Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
More Annotations
A complete backup of fluffychicks.net
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of www.tastyblacks.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of www.www.enature.tv
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of www.www.abcoeur.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of beautifulagony.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of www.www.imagefap.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of www.www.yournnpic.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of www.xhamster.desi
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
Favourite Annotations
A complete backup of stormventures.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of comite-solidarite-jeunesse.be
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of bhaskarhindi.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of rsthtprofnizar.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
Text
CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this period POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with WHAT IS “BEST EVIDENCE?” 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. POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks. POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
POINT FLT-4: UNEXPLAINED BLACK BOX ANOMALIES FOR THE FOUR According to a file released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request from Aidan Monaghan, the flight data file for American Flight 77, which was based on this FDR, was created at 11:45 PM on Thursday, September 13. This is a serious contradiction within the official story: According to the Pentagon, the FBI, and even the NTSB, the FDRwas
CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this period POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with WHAT IS “BEST EVIDENCE?” 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. POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks. POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
POINT FLT-4: UNEXPLAINED BLACK BOX ANOMALIES FOR THE FOUR According to a file released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request from Aidan Monaghan, the flight data file for American Flight 77, which was based on this FDR, was created at 11:45 PM on Thursday, September 13. This is a serious contradiction within the official story: According to the Pentagon, the FBI, and even the NTSB, the FDRwas
THE 9/11 CONSENSUS POINTS H. Consensus Points about Hijackers on 9/11. Point H-1: Mohamed Atta’s Mysterious Trip to Portland. Point H-2: The Claim that ‘Able Danger’ Failed to Identify Mohamed Atta’s Probable Presence in the US in January 2000. Point H-3: The Claim that the Hijackers Were Devout Muslims. ROWLAND MORGAN OBITUARY, JULY 7, 1945 The 9/11 Consensus Panel has lost a valued member, writer and journalist Rowland Morgan.. Rowland’s value to society was driven largely by his lifelong spirit of thumos: “Thumos is our will to fight, our need to rebel against that which is intolerable.POINT PENT-1
Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, August 2006: 262-285, at 268.(Bronner, who had been an associate producer of the film United 93 , was able to write this article because he was the first journalist to be given access to tapes provided by NORAD, which were used by the 9/11 POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT TT-7: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE SEISMIC The Official Account. The seismic waves were caused by the airplane impacts into the Twin Towers and the resulting collapses of the buildings. The magnitudes of the airplane impact shocks at WTC 2 and WTC 1, respectively, were 0.7 and 0.9. The collapse of WTC 2 caused a shock of magnitude 2.1; the collapse of WTC 1 caused a shockof
POINT WTC7-1
The Best Evidence. Before or after 9/11, no steel-frame high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire. If fire were to cause such a building to collapse, the onset would be gradual, whereas the videos show that WTC 7, after being completely stable, suddenly came down in virtual free fall. This building’s straight-down,symmetrical
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
OBITUARY: GIULIETTO CHIESA, 1940-2020 The 9/11 Consensus Panel mourns the loss of the great Italian journalist, Giulietto Chiesa, whose life was devoted to upholding the foundations of democracy, not just in his native Italy, but in Russiaand worldwide.
POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart.CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. ROWLAND MORGAN OBITUARY, JULY 7, 1945 The 9/11 Consensus Panel has lost a valued member, writer and journalist Rowland Morgan.. Rowland’s value to society was driven largely by his lifelong spirit of thumos: “Thumos is our will to fight, our need to rebel against that which is intolerable. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this period POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks.CONSENSUS 911
On December 16, 2017. New York, December 16, 2017 – The co-founders of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, authors Dr. David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, today release the following statement regarding disputed evidence within the 9/11 research community. Addressing Controversy Within the POINT PC-2: THE REPORTED PHONE CALLS FROM BARBARA OLSON The first three of the four calls attributed to Barbara Olson in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 455, note 57) were, like all of the reported calls by Tom Burnett to his wife, far above an elevation at which cell phone calls might have been possible (National Transportation Safety Board, “Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77,” February 19, 2002). REVIEW: BUSH AND CHENEY: HOW THEY RUINED AMERICA AND THE REVIEW: Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World. Review of Prof. David Ray Griffin’s Book by Elizabeth Woodworth, co-founder, consensus911.org; originally published on globalresearch.ca. As a prominent Whitehead process theologian, scholar David Ray Griffin attracted much attention when the first of his ten books about 9/11 POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart.CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. ROWLAND MORGAN OBITUARY, JULY 7, 1945 The 9/11 Consensus Panel has lost a valued member, writer and journalist Rowland Morgan.. Rowland’s value to society was driven largely by his lifelong spirit of thumos: “Thumos is our will to fight, our need to rebel against that which is intolerable. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this period POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks.CONSENSUS 911
On December 16, 2017. New York, December 16, 2017 – The co-founders of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, authors Dr. David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, today release the following statement regarding disputed evidence within the 9/11 research community. Addressing Controversy Within the POINT PC-2: THE REPORTED PHONE CALLS FROM BARBARA OLSON The first three of the four calls attributed to Barbara Olson in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 455, note 57) were, like all of the reported calls by Tom Burnett to his wife, far above an elevation at which cell phone calls might have been possible (National Transportation Safety Board, “Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77,” February 19, 2002). REVIEW: BUSH AND CHENEY: HOW THEY RUINED AMERICA AND THE REVIEW: Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World. Review of Prof. David Ray Griffin’s Book by Elizabeth Woodworth, co-founder, consensus911.org; originally published on globalresearch.ca. As a prominent Whitehead process theologian, scholar David Ray Griffin attracted much attention when the first of his ten books about 9/11 POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart. THE 9/11 CONSENSUS POINTS H. Consensus Points about Hijackers on 9/11. Point H-1: Mohamed Atta’s Mysterious Trip to Portland. Point H-2: The Claim that ‘Able Danger’ Failed to Identify Mohamed Atta’s Probable Presence in the US in January 2000. Point H-3: The Claim that the Hijackers Were Devout Muslims.POINT PENT-1
Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, August 2006: 262-285, at 268.(Bronner, who had been an associate producer of the film United 93 , was able to write this article because he was the first journalist to be given access to tapes provided by NORAD, which were used by the 9/11POINT PENT-4
Critical to the success of the 9/11 attacks was the element of surprise, which was emphasized by key White House and Pentagon officials: President George Bush said, “They struck in a way that was unimaginable.”; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “Never would have crossed anyone’s mind.”; General Richard Myers, Deputy Commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, saidCONSENSUS 911
On December 16, 2017. New York, December 16, 2017 – The co-founders of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, authors Dr. David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, today release the following statement regarding disputed evidence within the 9/11 research community. Addressing Controversy Within the POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT VIDEO-1: THE ALLEGED SECURITY VIDEOS OF MOHAMED ATTA As explained in Point H-1: “Mohamed Atta’s Mysterious Trip to Portland” (which provides evidence that this trip was fabricated), The 9/11 Commission Report says that Atta and fellow al-Qaeda operative Abdul Aziz al-Omari drove a rented car from Boston to Portland (Maine) on September 10, stayed overnight, and the next morning took a commuter flight back to Boston, where they boarded POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart.CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. ROWLAND MORGAN OBITUARY, JULY 7, 1945 The 9/11 Consensus Panel has lost a valued member, writer and journalist Rowland Morgan.. Rowland’s value to society was driven largely by his lifelong spirit of thumos: “Thumos is our will to fight, our need to rebel against that which is intolerable. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this period POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks. POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. ROWLAND MORGAN OBITUARY, JULY 7, 1945 The 9/11 Consensus Panel has lost a valued member, writer and journalist Rowland Morgan.. Rowland’s value to society was driven largely by his lifelong spirit of thumos: “Thumos is our will to fight, our need to rebel against that which is intolerable. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this period POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks. POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
THE 9/11 CONSENSUS POINTS H. Consensus Points about Hijackers on 9/11. Point H-1: Mohamed Atta’s Mysterious Trip to Portland. Point H-2: The Claim that ‘Able Danger’ Failed to Identify Mohamed Atta’s Probable Presence in the US in January 2000. Point H-3: The Claim that the Hijackers Were Devout Muslims. POINT TT-7: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE SEISMIC The seismic waves were caused by the airplane impacts into the Twin Towers and the resulting collapses of the buildings. The magnitudes of the airplane impact shocks at WTC 2 and WTC 1, respectively, were 0.7 and 0.9. The collapse of WTC 2 caused a shock of magnitude 2.1; the collapse of WTC 1 caused a shock of magnitude2.3.
