11
H. Consensus Points about Hijackers on 9/11
I. Consensus Points about the Phone Calls on 9/11
V. Consensus Points about Official Video Exhibits Regarding 9/11

What is “Best Evidence?”

An important distinction in the field of evidence is that between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence, or evidence that suggests truth as opposed to evidence that directly proves truth. The “best evidence” related to 9/11 is founded on:

    •     The opinions of respected authorities, based on professional experience, descriptive studies, and reports of expert committees.
    •     Physical data in the form of photographs, videotapes, court testimony, witness reports, and FOIA releases
    •     Direct rather than circumstantial evidence

The Practice of Evidence-Based Research

We define the practice of evidence-based research as the judicious use of current best evidence in evaluating the issue at hand. This practice means integrating individual professional expertise with the best available documentary and scientific evidence. To integrate professional expertise into Consensus Points, the Panel employs a simplified Delphi methodology. The Delphi approach is often used in contexts “where published information is inadequate or non-existent,” providing “a means of harnessing the insights of appropriate experts to enable decisions to be made.” The 9/11 Consensus Panel is dedicated to using the “best evidence” available in its quest to shed light upon the world-changing events of September 11, 2001.

Remember Building 7.org, Building 7 was a 47-story skyscraper and was part of the World Trade Center complex. Built in 1984, it would have been the tallest high-rise in 33 states in the United States. It collapsed at 5:20 pm on September 11, 2001. It was not hit by an airplane and suffered minimal damage compared to other buildings much closer to the Twin Towers.

 

Major Official U.S. Government Reports

Porter Goss CIA Director2002 Joint Inquiry By Senate and House Intelligence Committees, chaired by Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL, below at left) and House Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL, shown at right in an official photo from his later post as Bush administration CIA Director).

Former Sen. Bob GrahamThe Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 is the official name of the inquiry conducted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence into the activities of the U.S. Intelligence Community in connection with the September 11, 2001 attacks. The investigation began in February 2002 and the final report was released in December 2002.The 832-page report (available as both S. Rept. 107-351 and H. Rept. 107-792) presents the joint inquiry’s findings and conclusions, an accompanying narrative, and a series of recommendations. The critical and comprehensive report detailed failings of the FBI and CIA to use available information, including about terrorists the CIA knew were in the United States, in order to disrupt the plots.

Its major report is here, and listed as S. Rept. No. 107-351, 107th Congress, 2d Session; and H. Rept. No. 107-792, December 2002. The Joint Inquiry also published two volumes of hearings: Volume I, September 18, 19, 20, 24, and 26, 2002; and Volume II, October 1, 3, 8, and 17, 2002.  Part of the report, the so-called "28 pages" on who funded the accused hijackers, was suppressed from public view until pressure led in part by former Sen. Graham forced President Obama and congressional leaders to release it in redacted form on July 15, 2016.

Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton July 22, 2014

2004 "9-11 Commission" was chaired by New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean (R) and Deputy Chair Lee Hamilton (D-IN), a former House 9/11 Commission Report coverForeign Affairs Committee Chairman (shown Philip Zelikowtogether at a 2014 conference on the topic, with Kean at left). Executive Director Philip D. Zelikow is at right.

The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known more informally as "the 9-11 Commission"), was an independent, bipartisan commission created by congressional legislation and the signature of President George W. Bush in late 2002. It was chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks. The Commission was also mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks.

Its report is here.

2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Final Report released in September 2005 (primarily on World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2, the "Twin Towers")

NIST Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers NIST NCSTAR 1: Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Tower. Primary Author: Dr. Sivaraj Shyam-Sunder, then-director of NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory (shown in a 2008 C-SPAN appearance discussing the collapse of WTC 7. More recently, senior advisor to the U.S. Commerce Department deputy secretary.

Shyam SunderAbstract: This is the final report on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigation of the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers, conducted under the National Construction Safety Team Act. This report describes how the aircraft impacts and subsequent fires led to the collapse of the towers after terrorists flew jet fuel laden commercial airliners into the buildings; whether the fatalities were low or high, including an evaluation of the building evacuation and emergency response procedures; what procedures and practices were used in the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the towers; and areas in current building and fire codes, standards, and practices that warrant revision. Extensive details are found in the 42 companion reports. (The final report on the collapse of WTC 7 will appear in a separate report.)

