The Destruction of the Twin Towers

 By M.K. Styllinski

“I was on the ground floor of the building …. (the foyer of WTC) … “There was a huge bang ….”But seconds later, there were two or three similar huge explosions and the building literally shook.”

– Stephen Evans WTC survivor, BBC North American Business Correspondent (http://media.guardian.co.uk 9/11/01)

The official account would have us believe that the North and South Towers collapsed due to the impact of the airliners and the resulting heat produced by numerous fires within the buildings. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) completed a performance study of the buildings in May 2002, declaring that “… the sequence of events leading to the collapse of each tower could not be definitely determined.” Though it said that the WTC design was not to blame and that certain extraordinary factors were responsible which had been beyond the control of the builders. One of those factors was the apparent weakening of the floor joists by the internal fires caused by the initial impact which precipitated a progressive “pancake” collapse of all the floors as they detached from the main structure falling one by one onto each other. [1]

September 2005 saw the completion of another investigation conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Following FEMA’s lead the NIST also gave a clean bill of health for the WTC design, choosing the sheer scale of the destruction from two jet airliners had not been envisaged by the builders or architects. The NIST deviated slightly from FEMA and pronounced sagging floors themselves as the culprits which caused “… the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers.” [2]

Although the report was riven with assumptions, conflicts of interest, and attempts to re-write the laws of physics which bordered on farce, this remained the primary source of refutation for official theory adherents, (a tradition for which the IPCC would have been proud). Indeed, FEMA and the NIST (whose subsequent reports continue to astound) are not the only ones to promote the official theory. The BBC, the History Channel and government agencies have firmly stuck to what amounts to propaganda in the face of objective evidence, marginalising and ridiculing those who come forward.

Numerous architects and engineers had quickly discovered that the temperature of the fires required to collapse the North and South Towers would have to have been enough to melt the steel, namely temperatures of 2,770°F (1,500°C). The burning of jet fuel or kerosene doesn’t even come close to these temperatures as it burns off extremely fast. Remember the impact of the planes repeated endlessly on our televisions? All that thick black smoke was a product of hydro-carbon fires and not very hot ones at that. The official theory clings to the idea that the fires were responsible for steel-reinforced buildings to fall into their own footprints in around ten seconds. For such a thing to happen the fires would have to have spread throughout the North and South towers with the evenly distributed heat of a furnace burning for a very long time indeed – none of which is the case, since the jet fuel that spilled from Flight 11 when it hit the North Tower had mostly burned up by this time. The NIST commented in its report that: “The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes” further confirmed by many independent observers including engineering Professor Forman Williams who stated the jet fuel: “burned for maybe 10 minutes.” [3]

impactnorthtower1South Tower fireball on impact (left) North Tower impact damage (right) (wikipedia)

There is no evidence of fires in the North Tower that could constitute the kind of intense heat needed to bring down a steel-framed building. Only a jagged hole with dark smoke pouring out of it can be seen with hardly any flames visible, indicating the cooling of fires consistent with kerosene burn off, rather than increasing heat. This is also true of the South Tower which had only a few cursory fires on floors above the impact point. After 16 minutes had passed the idea that a raging inferno was already present is patently false. As Dr. David Ray Griffin points out, the evidence shows from the copious amounts of photos that: “… the fires were not even that hot. … the fires did not break windows or even spread much beyond their points of origin … This photographic evidence is supported by scientific studies carried out by NIST, which found that of the 16 perimeter columns examined, ‘only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250°C [482°F],’ and no evidence that any of the core columns had reached even those temperatures.” [4]

Even if the building had been engulfed in flames it would not have collapsed, just as the 32-story steel framed Windsor building in Madrid, burned for more than 24 hours in 2005 and did not collapse. Or the fire in October 2004 in Caracas, Venezuela, where a 56-story office tower burned for more 17 hours and spread over 26 floors. Two floors collapsed, but the underlying floors did not, and the building remained standing. There is also the 1991 fire which gutted eight floors of the 38-story One Meridian Plaza building in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, burning for 18 hours. This building also, did not collapse. [5] Nevertheless, we are still told the huge Twin Towers collapsed the South in just under an hour and the North in an hour and a half. If the official theory is true, it would be the first time in history a steel-structured building has ever collapsed due to fire.