POINT PENT-1
Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, August 2006: 262-285, at 268.(Bronner, who had been an associate producer of the film United 93 , was able to write this article because he was the first journalist to be given access to tapes provided by NORAD, which were used by the 9/11 POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL OR The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
POINT WTC7-1
The Best Evidence. Before or after 9/11, no steel-frame high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire. If fire were to cause such a building to collapse, the onset would be gradual, whereas the videos show that WTC 7, after being completely stable, suddenly came down in virtual free fall. This building’s straight-down,symmetrical
POINT PENT-2
References for Point Pent-2. The 9/11 Commission Report (2004), 34. Both General Arnold and General Eberhart testified that FAA notified NORAD at 9:24 ( National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Public Hearing, Friday May 23, 2003. The NORAD News Release of 18 September 2001 had reported the time of the FAANotification
POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart. POINT FLT-4: UNEXPLAINED BLACK BOX ANOMALIES FOR THE FOUR According to a file released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request from Aidan Monaghan, the flight data file for American Flight 77, which was based on this FDR, was created at 11:45 PM on Thursday, September 13. This is a serious contradiction within the official story: According to the Pentagon, the FBI, and even the NTSB, the FDRwas
CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks. POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this periodPOINT PENT-4
Critical to the success of the 9/11 attacks was the element of surprise, which was emphasized by key White House and Pentagon officials: President George Bush said, “They struck in a way that was unimaginable.”; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “Never would have crossed anyone’s mind.”; General Richard Myers, Deputy Commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL ORWHEN WAS 9 11WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS FALL The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
POINT PC-2: THE REPORTED PHONE CALLS FROM BARBARA OLSONWHAT HAPPENED TO BARBARA OLSONAMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77 BARBARA OLSONTED AND BARBARA OLSONBARBARA OLSON PHONE CALLBARBARA OLSON ALIVEBARBARA OLSON911
The first three of the four calls attributed to Barbara Olson in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 455, note 57) were, like all of the reported calls by Tom Burnett to his wife, far above an elevation at which cell phone calls might have been possible (National Transportation Safety Board, “Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77,” February 19, 2002).CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. On September 11, 2001, many people knew well before World Trade Center 7 collapsed that this 47-story high-rise building was going to come down. There were even two premature announcements of the collapse by major television networks. POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this periodPOINT PENT-4
Critical to the success of the 9/11 attacks was the element of surprise, which was emphasized by key White House and Pentagon officials: President George Bush said, “They struck in a way that was unimaginable.”; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “Never would have crossed anyone’s mind.”; General Richard Myers, Deputy Commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON The Official Account. On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 On September 29, 2001, the FBI received detailed records from Verizon’s wireless subscriber office in Bedminster, NJ, that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made 19 outgoing calls after the alleged 10:03 AM crash time of Flight UA 93. This fact, along with the sixth one, indicates either that the man self-identified as Todd Beamer wasnot on UA
POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL ORWHEN WAS 9 11WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS FALL The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.”. But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires,which at
POINT PC-2: THE REPORTED PHONE CALLS FROM BARBARA OLSONWHAT HAPPENED TO BARBARA OLSONAMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77 BARBARA OLSONTED AND BARBARA OLSONBARBARA OLSON PHONE CALLBARBARA OLSON ALIVEBARBARA OLSON911
The first three of the four calls attributed to Barbara Olson in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 455, note 57) were, like all of the reported calls by Tom Burnett to his wife, far above an elevation at which cell phone calls might have been possible (National Transportation Safety Board, “Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77,” February 19, 2002). ABOUT US | CONSENSUS 911 The purpose of the 9/11 Consensus Panel is to provide the world with a clear statement, based on expert independent opinion, of some of the best evidence opposing the official narrative about 9/11. The goal of the Consensus Panel is to provide a ready source of evidence-based research to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this periodPOINT PENT-1
Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, August 2006: 262-285, at 268.(Bronner, who had been an associate producer of the film United 93 , was able to write this article because he was the first journalist to be given access to tapes provided by NORAD, which were used by the 9/11POINT MC-INTRO
General Hugh Shelton, Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff ( Point MC-7) On the morning of 9/11, General Hugh Shelton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, later reported that he was on a plane – the Speckled Trout – to Europe. After learning of the second WTCPOINT PENT-2
References for Point Pent-2. The 9/11 Commission Report (2004), 34. Both General Arnold and General Eberhart testified that FAA notified NORAD at 9:24 ( National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Public Hearing, Friday May 23, 2003. The NORAD News Release of 18 September 2001 had reported the time of the FAANotification
POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT TT-1 | CONSENSUS 911 Experience, based on physical observation and scientific knowledge, shows that office fires, even with the aid of jet fuel, could not have reached temperatures greater than 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit (1,000 degrees Celsius). But multiple scientific reports show that metals in the Twin Towers melted. These metals included steel, iron, andPOINT WTC7-1
The Best Evidence. Before or after 9/11, no steel-frame high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire. If fire were to cause such a building to collapse, the onset would be gradual, whereas the videos show that WTC 7, after being completely stable, suddenly came down in virtual free fall. This building’s straight-down,symmetrical
POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart. POINT FLT-4: UNEXPLAINED BLACK BOX ANOMALIES FOR THE FOUR According to a file released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request from Aidan Monaghan, the flight data file for American Flight 77, which was based on this FDR, was created at 11:45 PM on Thursday, September 13. This is a serious contradiction within the official story: According to the Pentagon, the FBI, and even the NTSB, the FDRwas
CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Account 1: WTC 7 was critically damaged by flying debris from the collapsing WTC 1, which caused structural damage and fires in WTC 7. These fires were especially large and hot, being fed by diesel fuel stored in the building. Seeing the structural damage and fires, fire chiefs and engineers concluded that WTC 7 was in danger of collapse. POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this periodPOINT PENT-4
Critical to the success of the 9/11 attacks was the element of surprise, which was emphasized by key White House and Pentagon officials: President George Bush said, “They struck in a way that was unimaginable.”; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “Never would have crossed anyone’s mind.”; General Richard Myers, Deputy Commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower. POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 There are eight reasons to doubt the authenticity of the reported call to Lisa Jefferson from the man who identified himself as Todd Beamer. It is very unlikely that a passenger on UA 93 could have been able to talk to Jefferson continuously for 13 minutes. POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL ORWHEN WAS 9 11WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS FALL According to the official account, the Twin Towers were brought down by airplane impacts and fire, and in the case of WTC 7, by fire alone. One implication of this account is that the destruction would have produced no molten steel or molten iron (which is produced in athermite reaction).