Also in this report is a description of how NIST reached its conclusions. NIST complemented in-house expertise with private sector technical experts; accumulated copious documents, photographs, and videos of the disaster; established baseline performance of the WTC towers; performed computer simulations of the behavior of each tower on September 11, 2001; combined the knowledge gained into a probable collapse sequence for each tower; conducted nearly 1,200 first-person interviews of building occupants and emergency responders; and analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in the two high-rise buildings. The report concludes with a list of 30 recommendations for action in the areas of increased structural integrity, enhanced fire endurance of structures, new methods for fire resistant design of structures, enhanced active fire protection, improved building evacuation, improved emergency response, improved procedures and practices, and education and training.

NIST World Trade Center 7 Report

2008 NIST Final Reports released in November 2008, Primary Author: Dr. Richard G. Gann (shown below), senior research scientist at NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory.

NIST NCSTAR 1A: Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 

Richard GannAbstract: This report describes how the fires that followed the impact of debris from the collapse of WTC 1 (the north tower) led to the collapse of WTC 7; an evaluation of the building evacuation and emergency response procedures; what procedures and practices were used in the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the building; and areas in current building and fire codes, standards, and practices that warrant revision. Also in this report is a summary of how NIST reached its conclusions.

NIST complemented in-house expertise with private sector technical experts; accumulated copious documents, photographs, and videos of the disaster; conducted first-person interviews of building occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; performed computer simulations of the behavior of WTC 7 on September 11, 2001; and combined the knowledge gained into a probable collapse sequence. The report concludes with a list of 13 recommendations for action in the areas of increased structural integrity, enhanced fire endurance of structures, new methods for fire resistant design of structures, enhanced active fire protection, improved emergency response, improved procedures and practices, and education and training. One of these is new; the other 12 are reiterated from the investigation into the collapse of the towers. Each of the 13 is relevant to WTC 7.

 

Sample Analytical Report Critical of Government Evidence

Consensus 911, The 9/11 Consensus Points. Factual Evidence Contradicts the 9/11 Story. The official account of the events of September 11, 2001, has been used:

  •     to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which have resulted in the deaths of over a million people; [1]
  •     to authorize torture, military tribunals, and extraordinary rendition; and
  •     to suspend freedoms guaranteed by the American Constitution such as habeas corpus in the USA, and similar freedoms in Canada, the UK, and other countries.

The official claims regarding 9/11 are contradicted by facts that have been validated by a scientific consensus process, and which include the following points of “best evidence.” The 48 Consensus Points are divided into the ten categories below, which in turn link to the individual 48 points:

A. General Consensus Points
B. Consensus Points about the Twin Towers
C. Consensus Points about the Collapse of World Trade Center 7
D. Consensus Points about the Pentagon
E. Consensus Points about the 9/11 Flights
F. Consensus Points about US Military Exercises On and Before 9/11
G. Consensus Points about the Political and Military Commands on 9/11
H. Consensus Points about Hijackers on 9/11
I. Consensus Points about the Phone Calls on 9/11
V. Consensus Points about Official Video Exhibits Regarding 9/11

What is “Best Evidence?”

An important distinction in the field of evidence is that between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence, or evidence that suggests truth as opposed to evidence that directly proves truth. The “best evidence” related to 9/11 is founded on:

    •     The opinions of respected authorities, based on professional experience, descriptive studies, and reports of expert committees.
    •     Physical data in the form of photographs, videotapes, court testimony, witness reports, and FOIA releases
    •     Direct rather than circumstantial evidence

The Practice of Evidence-Based Research

We define the practice of evidence-based research as the judicious use of current best evidence in evaluating the issue at hand. This practice means integrating individual professional expertise with the best available documentary and scientific evidence. To integrate professional expertise into Consensus Points, the Panel employs a simplified Delphi methodology. The Delphi approach is often used in contexts “where published information is inadequate or non-existent,” providing “a means of harnessing the insights of appropriate experts to enable decisions to be made.” The 9/11 Consensus Panel is dedicated to using the “best evidence” available in its quest to shed light upon the world-changing events of September 11, 2001.

The Scope of “Best Evidence” for the Purposes of the 9/11 Consensus Panel

The Panel uses the term in the very narrow sense of the “best evidence” available with regard to any specific claim of the 9/11 official story that the Panel challenges. It does not mean the strongest evidence against the official story in general. It is simply the best evidence against each particular claim that the Panel addresses. “Best evidence,” as used by the 9/11 Consensus Panel, is not evidence in support of alternative theories of what happened on 9/11.