Hundreds of architects and engineers have begun to question the official story providing their testimony and professional evaluations. To that end, Architects and Engineers for Truth at www.ae911Truth.org provides a forum for gathering peer-reviewed evidence and testimony from over 2,337 professionals and another 20,117 supporters who cannot accept the science in the official story and seek an independent investigation. In a recent, comprehensive ae911 Truth report, 29 civil engineers voiced their concern over the collapse theory. Consulting civil/structural engineer Nathan S. Lomba with 39 years of professional experience asked: “How did the structures collapse in near-symmetrical fashion when the damage was clearly not symmetrical?” Whereas Dennis Kollar, P.E. a licensed professional engineer “was troubled by the collapses’ ‘totality and uniformity’ and the fact that the mass of debris remained centered on the building core all the way down.”

Frank Cullinan, P.E., explained that “…These systematic collapses required that many structural connections not only fail ‘nearly simultaneously,’ but also ‘in sequential order,’ …That’s “impossible from asymmetrical impact loading and … small, short-duration fires.” [6] Charles Pegelow who has performed design work on offshore oil rigs and tall buildings also raised concerns about the action of symmetrical collapse which would “… require simultaneous failure of all supporting columns. How could all 47 core columns fail at the same instant? … Fires could not do that.” [7] 

Richard F. Humenn, PE, Senior Project Design Engineer for electrical systems at the entire World Trade Centre, had over 60 people working under him. Humenn stated: “On September 11, I watched the live TV broadcast of the progressive collapse of the World Trade Towers with disbelief, as the mass and strength of the structure should have survived the localized damage caused by the planes and burning jet fuel. After viewing material presented by Architects and Engineers for 911 truth Humenn “… supported the proposal to form an international group of professionals to investigate all plausible causes for the virtual free-fall and the almost total destruction of the WTC structures.” [8]

Another architect the late Frank De Martini, who worked as the World Trade Centre’s construction manager gave an interview for the History Channel who were making a documentary about the WTC towers prior to September 11th. He stated: “I believe the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door, this intense grid, and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing the screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.” De Martini died in his office on the 88th floor of the North Tower when it is was hit on 9/11. According to an associated press report he died when the tower collapsed after helping people escape. [9] This is given further credibility by one of the original structural engineers of the Twin Towers Leslie Robertson, who believed there was: “… little likelihood of a collapse no matter how the building was attacked.” [10] At a later conference in Frankfurt, Germany in 2001 he said: “The twin towers were in fact the first structures outside the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airplane.” [11] Robertson would later recant these statements and change his story a few days after 9/11 which led to many suspecting he had been unduly pressured to do so. [12]

In early February of 1964, during the design phase of the towers, a three-page white paper, offered these findings: “The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner [Boeing 707-DC 8] traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.” [13]

Building designer John Skilling, among the world’s top structural engineers who worked on that particular 1964 paper and the structural design of the WTC, carried out an analysis on the impact of a Jet airliner impact on the Twin Towers which: “… indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel [from the airplane] would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed.” But, he says: “The building structure would still be there.” Skilling also added: “I’m not saying that properly applied explosives – shaped explosives – of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage.” [14]

Just before the North and South Towers collapsed many eyewitnesses including firemen, reported hearing, feeling and seeing the effects of what appeared to be explosions, in the immediate floors and in the sub-basements of the Towers.

Griffin and thousands of others think that is precisely what may have occurred:

[An] alternative explanation is that the collapse was an example of a controlled demolition based on explosives that had been placed throughout the building…With regard to why the collapse was so total and rapid, [Peter] Meyer says that ‘this is understandable if the bases of the steel columns were destroyed by explosions at the level of bedrock. With those bases obliterated, and the supporting steel columns shattered by explosions at various levels in the Twin Towers, the upper floors lost all support and collapsed to ground level in about ten seconds […] Since the fire in the South Tower resulted from the combustion of less fuel than the fire in the North Tower, the fire in the South Tower began to go out earlier than the fire in the North Tower. Those controlling the demolition thus has to collapse the South Tower before they collapsed the North Tower.’ [15]

A common myth promoted by 9/11 truth debunkers and government officials is the idea that the weight of the top sections of the buildings somehow progressively crushed those below, gaining velocity as they did so. To suggest that the upper structure of the Twin Towers could fall through 90-100 floors of an undamaged, full-strength steel core structure at free-fall speed is not only silly, but against the very laws of physics. Any secondary school-boy with a modicum of scientific knowledge knows that this is impossible but the theory remains popular with debunkers, turning themselves inside out to explain its validity.

 Both the North Tower and the South Tower collapsed just as their respective fires were dying down, even though this meant that the South Tower, which had been hit second, collapsed first.”