POINT PC-2: THE REPORTED PHONE CALLS FROM BARBARA OLSONWHAT HAPPENED TO BARBARA OLSONAMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77 BARBARA OLSONTED AND BARBARA OLSONBARBARA OLSON PHONE CALLBARBARA OLSON ALIVEBARBARA OLSON911
The first three of the four calls attributed to Barbara Olson in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 455, note 57) were, like all of the reported calls by Tom Burnett to his wife, far above an elevation at which cell phone calls might have been possible (National Transportation Safety Board, “Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77,” February 19, 2002).CONSENSUS 911
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. POINT WTC7-8: THE OMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT BARRY JENNINGS The importance of this Consensus Point is that two men occupying senior positions within the New York City administration reported a massive explosion deep inside World Trade Center (WTC) 7 on the morning of 9/11, which trapped them in a stairwell for 90 minutes. POINT PC-4: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE SECOND According to what served as the official account of cell phone usage from the 9/11 planes until July 2004 (when The 9/11 Commission Report was released), more than a dozen calls – from a combination of passengers and flight attendants – were made to people on the ground by means of cell phones.The belief that such calls had been made was conveyed to the public by the mass media, with POINT WTC7-7: FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE Account 1: WTC 7 was critically damaged by flying debris from the collapsing WTC 1, which caused structural damage and fires in WTC 7. These fires were especially large and hot, being fed by diesel fuel stored in the building. Seeing the structural damage and fires, fire chiefs and engineers concluded that WTC 7 was in danger of collapse. POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this periodPOINT PENT-4
Critical to the success of the 9/11 attacks was the element of surprise, which was emphasized by key White House and Pentagon officials: President George Bush said, “They struck in a way that was unimaginable.”; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “Never would have crossed anyone’s mind.”; General Richard Myers, Deputy Commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said POINT MC-10: THE ACTIVITIES OF NYC MAYOR GIULIANI ON On 19 May 2004, Mayor Giuliani testified before the 9/11 Commission. Volunteering to tell what he had done on the morning of September 11, 2001, Giuliani said that, after finishing breakfast at a hotel some distance away from the World Trade Center, he was told that a twin-engine plane had crashed into the North Tower. POINT PC-1: THE ALLEGED CALLS OF TODD BEAMER, FLIGHT UA 93 There are eight reasons to doubt the authenticity of the reported call to Lisa Jefferson from the man who identified himself as Todd Beamer. It is very unlikely that a passenger on UA 93 could have been able to talk to Jefferson continuously for 13 minutes. POINT TT-6: THE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS NO MOLTEN STEEL ORWHEN WAS 9 11WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS FALL According to the official account, the Twin Towers were brought down by airplane impacts and fire, and in the case of WTC 7, by fire alone. One implication of this account is that the destruction would have produced no molten steel or molten iron (which is produced in athermite reaction).
POINT PC-2: THE REPORTED PHONE CALLS FROM BARBARA OLSONWHAT HAPPENED TO BARBARA OLSONAMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77 BARBARA OLSONTED AND BARBARA OLSONBARBARA OLSON PHONE CALLBARBARA OLSON ALIVEBARBARA OLSON911
The first three of the four calls attributed to Barbara Olson in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 455, note 57) were, like all of the reported calls by Tom Burnett to his wife, far above an elevation at which cell phone calls might have been possible (National Transportation Safety Board, “Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77,” February 19, 2002). ABOUT US | CONSENSUS 911 “September 11, 2001 seems destined to be the watershed event of our lives and the greatest test for our democracy in our lifetimes. The evidence of government complicity in the lead-up to the events, the failure to respond during the event, and the astounding lack of any meaningful investigation afterwards, as well as the ignoring ofevidence turned
POINT PC-3: CELL PHONE CALLS FROM THE PLANES: THE FIRST Although the public’s understanding about the 9/11 attacks depended heavily, from the beginning, on alleged “cell phone calls from the planes,” for several years – from September 2001 until July 2004, when The 9/11 Commission Report was issued – there was no official statement about the reported calls. But ideas about such cell phone calls were conveyed to the public in this periodPOINT MC-INTRO
One of the most remarkable features of 9/11 is the fact that the official accounts of the activities of six political and military leaders with central roles on 9/11 – roles that put them in position to affect the outcome of crucial events of that day – are challenged by facts suggesting that each story isPOINT PENT-1
Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, August 2006: 262-285, at 268.(Bronner, who had been an associate producer of the film United 93 , was able to write this article because he was the first journalist to be given access to tapes provided by NORAD, which were used by the 9/11 POINT TT-8: WHY DID THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSE? THE PHYSICAL A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse thestructure.”
POINT TT-1 | CONSENSUS 911 Experience, based on physical observation and scientific knowledge, shows that office fires, even with the aid of jet fuel, could not have reached temperatures greaterPOINT PENT-2
Some members of the 9/11 Commission argued that General Arnold and other military leaders had lied; see Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, August 2006: 262-285; vanityfair.com, October 17, 2006.Co-chairs Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, in their 2006 book Without Precedent, said that NORAD’s behavior “bordered on willful concealment,” adding: “Fog of war could POINT FLT-4: UNEXPLAINED BLACK BOX ANOMALIES FOR THE FOUR The official claims above are contradicted by a substantial amount of evidence to the contrary: Contrary to the official claim about AA 11 and UA 175, a FDNY fireman who worked in the cleanup of Ground Zero, Nicholas DeMasi, and volunteer Mike Bellone, described their discovery in October 2001 of three of the four black boxes in the rubble of theTwin Towers.