 

Sample Popular Analytical Reports Supporting Government's Story

Popular Mechanics, Debunking 9/11 Lies: Special Report, Staff report, Feb. 2, 2005 (print date March). The following content is from an in-depth investigation of the conspiracy theories surrounding the Popular Mechanicsattacks of 9/11, which was published in the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics. That cover story was expanded and published in August 2006 as a book titled Debunking 9/11 Myths.

Popular Mechanics, 6 Debunked 9/11 Conspiracy Claims From NIST's New WTC 7 Report, Arianne Cohen, Aug. 20, 2008. Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report, responded directly to many conspiracy claims here this morning at his press conference in NIST headquarters in Gaithersburg, MD., which was attended by mainstream media and a handful of conspiracy theorist media, including a representative from InfoWars.com, a Web site that puts forward 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Sunder specifically addressed conspiracy claims linked to WTC 7. "Before I tell you what we found, I'd like to tell you what we did not find," Sunder told reporters. "We did not find any evidence that explosives were used to bring the building down. The collapse was also not due to fires from the substantial amount of diesel fuel stored in the buildings."

Here is a summary of some common 9/11 conspiracy theory claims regarding WTC 7, along with NIST's response:

Claim: "No combination of debris damage, fuel-tank explosions and fires could inflict the kind of simultaneous damage to all the building's columns required to make the building implode," says WTC7.net, a Web site dedicated to conspiracy theories. "The precision of such damage required to bring Building 7 down into its footprint was especially great, given the ratio of its height to its width and depth."

NIST report and press conference: Fire did indeed inflict enough column damage to destroy the building through a previously undocumented collapse sequence of thermal expansion. "Anyone who has run a tight jar lid under water to help loosen it knows that the metal expands when it gets hot," Sunder said. "Heat also causes steel to lose strength and stiffness. Thermal expansion occurs at temperatures much lower than those required to reduce steel strength and stiffness." The report found that as WTC 7's steel beams expanded in the heat, numerous structural connections throughout the building failed. That weakened the structure even before the collapse of any vertical columns.

Claim: The shape of the building's tidy pile of wreckage is consistent with a demolition, conspiracy theorists say.

NIST report and press conference: Sunder agrees that the wreckage was tidy and explained why. "If you look at columns 79, 80 and 81 [three of the building's central columns], the floor area that they're carrying is very large--particularly column 79, which was carrying about 2000 sq. ft. of floor area." Column 79 was the first column to fail. "It was an interior column that failed, followed by two more interior columns [80 and 81], then east to west. So what you're seeing is an interior collapse, then to the outside. What you're getting is an impression of a controlled demolition, but it's not."

Claim: The way the building fell was caused by demolition or thermate. (Thermate is thermite mixed with sulfur and sometimes other chemicals, which produces brief but intense and highly localized incendiary effects.)

NIST report and press conference: Sunder said that his team investigated these hypothetical causes and ruled them out. "We asked ourselves what is the minimum amount of charge we could use to bring the building down," he said. "And we found that even the smallest charge would release an extremely loud sound heard half a mile away." There were no reports of such a sound; numerous observers and video recordings found the collapse to be relatively quiet.

Prominent conspiracy theorist Steven Jones and others have suggested that thermate could have been inserted into a column, exploding the column without the loud boom of a demolition. Sunder said his team considered that theory. "In order for the thermate reaction to melt steel to take place, there has to be materials. If you look at the amount needed--at least 100 pounds for one column--you need someone to get that amount in the building, and place it, and for the reaction to take place. It is unlikely."

Claim: At the press conference, theorists questioned why NIST had just now found a previously undocumented cause of building collapse.

NIST report and press conference: The particulars of WTC 7's design contributed to the thermal expansion. WTC 7 had floor spans up to 54 ft. long. "Longer beams can be subject to proportionally greater expansion effects," Sunder noted. "Other tall buildings have burned for as long or longer in similar fires without collapsing--when sprinklers either did not exist or were not functional. So we knew from the beginning of our study that understanding what happened to Building 7 on 9/11 would be difficult. It did not fit any textbook description that you could readily point to and say, yes, that's why the building failed." The issue, Sunder said, was that buildings are not typically tested for their structural response to fire.