― David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration & 9/11

Engineer Gordon Ross who holds degrees in both mechanical and manufacturing engineering calculated the weight of the floors from the upper sections in a theoretical collapse down onto the lower portions of the two structures. Ross had to simulate a theoretical collapse but first had to veer away from reality in order to stay true to the official story. He had to imagine that there had indeed been extremely hot fires and melting steel structures so that the upper section was able to collapse without any resistance into free-fall scenario. The energy needed for this to happen was also calculated including the amount of resistance needed from the lower sections and how much of the energy would be absorbed by resistance from the initial impact of the upper structure descending downwards. On the first impact alone, he found that the upper sections would have lost 66 percent of their kinetic energy showing that no more energy would have been left to continue even one more story. There was no downward pressure of the kind government officials suggest.  [16]

The simple fact of the matter is that the tops of the buildings disintegrated into fine dust within seconds of the “collapse”. If the reader looks carefully at video shots of the WTC collapse you will see that no upper sections existed for this theory to be tenable. The buildings simply vaporised. Once you see it – it remains with you. But you have to disengage from the mind-programming telling you otherwise. Only carefully designed and placed explosives – possibly with advanced technology – could have allowed such a scenario to be fulfilled, otherwise known as a controlled demolition.

Adding to these suspicions were “hot spots” of molten steel found in the sub-basements, in particular at the bottoms of elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven basement levels which were smouldering for weeks. For example, Ron Burger, a public health adviser who arrived at Ground Zero on September 12, said that “feeling the heat” and “seeing the molten steel” there reminded him of a volcano. Paramedic Lee Turner was also at the WTC site on September 12 as a member of a federal urban search and rescue squad. He described his journey: “down crumpled stairwells to the subway, five levels below ground,” where he saw: “… in the darkness a distant, pinkish glow—molten metal dripping from a beam.” [17] In fact, scores of witnesses in the immediate aftermath of 911 and following weeks and months reported seeing molten metal in the remains of the World Trade Centre.  [18]

 molten-metal2

Metal crane at Ground Zero extracting molten metal (left) Molten metal pouring from the 81st floor. Fires were still burning beneath the the World Trade Centre and WTC building 7 and were not extinguished until December 2001.

As each tower collapsed, Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, just 21 miles north of the WTC, picked up a 2.1 magnitude earthquake at 9:59:04, then a 2.3 quake beginning at 10:28:31. [19] According to a report by the Mineta Transportation Institute: “People inside the South Tower felt the floor vibrate as if a small earthquake were occurring … The vibration lasted for about 30 seconds. The doors were knocked out, and a huge ball of flame created by the exploding diesel fuel from the building’s own supply tank shot from the elevator shaft and out the doors of the South Tower, consuming everything in its path. Minutes later, at 9:59 a.m., the tower collapsed.”  [20]

If it was a controlled demolition then it was of a type so powerful it literally pulverised the towers so that very little remained.

Dr.Griffin explains:

“… each collapse produced a lot of fine dust or powder, which upon analysis proved to consist primarily of gypsum and concrete […] ‘ Where does the energy come from to turn all this reinforced concrete into dust?’ […] ‘virtually every piece of concrete in each tower was pulverized to a powder. This required a lot of energy.’ […] “…things would actually be moving quite slowly at first…It is very hard to imagine a physical mechanism to generate that much dust with concrete slabs bumping into each other at 20 0r 30 mph…In order to pulverize concrete into powder, explosives must be used.” […] “…when the towers started to collapse, they did not fall straight down, as the pancake theory holds. They exploded. The powder was ejected horizontally from the buildings with such force that the buildings were surrounded by enormous dust clouds that were perhaps three times the width of the buildings themselves…What other than explosives could turn concrete into powder and then eject it 150 feet or more?” [21] [Emphasis mine]

There were many physical anomalies associated with the destruction that cannot be explained using the official story.

The 9/11 Commission Report said that the “South Tower collapsed in 10 seconds” and the NIST said that the tops of the buildings came down “essentially in free fall.”  [22] This conflicts with the official “pancake” theory whereby the floors weakened by the impact of the airliner falling on the floor below starting the so-called chain reaction. This is clearly not what happened because there was literally no resistance from a reinforced steel and concrete structure. But the rubble falling internally compared with externally fell at the same speed. Architect and physicist Dave Heller tells us that the pancake theory is untenable because: “The buildings fell too quickly. The floors must all have been falling simultaneously to reach the ground in such a short amount of time. But how? … In [the method known as controlled demolition], each floor of a building is destroyed at just the moment the floor above is about to strike it. Thus, the floors fall simultaneously, and in virtual free-fall.”  [23]

oem_9_16_pic05

What was left of the first ever steel reinforced building to collapse. The WTC Twin Towers were built to withstand jet airliner impacts through a “mosquito net” design. Jet fuel? Really?