POINT WTC7-1
NIST originally suggested that WTC 7 was brought down by structural damage combined with a raging fire fed by diesel fuel. However, in its Final Report (of November 2008), NIST declared that neither diesel fuel nor structural damage played a role in this building’s collapse, and that this building, which was not struck by a plane, was brought down by fire alone. POINT H-1: MOHAMED ATTA’S MYSTERIOUS TRIP TO PORTLAND The official story about Atta’s Portland trip contains three mysteries: Why were Atta’s bags not loaded onto AA 11? In the affidavit, pointed out a Newsday story in 2006, “there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded.”. The loading failure could not be attributed to a late flight: The commuter flight back to Boston was on time, so there was an hour until AA 11 was to depart.*
The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence -- derived from a standard scientific reviewing process -- is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution. The Panel regularly features selected excerpts from its Consensus Points, with links to full supporting documentation. These featured excerpts are shown below, along with other recent News items. *Please consider linking to consensus911.org -- a peer-reviewed research source. The work here is based on a rigorous medical consensus model, and should be widely available.* OBITUARY: GIULIETTO CHIESA, 1940-2020 _On April 28, 2020 _ The 9/11 Consensus Panel mourns the loss of the great Italian journalist, Giulietto Chiesa, whose life was devoted to upholding the foundations of democracy, not just in his native Italy, but in Russiaand worldwide.
The Consensus Panel was honoured to have Giulietto as a voluntary reviewing member of its evidence-based 9/11 research – from 2011 until its findings were published in 2018.
In 1999-2000 Chiesa had founded the association _Megachip – Democracy in Communications_,
which presents critical analysis of how the mainstream media actually works. By April 2009 its website had over 60 million hits, and by 2010 it had reached 100 million. On the website appeared the words: A whisper was enough to create a wave.A simple whisper,
Nothing compared to the incessant noise of the thousand media thatsurround us.
Yet it was enough.
From _Megachip_ sprang the 2008 documentary _Zero: An InvestigationInto 9/11_ , which
challenged many assumptions surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Featuring such luminaries as Gore Vidal and Nobel Prize winner Dario Fo, it has been seen by millions of people. The Italian daily newspaper, _Il Corriere de da Sera_ described the “sequence of contradictions, gaps, and omissions of stunning gravity” that it exposed in theofficial story.
In 2003, just before the American invasion of Iraq, he promoted – together with a large group of volunteering journalists – the experimental independent satellite TV project, _NoWar TV_.
From the late 1990s onwards Chiesa had covered issues related to globalization, in particular how they affect the world media system. This led to his involvement in the foundation of the global think tank, _the World Political Forum_,
based in Turin and chaired by Mikhail Gorbachev. In 2010 Gorbachev founded the _New Policy Forum in Luxemburg_,
placing Chiesa on the Advisory Board. Chiesa also served for 19 years as a Moscow correspondent, was a former member of the European Parliament, and was a Fellow of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies. He was the Chief Editor of the web TV, _Pandora TV_. His blog _Il
Fatto Quotidiano_ was among the top ten political blogs in Italy. He was deeply mourned and honoured at _Megachip_.
Giulietto Chiesa was clearly a diverse man whose immense energy and compassion drove a lifelong quest for democracy. In the words of 9/11 Consensus Panelist Dr. Graeme MacQueen , co-founder of the Centre for Peace Studies at McMaster University,
“I found him to be extremely kind and generous … it was a great honour to have known him; we have lost a brave companion. What aloss.”
Tweet Share2
FOUNDERS OF THE 9/11 CONSENSUS PANEL HONOR SHELTON LANKFORD, USMC,1942-2019
_On January 16, 2020 _ Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford was a United States Marine for 20 years, a naval aviator with over 10,000 hours of flight time, and a Vietnam veteran with over 300 combat missions. He was also a charter signatory of a petition calling for a new investigation into the events of September 11, 2001, and a member of Military Officers for 9/11 Truth. In a 2010 letter to his local newspaper in Salisbury, Maryland,Lankford wrote:
“My mourning for the country I live in is not abstract, but real and very immediate. Since the unsolved crime of 9/11/01, I have seen our republic descend into darkness, as we used the lie of 9/11 to justify aggression abroad and repression at home. We have officially become a torture state. Accountability for egregious crimes at the highest levels is non-existent.” In September 2010, Consensus Panel co-founders David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth organized a joint simultaneous 9/11 Press Conferences in Los Angeles & New York City to announce the launch of Actors and Artists for 9/11 Truth , Military Officers for 9/11 Truth , and Scientists for 9/11 Truth . On September 9, Mr. Lankford represented the military officers during the New York City press conference announcement.
In 2011, again at the invitation of Griffin and Woodworth, Lankford joined the evidence-based 9/11 Consensus Panel to work under an exacting protocol in which the 20 reviewing members were blind to one another. His three rounds of insightful analysis for the first 18 Consensus Points helped the Panel to achieve over 90% consensus.
During April 2012, following an internal Panel dispute over the Pentagon evidence, Lankford was persuaded to resign from the Panel, a decision for which he expressed earnest regret during a telephone call to the co-founders in late April, wishing his lucid statement to remain on the Panel’s website masthead : “September 11, 2001 seems destined to be the watershed event of our lives and the greatest test for our democracy in our lifetimes. The evidence of government complicity in the lead-up to the events, the failure to respond during the event, and the astounding lack of any meaningful investigation afterwards, as well as the ignoring of evidence turned up by others that renders the official explanation impossible, may signal the end of the American experiment. It has been used to justify all manner of measures to legalize repression at home and as a pretext for behaving as an aggressive empire abroad. Until we demand an independent, honest, and thorough investigation and accountability for those whose action and inaction led to those events and the cover-up, our republic and our Constitution remain in thegravest danger.”
Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, US Marine Corps (ret.) Rest in peace, Shelton Lankford. The world is a poorer place withoutyou.
David Ray Griffin
Elizabeth Woodworth
Tweet Share1
PRESS RELEASE:
AWARD-WINNING FILM-MAKER AND 9/11 CONSENSUS PANEL MEMBER, MASSIMO MAZZUCCO’S NEW VIDEO ABOUT 9/11 _On September 11, 2019 _ Mazzucco introduces his video, “9/11 – TAKE THE QUIZ ” (@IMDb ), with the oft-cited official story: “19 Islamic hijackers armed with box-cutters take over four passenger planes flying in the American skies. Two of these planes are crushed against the Twin Towers in New York, the third plane hits the Pentagon, and a fourth one is crashed intentionally by the passengers in an open field in Pennsylvania. The Twin Towers later collapse due to structural failures caused by the impacts and the ensuing fires, killing some 3,000 people. This is, by-and-large, the official version of the events of 9/11, as told every year by the mainstream media all around the world.” He then asks: “_But how much do you really know about what truly happened on September 11th? And I’m not talking conspiracy theories here. I’m talking about simple, verifiable facts that somehow seem to have gone unnoticed in the big narrative maelstrom that has been 9/11 ever since._” Next the viewer is presented with a multiple-choice series of 23 questions about what actually happened on 9/11. The correct answers, accompanied by evidence, are given as the 37 minutes unfolds. For example, Question Nine asks: “_How many policemen, firemen, and first responders have testified to the_ New York Times_ about hearing explosions just before and during the collapse of the Twin towers? – None? Just one? About a dozen? More than 100?_” The answer to this question, which is given in the video, was never reported in the corporate media. At the end Mazzucco summarizes: “_If you scored less than 10 correct answers, I’m afraid, you’re somewhat ignorant on September 11th – or, rather than ignorant, you are a victim of the mainstream propaganda, which every year tells us the fairy-tale of the 19 hijackers armed with boxcutters, and the skyscrapers that totally collapsed on themselvessimply due to fire.