Claim: The minimal wreckage available for later investigation has generated speculation. Some conspirators point to the fast removal of debris as evidence of a government coverup.

NIST report and press conference: Compared to WTC 1 and 2, NIST had very little WTC 7 wreckage to study. The site was cleared quickly in a search-an- rescue effort, and much of the debris was transported to salvage yards. "There was no loss of life," Sunder noted. "In hindsight, we knew that the building was evacuated. But we didn't know that on that day." Hundreds of investigators at the salvage yards later found that the Twin Towers' steel columns were labeled and numbered, while the columns from Towers 5, 6 and 7 were not. "I am not surprised that there wasn't a lot of identifiable debris," Sunder said. "But at the time, we were concerned about terrorists who attacked our country and search and rescue. I think the fact that they [invesigators] didn't collect [wreckage] was the least important activity that happened that day."

Claim: Many theorists have suggested that the long delay in an explanatory report is further proof of a government coverup.

NIST had to complete the investigation on the collapse of the Twin Towers and publish its report before turning to WTC 7. The Twin Towers report was released in September 2005. "We thought we might be able to do things much quicker and faster because of our tower experience," Sunder said. "I think we underestimated the amount of effort that would be required to answer the questions that we raised." In addition, new computer models of the collapse had to be created. "A typical fire simulation for a single floor of the building took up to two days with a state-of-the-art cluster of Linux computers. We had computer programs that took six to eight months to get a correct run, and we wanted to make sure we got this right. And three years is not an unusual length of time." Sunder emphasized that previous reports were preliminary and provisional. "We didn't have the insight that thermal expansion could have happened until early last year," Sunder said. "After that it was smooth sailing." Until last year, NIST was still investigating other hypotheses, including whether the building's location on top of an electric substation played a critical role and whether 6000 gal. of diesel fuel used to power backup generators in the building directly weakened the columns. Both hypotheses were abandoned.

Sunder classified the report's conclusions as "simple, straightforward, elegant and going along with what was observed. I would say that the findings we have are incredibly conclusive that fire is why WTC 7 collapsed."

 

Related Recent News Coverage (Reverse Chronological Order)

Physics and Engineering Studies

No Lies/Quantum Matrix Radio, Engineering Scientist Ronald Cutburth — Nano Thermite AND Nano RDX Destroyed the World Trade Center Towers, Host David Meiswinkle, Oct. 3, 2016. Dr. Ronald Cutburth Dr. Ronald Cutburthholds a Ph.D. in Management of Engineering Science Operations. His dissertation includes an evaluation of over 200 engineering science research operations at Lawrence Livermore National Lab. He is an engineering scientist holding advanced level lower degree credits in five categories of engineering sciences and advanced theoretical math, mechanical, electrical, electronic, manufacturing, and controls engineering. He also holds nine issued patents for Lawrence Livermore National Labs (LLNL), in development of laser optic mount and apparatus hardware.

He has more than 30 years of experience in engineering departments all over the USA in military and commercial products,and more than 9 years experience making engineering evaluations of engineering designs in the USA.

The Other Side of Midnight, 15th 9/11 Anniversary Conference Sept. 10-11, 2016, host Richard Hoagland interviewed 9/11 investigator, author and whistleblower Barbara Honegger, Sept. 20, 2016. On a show that reached 160 countries, she detailed the historic 9/11 Justice in Focus Conference held at Cooper Union Great Hall in New York City from Sept. 10-11, the vital importance of Congress overriding the President's veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), and current perspectives on the ongoing search for incontestable forensic facts about the 9/11 attacks and justice for the real perpetrators -- the focus of the NYC conference.
 
The audio of the two-hour radio show, including for 200 past programs on other topics, can be heard by subscribing to 'Club 19.5' at www.theothersideofmidnight.com. The NYC conference-related photos and website links that accompanied the show can be viewed here by scrolling down to 'Barbara's items.' Her presentation at the conference can be viewed on YouTube under the title: The 28 Pages & JASTA: Turning Point in History.
 
Global Research, Fifteen Years Later, Physics Journal Concludes All Three WTC Towers Collapsed on 9/11 Due to Controlled Demolition, Jay Syrmopoulos, Sept. 13, 2016. Over the past 15 years many highly respected academics and experts have come forward to challenge the official narrative on the collapse of the WTC towers forwarded by the U.S. government. The official government position holds that the collapse of all three towers was due to intense heat inside of the buildings.