This leads us to the total collapse of 110-story buildings with an inexplicably small amount of debris. Where did the 47 massive steel box columns go? According to the pancake theory they should have been still standing. Tons of concrete was simply vapourised. Massive steel girders were found twisted in strange shapes. If it was a controlled demolition then something other than normal explosives seemed to have been used. The anomalies experienced at ground zero offer no other explanation.

NIST hasn’t been much help in offering scientific and impartial analysis either. Its $20 million 2005 report at 10,000 pages (yes, that’s right) is taken as a definite account to explain how fires and plane impacts destroyed the WTC. Unfortunately, as Ronald Brookman, S.E., a licensed structural engineer from Novato, California tells us: “The report not only fails to explain why and how the towers completely collapsed,” … “it states that the collapse became inevitable without any further explanation,” and where the report considered: “conservation of energy and momentum principles only up to the moment prior to collapse.” [24] And since the NIST stopped its computerized models before the onset of collapse, no work was carried out to calculate what happened during the failure. [25]

Significant quantities of thermetic material were found in dust samples from the WTC site yet showing clear evidence of advanced engineered pyrotechnic material. NIST officials deemed this inadmissible as evidence, despite researchers showing that the material could not have been found from a natural process before or during the destruction of the Twin Towers. Pyroclastic flow was observed in the concrete-based clouds which are only found with volcanic eruptions and nuclear detonations. Pyroclastic flow will not mix with other clouds meaning very serious health issues not possible with the conventional demolition or explosive charges. The presence of such a pyroclastic material would offer partial explanation as to the formation of pyroclastic clouds observed during the destruction of the WTC given that many thousands of tiny blasts would be required:

“Aluminothermic reactions are a class of energy-releasing oxidation-reduction chemical reactions in which elemental aluminum reduces a compound, typically by stealing the oxygen from a metal oxide. Aluminothermics range from low-tech preparations that take seconds to react and therefore release nearly all their energy as heat and light, to advanced engineered materials with accelerated reaction rates that yield explosive powers similar to conventional high explosives. […] The red layers contain abundant aluminum, iron, and oxygen, where the iron is associated with oxygen, and the aluminum is mostly in a pure, elemental, form. The relative quantities of aluminum, iron, and oxygen match those of the most common thermite formulation: Fe2O3 + 2 Al .

Although these elements — aluminum, iron, oxygen, and silicon — were all abundant in building materials used in the Twin Towers, it is not possible that such materials milled themselves into fine powder and assembled themselves into a chemically optimized aluminothermic composite as a by-product of the destruction of the Twin Towers.

The iron-rich spheroids formed by heating the chips in this manner match those found in abundance in all of the samples of WTC dust studied, and those produced by the reaction of commercial thermite, both in appearance and in chemical composition revealed by XEDS analysis.” [26]

However, even thermite does not explain the sheer destruction which was visited on the WTC in such a rapid space of time. Some researchers have rightly stated that claims for thermite have thus been exaggerated. [27] Other researchers suggest the presence advanced experimental technology not currently recognised in military circles. Not only did concrete disappear but other construction materials such as glass and alloys, along with office furniture and tens of thousands of computers. [28] The pulverisation of 99 percent of concrete into ultra-fine dust and recorded by official studies was not the only example of effects outside the norms of a controlled demolition.

A Finish military expert who wished to remain anonymous due to fears for his safety wrote a summary of why there may be more unconventional reasons for the WTC destruction, some of which are included here:

  • Superheated steels ablating (vaporizing continuously as they fall) as seen in video clips of the towers collapsing. This requires uniform temperatures roughly twice that of thermite. Conventional demolition or explosive charges (thermate, rdx, hdx etc.) cannot transfer heat so rapidly that the steel goes above its boiling temperature.
  • 22 ton outer wall steel sections ejected 200 meters into the winter garden. Cutting charges cannot eject heavy steels and throwing charges cannot provide the energy required without heavy, solid surface mounts.
  • 330 ton section of outer wall columns ripping off side of tower. Cutting charges cannot eject heavy steels linked together and throwing charges cannot provide the energy required without very heavy, solid surfaces to mount those charges.
  • The spire behaviour (stands for 20-30 seconds, evaporates and goes down, steel dust remains in the air where the spire was). The spire did not stand because it lost its durability when the joints vaporized.
  • A press weighting 50 tons disappeared from a basement floor of Twin Towers and was never recovered from debris. Not possible with collapses or controlled demolitions. The press was vaporized or melted totally.
  • Bone dust cloud around the WTC. This was found not until spring 2006 from the Deutsche Bank building. [In excess of 700 human remains found on the roof and from air vents]. [29]
  • Rubble height was some 10percent of the original instead of 33percent expected in a traditional demolition. Fusion device removal of underground central steel framework allowed upper framework to fall into this empty space and reduce the rubble height.
  • 14 rescue dogs and some rescue workers died far too soon afterward to be attributed to asbestos or dust toxins (respiratory problems due to alpha and tritium particles created by fusion are far more toxic)
  • Record concentrations of near-atomic size metal particles found in dust studies due to ablated steel. Only possible with vaporized (boiling) steels.
  • No bodies, furniture or computers found in the rubble, but intact sheets of paper covered the streets with fine dust. Items with significant mass absorbed fusion energy (neutrons, x-rays) and were vaporized while paper did not. Paper and powder theory.
  • 200 000 gallon sprinkler water tanks on the roofs of WTC1 and WTC2, but no water in the ruins. Heat of fusion devices vaporized large reservoirs of water.
  • Reports of cars exploding around the WTC and many burned out wrecks could be seen that had not been hit by debris. Fusion energy (heath radiation and the neutrons) caused cars to ignite and burn far from WTC site.
  • Wide area electrical outage, repairs took over 3 months. Fusion devices cause EM pulse with Compton scattering. (See German engineers help the USA plate 5. http://home.debitel.net/user/andreas.bunkahle/defaulte.htm)
  • EM pulse was recorded by broadcast cameras with high quality electronic circuitry. This occurred at the same time as the seismic peaks recorded by Lamont Doherty during the beginning of the collapse. This is due to the Compton Effect and resulted in a large area power outage at the WTC. [30]

Rather than purely a nuclear device or conventional explosives former Virginia Tech professor of mechanical engineering Dr. Judy Wood is convinced the only explanation is derived from the use of Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) having “… ruled out a Kinetic Energy Device (bombs, missiles, etc.) as the method of destruction as well as a gravity-driven ‘collapse.’” Somewhat understandably, she has been marginalised by both the 9/11 Truth movement and less surprisingly, the MSM. This is probably due to aspects of her research which tend to push the boundaries of what can be considered rational, which is problematic for the 9/11 Truth movement which is still struggling to get people to accept that an “inside job” is even possible. Nevertheless, Dr. Wood contends that: “…the evidence is consistent with the use of energy weapons that go well beyond the capabilities of conventional explosives and can be directed” and that a: “satellite-mounted military weapon” may have been used to destroy the WTC. [31]

The foundation of Wood’s theory is not only from the evidence at the WTC itself but the existence of DEW’s sourced firstly from the Star Wars Program, also known as the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). “Since the invention of the microwave for cooking in 1945 and laser beam in 1955, commercial and military development of beam technology has proceeded apace, so use of high-energy beams are likely.” Having been secretly developed over 100 years and one of the most classified of military weapons it surely a case of near certainty. [32]

The reasons Woods gives for concluding that DEWs were responsible for the type of destruction wrought on WTC is vast in scope. A very brief selection of the main points of contention is included from Dr. Wood’s website:

  • The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain (at free fall speed ‘collapse’).
  • They underwent mid-air pulverization and were turned to dust before they hit the ground.
  • The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
  • The rail lines, the tunnels and most of the rail cars had only light damage.
  • The WTC mall survived well.
  • The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up.
  • The demolition of WTC7 was whisper quiet…seismic signal was no greater than background noise.
  • The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
  • The upper 90 percent, approximately, of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
  • File cabinet with folder dividers survived.
  • Office paper was densely spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often alongside burning cars.
  • Vertical round holes were cut into buildings 4, 5 and 6, plus a cylindrical arc into Bankers Trust and into Liberty Street in front of Bankers Trust.
  • All planes except top secret missions were ordered down until 10:31 a.m. (when only military flights were allowed to resume), after both towers were destroyed, and only two minutes after WTC 1 had been destroyed.
  • Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways, during the destruction of the Twin Towers.
  • The order and method of destruction of each tower minimized damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings.
  • The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared.
  • The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the mass.
  • The WTC7 rubble pile was too small and contained a lot of mud.
  • Eyewitness testimony about toasted cars, instant disappearance of people by “unexplained” waves, a plane turning into a mid-air fireball, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions.
  • There were many flipped cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex near trees with full foliage.