_
_ So now it’s up to you to decide how important it is, for each and every one of us, to know what truly happened on September 11th … It’s never too late to inform those who are less knowledgeable about what truly happened on September 11th, given that the mainstream journalists blatantly refuse to do what is supposed to be theirjob._”
###
Source:
The 9/11 Consensus Panel @consensus911E-mail:
consensus911@gmail.com Award-winning film-maker and 9/11 Consensus Panel member, Massimo Mazzucco’s new video about 9/11"> Tweet Share3 PRESS RELEASE: 40 PHONE-CALLS CHANGED THE WORLD ON 9/11 — BUT WERE THEY REAL? INVESTIGATION BY A DISTINGUISHED CONSENSUS911 PANELIST _On September 10, 2019 _ An unpublished manuscript investigating the alleged cell phone calls from the 9/11 flights has recently been released by the well-known British writer and Consensus911 panelist, Rowland Morgan.
Morgan, a former columnist for London’s _The Guardian_ and _The Independent_, undertook an in-depth investigation of the 9/11 phone calls in his extraordinary manuscript, _Voices_, researched from 2008 to 2010. (He also co-authored, with Ian Henshall,Flight 93 Revealed
,
Carroll and Graf, 2006.) _Voices_ cites an Associated Press report on April 6th, 2006, that “much of what happened aboard Flight 93 is known because passengers used cell phones in flight to call their loved ones.” However, the US government’s own telephone data presented at the Moussaoui trial in 2006 showed that Moussaoui prosecutor David Raskin “had not studied his own evidence, which claimed only two cellular telephone calls out of some 35 ostensibly heard from Flight 93.” Morgan goes on to reveal: “The telephone data contained more bombshells of which Moussaoui’s prosecutors apparently were unaware: * The world-famous 9/11 telephone calls from TV-pundit Barbara Olson to her husband Theodore Olson at his office in the Department of Justice had never occurred. The U.S government’s call data said she made a call but did not get through. This meant that the U.S. Solicitor-General, a key member of the Bush administration, had connived at, or been deluded about, a crucial deception, one that had placed ‘hijackers’ armed with ‘cardboard-cutters’ aboard Flight 77 ostensibly speeding towards the Pentagon. * The world-famous 9/11 in-flight telephone call from Todd Beamer, the one in which an Airfone operator heard him shout the Pentagon’s recruitment slogan ‘Let’s Roll ’, had never occurred. The U.S. government’s fudged data said Beamer had made separate calls in the same second. Because the existence of hijackers aboard the rogue planes partly relied on them, the collapse of these two vital telephone calls alone badly damaged the U.S. Government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory.” The full manuscript for Rowland Morgan’s brilliant study of all the alleged 9/11 cell phone calls, _Voices_, is available on the 9/11 Consensus Panel’s website.
###
Source:
The 9/11 Consensus Panel @consensus911E-mail:
consensus911@gmail.com 40 phone-calls changed the world on 9/11 — but were they real? Investigation by a Distinguished Consensus911 Panelist "> Tweet Share1 PRESS RELEASE:LOST AND FOUND
IMPORTANT 9/11 LINKS THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE WEB AND THEWAYBACK MACHINE
_On April 4, 2019 _
In the fullness of time, much key evidence concerning the 9/11 attacks has disappeared from the Internet and even retroactively from the Wayback Machine , which respects requests from websites to block their materials. In an effort to preserve important evidence that is not easily available on the Internet, the 9/11 Consensus Panel is now offering a home for selected evidence that is of value to researchers who are investigating the events of that world-changing day. The group of links restored to the Internet today include nine interviews with senior political and military figures on the first anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, September 11, 2002:Andrew Card
,
Karen Hughes
,
Norman Mineta
,
Robert Mueller
,
General Richard Myers,
Colin Powell
,
Condoleezza Rice
,
Karl Rove
, and
Donald Rumsfeld.
These people were all involved in the response that day. Please Note: If any persons in the 9/11 research community are looking for a place to post other important links that are no longer available on the Internet _AND on the Wayback Machine_, the Consensus Panel will consider including them on this website. We may be contacted at consensus911@gmail.com.Lost and Found
Important 9/11 Links that Have Disappeared from the Web and theWayback Machine
"> Tweet Share11 9/11 CONSENSUS PANEL LOSES VALUED HONORARY MEMBER, JUDGE FERDINANDO IMPOSIMATO, 1936-2018 _On March 10, 2018 _ The 9/11 Consensus Panel mourns the loss of one of its most respected Honorary Panel Members, Ferdinando Imposimato, Honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy, former Senator and presidential candidate (2015), and Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic, who died in Rome on December 31, 2017. Dedicated to the fight against corruption, he became one of Italy’s most respected judges. He served on the Anti-Mafia Commission in three administrations and for over two decades investigated many important cases, among these the kidnapping of former PM Aldo Moro and the assassination attempt onPope John Paul II.
Besides contributing numerous articles to other publications, he authored several books dealing with international terrorism, and not only participated in the “9/11 Toronto Hearings” (2011) but contributed a chapter to the “9/11 Toronto Report.”
Judge Imposimato became involved in 9/11 matters soon after the attacks, assisting in counseling families of victims from Italy. He then became an outspoken critic of the official 9/11 story, and in a2012 letter
to “The Journal of 9/11 Studies” stated that_
“The 9/11 attacks were a global state terror operation permitted by the administration of the USA, which had foreknowledge of the operation yet remained intentionally unresponsive in order to make war against Afghanistan and Iraq the 9/11 events were an instance of the strategy of tension enacted by political and economic powers in the USA to seek advantages for the oil and arms industries.”_
He repeatedly suggested that the only possibility for achieving justice is to submit the case to the Prosecutor of the InternationalCriminal Court.
The Consensus Panel – and many more – will miss this rare promoter of justice and truth. We are dedicated to carrying on his quest for justice for the thousands of victims of the attacks themselves, and the millions of the resulting global war on terror.Tweet Share13
WHY DO SELF-STYLED “SKEPTICS” BELIEVE IN THEIR OWN BRAND OFMIRACLES?
_On March 2, 2018 _
By Petra Liverani
Off-Guardian , February27, 2018
find it such an interesting phenomenon that of all the self-styled skeptics I have corresponded with or whose opinions are aired online, every single one swallows the miracles, told to us by NIST, of the three high rise steel frame building collapses on 9/11 being caused by fire when the evidence clearly shows that the collapses were caused by controlled demolition. Moreover, the $5,000 10-point Occam’s Razorchallenge
on
the cause of collapse of the third building, WTC-7, that I’ve issued personally to a significant number of these self-styled skeptics, has been very loudly ignored. As Australian politician, Pauline Hanson, infamously said when asked if she were xenophobic, “Please explain”. Please explain why it is that the most prolific scholar – by far – on 9/11 is a Christian and Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies, David Ray Griffin, and why this scholar, highly-esteemed within and without his own academic field, does not swallow the collapse-by-fire miracles? He has written over 10 books on the subject of 9/11, his latest being Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World.