But a new forensic investigation into the collapse of the three World Trade Center towers on 9/11, published in Europhysics News – a highly respected European physics magazine – claims that “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.” While many in the mainstream have attempted to label anyone questioning the official narrative as “tin foil hat” conspiracy theorist, many highly respected experts have come forward to lampoon the idea that the buildings collapsed due to the intense heat and fires following two terrorist-directed plane crashes.

“Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities,” the four physicists conclude in the damning report.

The new study is the work of Steven Jones, former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University, Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer with over 25 years of structural design experience in the aerospace and communications industries and Ted Walter, the director of strategy and development for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a nonprofit organization that today represents more than 2,500 architects and engineers.

The comprehensive study in Europhysics Magazine directly challenges the official narrative and lends to a growing body of evidence that seriously questions the veracity of the government narrative.

In 2002, the National Institute of Standards and Technology remarked that the case was exceptionally bizarre. There were no other known cases of total structural collapses in high-rise buildings caused by fires and so it is deeply unusual that it should have happened three times in the space of one day, noted NIST.

Official investigations have never been able to thoroughly and coherently explain how this might have happened and various teams tasked with examining the collapse have raised difficult questions about the veracity of the government’s story.

Perhaps most damning of all, the experts claimed that after a thorough forensic analysis of video footage of the building’s collapse, it revealed signs of a controlled implosion. Additionally, Jones has co-authored a number of papers documenting evidence of unreacted nano-thermitic material in the WTC dust.

The authors of the study note that the buildings fell with such speed and symmetry that they there was no other feasible explanation for the sudden collapse at free fall speeds – directly refuting studies that attempted to debunk the idea that the building fell without resistance. These respected experts’ new forensic analysis only adds to the growing movement of people calling for a new and impartial investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center.

Revealing the scope and breadth of public disbelief in the official government narrative surrounding the events of 9/11, even presidential candidate Jill Stein has recently called for a new investigation.

WND, 9/11 conspiracy gets support from physicists' study, Staff report, Aug. 31, 2016. Europhysics magazine report finds Twin Towers brought down by 'controlled demolition.'  For 15 years, there’s been a small band of investigators who have questioned the idea that the Twin Towers in New York City collapsed because of the intense heat and fires raging following two terrorist-directed plane crashes. But they have largely been dismissed as crazy conspiracy theorists.

Now, however, Europhysics Magazine, the respected publication of the European physics community, has published a report, 15 Years Later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses, by four experts who say “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.” “Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities,” the four physicists conclude.

The study is the work of Steven Jones, former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University, Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer with over 25 years of structural design experience in the aerospace and communications industries, and Ted Walter, the director of strategy and development for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a nonprofit organization that today represents more than 2,500 architects and engineers.

9/11 Family Litigation Against Terrorism Sponsors

President Obama with Saudi King Salman bin Abdul Aziz al Saud in Riyadh, April 20, 2016 (Saudi Press Agency)

Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud receives President Barack Obama in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on April 20, 2016 (EPA/Saudi Press Agency)

Roll Call, Obama Vetoes Terrorism Bill as Override Votes Loom, John T. Bennett, Sept. 23, 2016. Democrats are sympathetic to his concerns, but likely to vote with GOP. President Barack Obama on Friday vetoed a bill that would allow families of the victims of terrorist attacks in the United States to sue foreign governments believed to be linked to the strikes, setting up a difficult election-year decision for congressional Democrats. Obama cited concerns that the legislation, which passed both the House and Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support, could prompt other nations to pass look-alike laws, leading to more lawsuits and inconsistent standards for what constitutes state support for terrorist attacks. Proponents, however, call it "narrowly" crafted to guard against such things.

Aides say Obama fully understands why convincing Democrats to block an override of his veto will likely be tough in an election year. "The president's not blind to the politics of the situation," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Friday. "The president understands that the talking points that are being prepared for the proponents of this bill have … political upside," Earnest said. "But if we're focused on the substantive long-term impact on our nation's national security … that's what's driving the president's decision to veto this bill. Not because it's politically convenient. It's not."

The Senate's No. 3 Democrat, Charles E. Schumer of New York, a co-sponsor of the measure, called the veto a "a disappointing decision," predicting that it will be "swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress."