northtowerpulverization4

Various shots of the North Tower turning to dust? | Source: http://www.drjudywood.co.uk

Dr. Woods is a very controversial figure in the 9/11 Truth Movement. Whether we find the above evidence too outrageous to contemplate should not necessarily preclude its validity. However, there is no doubt that the WTC was effectively turned to dust. Something other than conventional weaponry was used, perhaps unknown to the military. The problem appears to be that Wood assumes she know what it is, which is clearly not the case. In amongst the valuable information there are persistent assumptions with no evidence to back it up. Overall, Wood maybe onto something, and her work has highlighted important anomalies which as yet, cannot be explained. The question mark appears to be over Dr. Wood herself and her associations with known disinformation agents. [33]As with most unconscious CoIntelpro operatives and their handlers, their information is valuable and designed to be derailed through the protagonist’s erratic behaviour and supposition theories which don’t necessarily stand up to scrutiny (Hutchison effect). It is in that way that the glimmers of truth lying behind the information is discarded while people who could provide collaboration and possible answers steer well clear. For now, Wood must be treated with extreme caution whilst acknowledging the central thrust of her work. Perhaps in the future, as 9/11 justice gains further momentum information may safely come to light and in the right hands.

(Note: For an interesting discussion on Dr. Judy Woods’ work please visit: https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/)

All good quality reseearch contributions must be included whilst maintaining the momentum of pressure for an independent investigation – an admittedly slim chance when criminal elements are still in control. This fact became abundantly clear when a federal offence was committed (actually aided and abetted by federal officials) who allowed the crime scene itself to be carted off and sold to scrap dealers who put it on ships to Asia. Vital evidence was forever lost to forensic science, a decision which was roundly condemned by many within the engineering and fire-fighting communities, culminating in a virtual riot by fire-fighters at Ground Zero, who were: “… protesting the desecration of the dead in a hasty ‘scoop and dump’ clean-up of the structural steel debris.”  [34]

One senior level fire-fighter Bill Manning called the WTC investigation a “half-baked farce,” adding: “The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately.” Manning also concluded that many of his colleagues and other fire-fighters are of the opinion that: “… the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers. Yet, “[a]s things now stand and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper-and computer-generated hypotheticals.”  [35] This is something that has been quite useful for obfuscation and pseudo-science as we have seen in previous posts.

gz_d1391p02WTC debris Source: http://www.911research.wtc7.net/

The decision to recycle the steel columns, beams, and trusses from the WTC in the few days after the destruction was also protested by some of the nation’s leading structural engineers and fire-safety experts. The 20 engineer team at Ground Zero leading the investigation also found constant obstruction by FEMA officials when attempting to interview witnesses and examining the site itself. Requests to see videos and detailed blueprints of the buildings were also denied. [36] Despite steel components being stamped with identification numbers for reassembly and study at a later date, this proved impossible.

Another spectre that plagued the ground zero responders and New York Residents is the issue of poor health arising from the smoke inhalation from the pulverized WTC material. On September 18, 2001, then chief of the Environmental protection Agency (EPA) Christine Todd Whitman told reporters through a press release: “We are very encouraged that the results from our monitoring of air-quality and drinking-water conditions in both New York and near the Pentagon show that the public in these areas is not being exposed to excessive levels of asbestos or other harmful substances,” and that “given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York … that their air is safe to breathe and the water is safe to drink.” [37] Rudy Giuliani (below) agreed with her assessment, cheerily stating that: “the problems created … are not health-threatening” and that “the air quality is safe and acceptable.” [38]

1rudy-giulianiFormer Mayor Rudolph Giuliani: Ground Zero Hero?

In a 2006 CBS News Interview EPA scientist Dr. Cate Jenkins described some of the dust at Ground Zero “As caustic and alkaline as Drano.” She also claimed that EPA officials had been aware of air toxicity and had chosen to lie about at the behest of the Bush Administration. In fact, before the publication of a 2003 report by the Office of the Inspector General of the EPA pressure was brought to bear to remove and alter information which urged caution regarding the dangers surrounding the air quality at Ground Zero. The fact that the air was described by one air pollution expert as “wildly toxic,” due to contaminants and carcinogens saturating the atmosphere at the time, it should not come as a shock that getting Wall St. back into business rather than saving lives was by far the most important order of the day – Bush family crimes have been part of its sordid history for quite some time. [39] Exposure to Ground Zero toxins has meant increasing numbers of residents reporting symptoms of respiratory illnesses with over 75 ground zero recovery workers having been “… diagnosed with blood cell cancers that a half-dozen top doctors and epidemiologists have confirmed as having been likely caused by that exposure.” [40] [41]