He has also recently authored and co-authored two books on climate change. So he’s on the same page as most of the self-styled skeptics (in no way referring to the so-called climate skeptics, of course) with climate change but not with 9/11. As summarised by Edward Curtin in his review of Griffin’s book,
here are the 15 miracles that Griffin identified that the self-styled skeptics have swallowed:*
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 were the only steel-framed high-rise buildings ever to come down without explosives or incendiaries.*
The Twin Towers, each of which had 287 steel columns, were brought down solely by a combination of airplane strikes and jet-fuel fires.*
WTC 7 was not even hit by a plane, so it was the first steel-framed high-rise to be brought down solely by ordinary building fires.*
These World Trade Center buildings also came down in free fall – the Twin Towers in virtual free fall, WTC 7 in absolute free fall – forover two seconds.
*
Although the collapses of the of the WTC buildings were not aided by explosives, the collapses imitated the kinds of implosions that can be induced only by demolition companies.*
In the case of WTC 7, the structure came down symmetrically (straight down, with an almost perfectly horizontal roofline), which meant that all 82 of the steel support columns had to fall simultaneously, although the building’s fires had a very asymmetrical pattern.*
The South Tower’s upper 30-floor block changed its angular momentumin midair.
*
This 30 floor block then disintegrated in midair.*
With regard to the North Tower, some of its steel columns were ejected out horizontally for at least 500 feet.*
The fires in the debris from the WTC buildings could not be extinguished for many months.*
Although the WTC fires, based on ordinary building fires, could not have produced temperatures above 1,800°, the fires inexplicably melted metals with much higher melting points, such as iron (2,800°) and even molybdenum (4,753°).*
Some of the steel in the debris had been sulfidized, resulting in Swiss-cheese-appearing steel, even though ordinary building fires could not have resulted in the sulfidation.*
As a passenger on AA Flight 77, Barbara Olson called her husband, telling him about hijackers on her plane, even though this plane had no onboard phones and its altitude was too high for a cell phone callto get through.
*
Hijacker pilot Hani Hanjour could not possibly have flown the trajectory of AA 77 to strike Wedge 1 of the Pentagon, and yet hedid.
*
Besides going through an unbelievable personal transformation, ringleader Mohamed Atta also underwent an impossible physicaltransformation.
Now could it be that self-styled skeptics all over the Anglo world (Michael Shermer, Richard Dawkins and Richard Saunders being notable examples) are suffering from a severe case of skeptic groupthink? You’d think one of them would deviate from the flock in their concept of truth, wouldn’t you? An example of the faulty reasoning used by skeptics is displayed by Michael Shermer in this interview where he employs a common logical fallacy of 9/11 argument, argumentum ad speculum, by putting forward the seemingly great implausibility of the conspirators’ ability to lay explosives in the twin towers. This hypothesis ignores the reality of how the buildings collapsed and also displays ignorance of information indicating how the task of laying explosives could have been achieved, as in Jeremy Rys’s 45 minute film, Conspiracy Solved! There is much study in social psychology on why people believe things and what approaches to take to help them out of their entrenched beliefs (see presentation In Denial of Democracy: Social Psychological Implications for Public Discourse on State Crimes Against DemocracyPost-9/11 , by
neuroscientist, Laurie Manwell) but it truly baffles me that when you ask a self-styled skeptic to provide even just a single point to justify their belief and they fail, this stark confrontation with their inability to support their belief has no impact. It truly astounds me. I’m not talking here about aggressive confrontation, in which case one can comprehend a psychological resistance. I’m talking about asking someone, with pretensions to operate in a realm of reason and logic, simply to provide support fortheir belief.
Occam’s Razor is a tool of logic that can be applied in different ways. In my appplication I take the approach: what hypothesis fits the piece of evidence in question with the fewest questions and assumptions. It works like magic. If a self-styled skeptic cannot use the tool to support their belief nor poke a hole in the points provided for the opposing view, surely reason
and logic dictate that the skeptic must change their mind. If not, their claim to skepticism is utterly fraudulent. Interestingly, Griffin divides the world into three types of people:
*
Those guided by evidence,*
Those guided by their paradigms of how the world is thus if 9/11 being a false flag does not fit into their paradigms of how the world works they simply will not consider the evidence,*
Those guided by wishful-and-fearful thinking thus if the idea of their own government perpetrating an horrific crime on their own people is too awful to bear they simply will not believe the evidence. Shouldn’t self-styled skeptics, by definition, be of the first type? Apparently, not a one is. They seem to be all of the second type orpossibly third.
The Australian Skeptics association defines skepticism as follows: Skepticism is a dynamic attitude to the world around us. It is not a dogmatic approach restricted by “accepted wisdom”, but a serious and sincere appraisal of claims of how the world works. In response to my perfectly-reasoned emails, however, a leading Australian skeptic, (we’ll call him “R”), simply dismissed me, without evidence or debate, as a “conspiracy theorist.” Sadly, in his discourteous emails, “R” displays the opposite of genuine skepticism. He displays, only, that he could not be more indoctrinated by the most successful propaganda weapon of all time, the “conspiracy theory,” meme promulgated by the CIA after the JFK assassination to silence and discredit those who questioned the lonegunman explanation.
From an article in the Observer about NYU Professor of Media Studies, Mark Crispin Miller: The outspoken voice of public dissent considers a “meme” used to “discredit people engaged in really necessary kinds of investigation and inquiry.” For Miller, those investigations include, among others: did the U.S. government have foreknowledge of the 9/11 terror attacks and choose to do nothing? Were Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others surreptitiously trying to dismantle the republic envisioned by the founding fathers? And is the CDC concealing links between the MMR vaccine and autism? “_It’s one that you run into time and time again,_” Miller said on an October 11 episode of CounterPunch Radio.
“_To the point that I now believe that anyone who uses that phrase in a pejorative sense is a witting or unwitting CIA asset._” What sort of world do we live in when so many self-styled skeptics can watch the 6.5 second, beautifully symmetrical collapse of WTC-7 into its own footprint and accept the government report stating that it wascaused by fire?
_the collapse of WTC7 now acknowledged by NIST to be at free-fall_ Unincinerated terrorist passport fluttering to the ground at the World Trade Centre and being handed in by anonymous passerby? BBC journalist stating that WTC-7 collapsed 20 minutes before it did? Owner of WTC-7, Larry Silverstein, speaking of how he suggested that perhaps the smartest thing to do was to “pull it” (term used originally for demolition by pulling a building down but now also used for controlled demolition using explosives)? Do none of these puzzles excite even the barest curiosity in these so-called seekers after truth? … … … … … … … … … … … … …Tweet Share6
PRESS RELEASE: ADDRESSING CONTROVERSY WITHIN THE 9/11 TRUTH COMMUNITY _On December 16, 2017 _ New York, December 16, 2017 – The co-founders of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, authors Dr. David Ray Griffinand Elizabeth
Woodworth ,
today release the following statement regarding disputed evidence within the 9/11 research community. Addressing Controversy Within the 9/11 Truth Community: A Statement of Constructive Principles Serious students of 9/11 tend to agree that the official story raises too many problems to hold together as a credible account. However and unfortunately, there are areas of disagreement, especially with regard to the Pentagon, that threaten to undermine good will andmutual trust.