“If the Saudis did nothing wrong, they should not fear this legislation," Schumer said in a statement. "If they were culpable in 9/11, they should be held accountable. The families of the victims of 9/11 deserve their day in court, and justice for those families shouldn’t be thrown overboard because of diplomatic concerns.”

Obama used up every day he had under law from the time the House unanimously passed the bill, formally dubbed the “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act,” to reject it. The move now sets up a decision for House and Senate leaders on when they will hold override votes.

“Now that we have received the veto message from the president, the Senate will consider [an override vote] as soon as practicable in this work period," said David Popp, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in a statement on Friday.

Tampa Bay Times, Bob Graham: Government Needs To Learn More About 9/11 Attacks, Alex Leary, Aug. 31, 2016. Former Sen. Bob Graham this morning sharply criticized government secrecy over 9/11, saying the recent release of 28 pages of classified information is only an opening into what the American public deserves to know. "The legacy of Barack Obama is going to be stained," when it becomes clear how much material remains hidden from view, Graham said at the National Press Club. In particular, he said, much remains unanswered about a Saudi family that lived in Sarasota and suddenly vanished around the attack.  Graham was a leading figure in getting the release of the 28 pages, and he credited journalists for helping raise the issue. "Get a life," he said the deputy director of the FBI once told him.

Despite the release, Graham said more pressure needs to be applied so tens of thousands of pages of additional investigative material comes out. He also called on Congress to approve the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, designed to help families of the nearly 3,000 victims. Having already passed the Senate, the legislation would allow families to sue the Saudi government. Graham said government attempts to conceal links between the 9/11 hijackers and the Saudi government adds to public cynicism. "We are developing a democracy of spectators."

Executive Intelligence Review, Senator Bob Graham Did Saudi Royals Make A Dirty Deal With Bin Laden for 9/11? Staff report (subscription required), Aug. 31, 2016 (video here). Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), the former head of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the co-chair of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, addressed a room full of media at the National Press Club in Washington today, and made some explosive statements about the Saudi Royal Family's role in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The former Senator has been a driving force behind the recent release of the long-suppressed 28-page chapter from his Dec. 2002 report, and he has now called for the total declassification of all of the government's investigative files on the 9/11 attacks.

Mohamad AttaSen. Graham detailed the fight, now underway in Florida, to declassify 80,000 pages of FBI documents on a prominent Saudi businessman who was tied to three of the 9/11 hijackers, including the alleged ring-leader, Mohammed Atta (shown at right). The FBI covered up the existence of that investigation for a decade, and it took a Federal judge to order the Bureau to turn over the investigative file on their probe of the Florida cell, in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

Sen. Graham highlighted the role of Prince Bandar bin Sultan in providing financial and logistical support to the 9/11 hijackers in San Diego, Cal., and reviewed some of the now-declassified details about Bandar's private security links to leading Al Qaeda figure Abu Zubaida. He made a strong case for the House to immediately pass the Justice Against Supporters of Terrorism Act (JASTA), to give the 9/11 survivors and families their long-overdue day in court to actually put the Saudi Royals on trial for their complicity.

During the extensive question-and-answer period, Sen. Graham gave some startling answers. He blasted both President Bush and President Obama, and particularly President Obama, who had no personal interest in covering up the Saudi role in 9/11, but suppressed the 28 pages for nearly eight years. He also assailed the FBI for conducting what he called an "aggressive deception"' over the Sarasota files, and provided a detailed account of his own Dulles Airport encounter with the Deputy Director of the FBI, who pressured him to "get a life"' and drop his inquiries into the Sarasota 9/11 cell.

Asked to explain how the Saudi royal family, ostensibly close allies of the United States, could have been complicit in the 9/11 attacks, Senator Graham gave his own hypothesis: He noted that the Saudis were very insecure about the stability of the Kingdom, after the U.S. had supported Iraq during the long war with Iran in the 1980s. After the U.S. intervention against Saddam Hussein in 1991, the Kingdom was even more unstable, and Osama bin Laden was calling for the ouster of the Royal Family. In return for bin Laden backing off from the threats, the Saudis agreed to provide material support in the United States for the planned Al Qaeda terror attack. He made clear that he had no ``proof'' of that theory, but found it very credible.