AASreeetAPAfter trying to play the hero at Ground Zero further evidence of Giuliani’s actions contradicting his own words were shown in November 2001 when he: “…wrote to members of the city’s Congressional delegation urging passage of a bill that capped the city’s liability at $350 million. And two years after Mr. Giuliani left office, FEMA appropriated $1 billion for a special insurance company to defend the city against 9/11 lawsuits.” [42]

Described as a “benevolent dictator” by one Ground Zero official, Giuiliani and his City team: “seized control” and largely limited the influence of federal authorities in the clean-up operation. The use of respirators and basic health procedures were discarded in favour getting Wall St. operational under the instruction of the Bush Administration. New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health industrial hygienist David Newman said, “I was down there watching people working without respirators.” He continued: “Others took off their respirators to eat. It was a surreal, ridiculous, unacceptable situation.” [43]

Judging by Giuliani’s legacy of corruption and racism [29] after leaving the mayor’s office, the mythology of a Ground Zero hero continues to feel the strain. Furthermore, it seems foreknowledge of some kind was in evidence. Giuliani, one of many officials at the time, told ABC News that he received a warning that the WTC was “gonna’ collapse” about ten minutes before it did.

“I went down to the scene and we set up a headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna’ to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit, got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us. ” [44]

Quite apart from there being no historical basis for such a prediction – no steel girded building had fallen in such a way – and with only isolated fires reported just before the collapse, why was it that no one but select officials were warned? What about Port Authority police?

Most importantly, why were fire-fighters still in the impact zone wholly unaware of an imminent collapse of WTC 2?

 