As co-founders of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, we offer the following observations and principles for consideration: * At the four alleged airliner crash sites, odd phenomena and anomalies continue to cause speculation and disagreement. Some scholars can justifiably take one set of data as most important, while playing down the importance of another set, while other scholars can justifiably take the second set of data as most important. * These differences of opinion can be justifiable until there is a theory that can take account of all the indisputable evidence. * Based on an understanding that there are valid reasons for disagreement, the 9/11 research community can best be unified by respect and tolerance for contrary theories. * Contributions seeking to solve contentious issues can only be made by assembling reliable evidence and by applying critical thinking and peer review according to the standard scientific process. This is the strength of science and the way it has progressed over centuries. * In conclusion, we offer the “agree to differ” approach: to end an argument amicably while maintaining differences of opinion until there is an explanation that does justice to all the various types ofevidence.
###
295 words
Source:
The 9/11 Consensus Panel @consensus911Contact list:
www.consensus911.org/media-contacts/E-mail:
consensus911@gmail.comTweet Share10
PRESS RELEASE: NEW SONG PROFILES THE MIRACULOUS CLAIMS OF THE OFFICIAL9/11 STORY
_On December 16, 2017 _ New York, December 7, 2017 – The 9/11 Consensus Panel was impressed by the imagination and resourcefulness of a new 4-minute video song created by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth . The song was inspired by 9/11 Consensus Panel co-founder David RayGriffin ’s
recent book, “Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World,”
(Interlink, 2017).
The song, a take-off on “I believe in Miracles,” is titled, “I believe in 9/11 Miracles.” Its sometimes hilarious content reflects and illustrates Griffin’s statement: “If journalists continue to endorse the official account of the destruction of the World Trade Center, they should begin their articles by saying: ‘I believe in miracles—lots of them.’” This snappy little song has been picked up the The Centre for Research on Globalization and may be heard here.
###
144 words
Source:
The 9/11 Consensus Panel @consensus911Contact list:
www.consensus911.org/media-contacts/E-mail:
consensus911@gmail.comTweet Share2
PRESS RELEASE: THE 9/11 CONSENSUS PANEL’S CONTINUING WORK AT THE16TH ANNIVERSARY
_On September 7, 2017 _ NEW YORK, September 8, 2017 – With the approaching 16th anniversary of September 11, 2001, and with the global war on terror still raging unabated, the 9/11 Consensus Panel continues its 7-year commitment “to provide a ready source of evidence-based research to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution.” This year the 23-member Panel published two new Consensus Points, using its “best evidence” review model
to analyse the official claims about 9/11. (The Panel has now reviewed50 official claims
and has found
each to be a substantially flawed account.) The first Point , “The Claim that the Hijackers were Devout Muslims,” cites many media reports that the hijackers were engaged in “decidedly un-Islamic sampling of prohibited pleasures,” including lap dancing in Las Vegas nightclubs.
The second 2017 Consensus Point , “The Claim that Mohamed Atta Had Become a Fanatically Religious Muslim,” explores the question asked by a member of the press to 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste: “If Atta belonged to the fundamentalist Muslim group, why was he snorting cocaine and frequenting strip bars?” Ben-Veniste replied: “You know, that’s a heck of a question.” But it was a question that the 9/11 Commission never addressed. These two Points build upon the already overwhelming evidence that 9/11, which has been used to justify America’s imperialist agenda in the Middle East, was a deception across the board: the World TradeCenter ,
the Pentagon
, the
hijackers
,
the phone calls from the planes, the
fake security video exhibits, and
the whereabouts of the political and military commands.
Consensus panelist Dr. Niels Harrit, Professor
Emeritus of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, has published more than 60 peer-reviewed papers in the top chemistry journals and has given more than 300 presentations about the World Trade Center demolitions, speaking in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Holland, France, Switzerland, Spain, United Kingdom, Canada, USA, China, Australia, Russia and Iceland.Frances Shure , a
licensed professional counselor on the 9/11 Consensus Panel, was interviewed on Progressive Spirit in August, 2017 about the extraordinary denial that continues to surround the events of 9/11. The title of her interview was “Why Do Good People Become Silent—Or Worse—About 9/11?”
Dr. Graeme MacQueen
, Professor
Emeritus of Peace Studies at McMaster University, has published a recent article with an entirely new slant, “9/11: The Pentagon’sB-Movie
,”
which re-awakens our sense of the horrific yet still-concealed nature of this world-changing deception. Two other Panelists, physics teacher David Chandlerand engineer
Jonathan Cole ,
maintain a separate website , in which their independent research, which is also affiliated with the 2900-member Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Scientists for 9/11 Truth ,is documented.
Panel co-founder, Dr. David Ray Griffin, has recently
released his 11th scholarly book on 9/11, _Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World_,
perhaps his best-selling title to date. David’s August 2017 interview with John Shuck may be heard here.
The Panel wishes to thank its fine team of voluntary translators, who continue to make best-evidence research about 9/11 much more widely available through other languages.###
527 words
Source:
The 9/11 Consensus Panel @consensus911Contact list:
www.consensus911.org/media-contacts/E-mail:
consensus911@gmail.comTweet Share7
9/11: THE PENTAGON’S B-MOVIE _On September 5, 2017 _By Graeme MacQueen
Global Research
,
August 31, 2017
_The events that took place in the United States on September 11, 2001 were real and they were extremely violent. As David Griffin has recently shown in detail, they also had catastrophic real-life consequences for both the United States and the world._ _But these events were also deeply filmic (like a film) and they were presented to us through a narrative we now know to be fictional. This “9/11 movie” reveals itself to careful investigators as scripted, directed and produced by the U.S. national security state. The movie does not represent the real world. It violates the rules operative in the real world, including the laws of physics. Audiences will remain in thrall to the spectacle and violence of the War on Terror only as long as they remain mesmerized by the B-movieof 9/11._
THE FILMIC NATURE OF THE SEPTEMBER 11 EVENTS Many people caught a whiff of Hollywood on September 11, 2001. According to LAWRENCE WRIGHT (screenwriter of _The Siege_),
“It was about an hour after the first trade centre came down that I began to make the connection with the movie, this haunting feeling at the beginning this looks like a movie, and then I thought it lookslike my movie.”