There are undoubtedly hundreds of thousands of pages of FBI and other government investigative files on the 9/11 attacks that remain hidden from the public, and Sen. Graham made clear that all of this had to be made public.  Along with the immediate passage of JASTA, he put priority on opening up with the files on places like Paterson, New Jersey, and Falls Church, Virginia, where hijacker cells were operating, and where the FBI and other agencies no doubt conducted exhaustive investigations that remain secret.

28Pages.org, Graham: Many More Documents on Saudi Links to 9/11 Still Secret, Staff report, Aug. 31, 2016.  In an appearance this morning at the National Press Club, former Senate intelligence committee chairman Bob Graham said the July release of 28 pages from a 2002 congressional inquiry was just the first step toward gaining full transparency on the U.S. government’s investigation of Saudi links to the 9/11 attacks.

“This is removing the cork from the bottle,” said Graham. “There is a significant amount of information which, like the 28 pages, has been withheld and it was necessary to get this first block of material to the public in order to build the support that will be necessary for the balance of the material to flow.”

Among the countless documents still hidden from public view are those relating to the FBI’s investigation of a wealthy, well-connected Saudi family in Sarasota that reportedly had many contacts with future 9/11 attackers before suddenly vacating its home days before the attacks.

Media Coverage and Congressional Outreach

In recent weeks, former U.S. Customs agent Karl Golovin, a responder to the 9/11 attacks, has bought and personally delivered to 541 members of the U.S. Senate and House a copy of the AE911 Truth publication "Beyond Misinformation" (www.BeyondMisinformation.org). The photo above shows Golovin, at left, the publication and U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, a veteran Republican representing Texas. As Golovin summarized, "the publication documents evidence and analysis that all THREE World Trade Center towers that collapsed on 9/11/01 (WTC's 1, 2 and 7) did so not merely due to two of them being hit by fuel-laden commercial aircraft, but due to explosive/contraband."

Golovin's complementary efforts to prompt more news coverage are described below. This editor from the Justice Integrity Project sat next to him at the Newseum event and saw first-hand how his dedication and persistence -- while only warily received by media stars concerned about implied criticism of their coverage -- provides a model for how others willing to stand up can be effective on this and similar issues.

Washington Times ad on 9/11 by Karl Golovin 

Newseum, CNN Politics Campaign 2016: Like, Share, Elect With Wolf Blitzer at Newseum, CNN campaign coverage team, Sept. 19, 2016. During the Q&A of a CNN panel on presidential campaign coverage and the network's desire for more public input, former U.S. Customs special agent Karl Golovin requested more coverage for 9/11 research issues, citing his own role in seeking evidence following the WTC collapses. Earlier in the month, the retired agent had bought a full-page advertisement in the Washington Times casting suspicion on the 9/11 official accounts. The ad on Page 3 of the newspaper's Sept. 9 edition was headlined: Congress Receives '48 Pages' 9/11 Reading Assignment. That referenced a 48-page AE911 Truth booklet. Golovin had purchased enough copies to personally deliver one to each of the nation's 541 U.S. Senators and House members.

Below is a transcript of the Q&A, extending from 49:55 to 51:07 mins. in the above video:

Blitzer: Go ahead with your question please.

Golovin: Yes sir. My name's Karl Golovin. I'm a 9/11 responder. As a special agent with U.S. Customs, I helped go through the rubble of World Trade Center 7 in November of that year, a building, the third tower, that collapsed in New York, most people have never even heard of.

And I have to go slightly beyond a question to lay a foundation here, that, I have a gift for you here, a "situation" that I would like to have raised to the candidates, to have raised in the media: I've raised the same question here with Jeff Zucker, also with John King. In fact, I gave both of them copies of what I call the "48 Pages" written by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth that, scientifically, demonstrates -- and I, as a retired criminal investigator I will say -- there is abundant evidence, all three towers in New York were brought down, not just by two airplanes with jet fuel, but by controlled demolition, and this is an astonishing truth....

Blitzer: Alright, well, I'll take your information, but do you have a question?

Golovin: Yes. Will you raise this issue in the media? Will you raise it to the candidates? Here is a full page ad taken out in The Washington Times documenting delivery of that same information to every Member of Congress in the last two weeks.

Blitzer: Alright, give your papers to the man behind you.

Golovin: Yes sir.

Blitzer: I'll be happy to take a look at that.

Golovin: Thank you.

Blitzer: Next question.