Notes

[1] Hamburger, Ronald, et al.. “World Trade Center Building Performance Study” (PDF). Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[2] ‘NIST Response to the World Trade Center Disaster’ (PDF) ‘World Trade Center Disaster Study’ – “On August 21, 2002, with funding from the U.S. Congress through FEMA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced its building and fire safety investigation of the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster that occured on September 11, 2001. The NIST WTC Investigation was conducted under the authority of the National Construction Safety Team Act.” | http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/
[3] National Institute of Standards and Technology, 9/2005 (pp. 183) | Popular Mechanics| http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842?page=1
[4] ‘The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True’ by Dr. David Ray Griffin Global Research, via 911truth.com January 29, 2006.
[5] ‘Towering Inferno In Caracas’ February 11, 2009 | ‘One Meridien Plaza’ Philadelphia, Pennsylvania http://web.archive.org/web/20040216014121/http://www.sgh.com/expertise/hazardsconsulting/meridian/meridia| ‘Commuter chaos after Madrid blaze’ BBC News, 14 February, 2005. | See also Christopher Bollyn’s ‘9/11 and the Windsor Tower Fire.’
[6] ‘29 Structural/Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition in Destruction of All 3 WTC High-Rises on 9/11’ – More than 700 architects and engineers have joined call for new investigation, faulting official reports Gregg Roberts and Staff June 17, 2009.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] 102 Minutes: The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers by Jim Dwyer. Published by Times Books, 2005. (p.149)
[10] Robertson, 3/2002; Federal Emergency Management Agency, 5/1/2002, (pp. 1-17)
[11] ‘Towers built to withstand jet impact’ Chicago Tribune, September 12, 2001.
[12] ‘What the World Trade Center Building Designers Said: Before and After 9/11’ http://www.911Blogger, February 21, 2007.
[13] City in the Sky: The Rise and Fall of the World Trade Center by James Glanz Glanz and Lipton, 2004, pp. 131-132; Lew, Bukowski, and Carino, 10/2005, (pp. 70-71)
[14] ‘Twin Towers Engineered To Withstand Jet Collision’By Eric Nalder, Seattle Times, February 27, 1993.
[15] op. cit. Griffin; 2004 (p.17)
[16] ‘Momentum Transfer Analysis of the collapse of the Upper Storeys of the WTC1’ By Gordon Ross. Ross was born in Dundee, Scotland. He holds degrees in both Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, graduating from Liverpool John Moores University, in 1984. www. gordonssite.tripod.com/id1.html
[17] ‘Memories’By Marci MacDonald, US New & World Report September 2002.| ‘Messages in the Dust’ by Francseca Lyman, The National Environmental Health Association 2003.www.neha.org/
[18] ‘September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero’ 911 Timeline – http://www.historycommons.org
[19] ‘Damage to Buildings Near World Trade Center Towers Caused by Falling Debris and Air Pressure Wave, Not by Ground Shaking, Columbia Seismologists Report’ in November 20 issue of Eos – Researchers Call for Seismographic Stations in Urban Areas. Earth Institute Colombia University /11/16/01.
[20] ‘Saving City Lifelines: Lessons Learned in the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks’ MTI REPORT 02-06 by Brian Michael Jenkins & Frances Edwards-Winslow, Ph.D., CEM. September 2003.
[21] The New Pearl Harbor – Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 by David Ray Griffin (2004) (1st edition)
[22] 9/11 Commission: ‘Final Report on the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States’ (p.305). | Ibid. NIST Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers Washington D.C. Govermment Printing Office; September 2005.
[23] Heller, David, 2005. ‘Taking a Closer Look: Hard Science and the Collapse of the World Trade Center,’ Garlic and Grass, Issue 6, November 24 (www.garlicandgrass.org/issue6/Dave_Heller.cfm).
[24] op. cit. Roberts et al.
[25] ‘29 Structural/Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition in Destruction of All 3 WTC High-Rises on 9/11’ Gregg Roberts and Staff June 17, 2009.
[26] ‘Explosives Found in World Trade Center Dust Scientists Discover Both Residues And Unignited Fragments Of Nano-Engineered Thermitic Pyrotechnic In Debris From the Twin Towers’ by Jim Hoffman.Version 1.00, http://www.911research.wtc.7.net, April 3, 2009. | ‘Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe’ Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen Pp 7-31The Open Chemical Physics Journal ISSN: 1874-4125.2008.
[27] ‘On the Manipulation of the 9/11 Research Community’ by Jim Fetzer – “The Dynamic Duo” radio show of 17 May 2007, Genesis, communications Network, http://www.gcnlive.com, Channel 2. Transcribed by Jeannon Kralj http://67.15.255.19/~c911sch1/media/0517071.mp3 / http://67.15.255.19/~c911sch1/media/0517072.mp3.
[28] 9/11 Deceptions By M. P. Lelong Published by XLibris 2011. (pp.118-119)
[29] See http://www.911citizenswatch.org/print.php?sid=906
[30] ‘Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11’ 2005; http://www.11syyskuu.net/evidence.htm
[31] ‘The Star Wars Beam Weapons and Star Wars Directed-Energy Weapons’ (DEW) (A focus of the Star Wars Program) by Dr. Judy Wood and Dr. Morgan Reynolds ,October 17, 2006.
[32] Ibid. | See also: ‘US Electromagnetic Weapons and Human Rights’ projectedcensored.org
[33] ‘Pete Santilli / Dr. Judy Wood January 13, 2013 via Before Its News www.americanfreedomradio.com/
[34] ‘29 Structural/Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition in Destruction of All 3 WTC High-Rises on 9/11’ Gregg Roberts and Staff June 17, 2009.
[35] $elling Out the Investigation By Bill Manning January 1, 2002 http://www.fireengineering.com
[36] ‘Experts Urging Broader Inquiry in Towers’ Fall’ By James Glantz and Eric Lipton, The New York Times, December 25, 2001.
[37] ‘Death by Dust – The frightening link between the 9-11 toxic cloud and cancer’, by Kristen Lombardi Village Voice, November 28, 2006.
[38] ‘Dishonorable Non-Mention: Juan Gonzalez and the Daily News’ 9/11 Pulitzer’, by Keach Hagey Village Voice, April 24, 2007. | ‘Buildings Rise from Rubble while Health Crumbles’, By Anita Gates, The New York Times, September 11, 2006, reporting on the documentary by Heidi Dehncke-Fisher, Dust to Dust: The Health Effects of 9/11.
[39] EPA’s Response to the World Trade Center Collapse: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement, Report No. 2003-P-00012, August 21, 2003.
[40] ‘Lost in the Dust of 9/11’ By Ellen Barry, Los Angeles Times, October 14, 2006.
[41] op. cit. Lombardi.
[42] ‘Ground Zero Illness Clouding Giuliani’s Legacy’, By Anthony DePalma, The New York Times, May 14, 2007.
[43] Ibid.
[44] ‘New York’s ex-mayor Giuliani leaves a legacy of corruption and racism’ By Bill Vann WSWS.org, 24 May, 2002.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.