STEVE DE SOUZA (screenwriter, _Die Hard_and _Die Hard 2_
) has said:
“Well it did look like a movie. It looked like a movie poster. It looked like one of my movie posters.” The 9/11 attacks were filmic in at least the following ways * Given the complex and coordinated nature of these attacks, they had been _scripted_ and given a timeline in advance; * given the need to make decisions as the attacks progressed (for example, when an aircraft went off course or was delayed), it is clear that there was a _director_; * given the overall vision, the need for funds, resources and international coordination over a period of years, it is obvious that there had been a _producer_; * given the numerous roles played in this event (for example, by the “hijackers”), there were undoubtedly _actors_. In addition, the event included the key dramatic elements of conflict, violence and spectacle. The entire production was filmed from several angles, and the films, sometimes in the rough and sometimes cleverly edited, were shown many, many times all over the world. Official U.S. sources rapidly acknowledged the remarkably filmic nature of these events. In October, 2001 some two dozen Hollywood writers and directors were assembled “to brainstorm with Pentagon advisers and officials in an anonymous building in L.A.” The Army’s Institute for Creative Technologies was the lead organization. The assembled group was assumed to have relevant expertise and was asked to brainstorm about what future attacks might look like so that the Pentagon could be prepared. (“We want some left-field, off-the-wall ideas; say the craziest thing that comes into your mind”). While the bare fact of this consultation was widely reported by news media, further details about the three-day consultation have been hard to come by. Reporters have had their FOIA requests denied. Beneath this consultation lay the “failure of imagination” hypothesis. Although the hypothesis emerged almost immediately after September 11, it was given especially clear expression in a BBC Panorama programme aired on March 24, 2002. STEVE BRADSHAW interviewed representatives of Hollywood and of national security institutions. The Pentagon, we were supposed to believe, is a typical large bureaucracy characterized by inertia. It is unable to imagine, and to rapidly respond to, new and emerging threats. It is stuck in the past. It is also afraid to irritate the general population by appearing to be politically incorrect–by looking, in this case, at Islam as a threat. Fortunately, there are two sets of people with imagination and courage: a small number of people within the national security apparatus who were trying to warn the Pentagon but were ignored, and Hollywood screenwriters and directors, who had imagination, who had some contact with the national security dissidents, and who had the courage to risk being calledIslamophobic.
So the planes of September 11, when they burst on the scene, confirmed the imaginative prescience of Hollywood, supported the courageous faction of the national security apparatus, and embarrassed the national security bureaucracy, which had to lower itself in October, 2001 to meet with the purveyors of fiction in order to stimulate itssclerotic brain.
This failure of imagination hypothesis was supported by statements by GEORGE W. BUSH and, even more famously, by CONDOLEEZA RICE: “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile.” The hypothesis became more or less official when it was adopted by the 9/11 Commission in its report on the attacks. Of course, given the filmic nature of 9/11, it is clear that, according to these official U.S. sources, there was another group–beyond Hollywood and a few national security malcontents–that had imagination, namely al-Qaeda. ROBERT ALTMAN (director of MASH, McCabe and Mrs. Miller and many other films) said in 2002 that Hollywood was to blame for the 9/11 events. “The movies set the pattern, and these people have copied the movies … Nobody would have thought to commit an atrocity like that unless they’d seen it in a movie.” Presumably, by “these people” Altman meant al-Qaeda. Perhaps it was while munching popcorn and watching a Hollywood movie that OSAMA BIN LADEN and his high-level companions got the idea for 9/11? This is possible. But would it not make sense to ask if it is true that the Pentagon has no imagination, and that it was incapable of picturing attacks like those of the fall of 2001? Collaboration between Hollywood and U.S. government agencies goes back at least as far as WW II. Indeed, a 1943 memo from the OSS (forerunner of the CIA) noted that, “The motion picture is one of the most powerful propaganda weapons at the disposal of the United States.” Many Hollywood films and TV programs have, therefore, been supported by the Pentagon, and some have been supported by the CIA. Such support can be crucial for films that require U.S. military assets such as planes and helicopters. But support is not automatic. The script must first be approved, and emendations may be demanded by the national security agency in question. In a recent book on this subject (_National Security Cinema: The Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood_), authors TOM SECKER and MATTHEW ALFORD list 814 films and 1133 TV titles that received DOD support. Since many of these films are highly imaginative constructions, how can it be that the national security agencies that have helped bring them to fruition have remained trapped in their grey, unimaginative world? Presumably, we are to believe that it is the nature of a bureaucracy to restrict these imaginative insights to one part of the organization–say, the Army’s Institute for Creative Technologies–while neglecting to disseminate them to other parts of the national security state. But is this true? Those familiar with the History Commons research project on 9/11 will know that it is not true at all. Here are 16 titles from that project (selected from a much longer list) that refer to pre-9/11 exercises and simulations by U.S. government agencies: * November 7, 1982: Port Authority Practices for Plane Crashing intothe WTC
* (1998-September 10, 2001): NORAD Operations Center Runs Five ‘Hijack Training Events’ Each Month * 1998-2001: Secret Service Simulates Planes Crashing into the WhiteHouse
* October 14, 1998: ‘Poised Response’ Exercise Prepares for Bin Laden Attack on Washington * Between 1999 and September 11, 2001: NORAD Practices Live-Fly Mock Shootdown of a Poison-Filled Jet * Between September 1999 and September 10, 2001: NORAD Exercises Simulate Plane Crashes into US Buildings; One of Them Is the WorldTrade Center
* November 6, 1999: NORAD Conducts Exercise Scenario Based around Hijackers Planning to Crash Plane into UN Headquarters in New York * June 5, 2000: NORAD Exercise Simulates Hijackers Planning to Crash Planes into White House and Statue of Liberty * October 16-23, 2000: NORAD Exercise Includes Scenarios of Attempted Suicide Plane Crashes into UN Headquarters in New York * May 2001: Medics Train for Airplane Hitting Pentagon * June 1-2, 2001: Military Conducts Exercises Based on Scenario in which Cruise Missiles Are Launched against US * July 2001: NORAD Plans a Mock Simultaneous Hijacking Threat frominside the US
* Early August 2001: Mass Casualty Exercise at the Pentagon Includes a Plane Hitting the Building * August 4, 2001: Air Defense Exercise Involves the Scenario of Bin Laden Using a Drone Aircraft to Attack Washington * September 6, 2001: NORAD Exercise Includes Terrorist Hijackers Threatening to Blow Up Airliner * September 9, 2001: NEADS Exercise Includes Scenario with Terrorist Hijackers Targeting New York It is not necessary to find an exercise here that perfectly matches the attacks of the fall of 2001. The point is that there is far too much imagination and far too much similarity to the actual attacks of the fall of 2001 to support the “failure of imagination” hypothesis. Hollywood participants in the October, 2001 brainstorming exercise, who thought they were being tapped for their imagination,were conned.
Who was better prepared, through both imagination and logistical capacity, to carry out the attacks of the fall of 2001–Bin Laden’s group or the U.S. national security state? The latter had been practising steadily, in relevant scripted training operations, for years, and it had the power and resources to bring the imaginative scenarios to reality. Al-Qaeda was not remotely its match. NOT JUST FILMIC, BUT EXCLUSIVELY FILMIC _The violent destruction of the North Tower_ If this business of the filmic nature of the September 11 attacks involved only Hollywood scriptwriters we might be tempted to regard it as nothing but a minor distraction. But what we find is that even members of the Fire Department of New York, risking their lives at the scene, were shocked by the filmic nature of what they witnessed. * “I thought I was at an event at Universal Studios, on the side, watching a movie being taped.” (EMS CHIEF WALTER KOWALCZYK) * “I remembered hearing Lieutenant D’Avila coming over the radio and saying Central be advised, a second plane just went into the second tower. We ran out and we saw the second plane. It was like watching a movie. It really was.” (EMT PETER CACHIA) * “I looked over my shoulder and you could see the whole top of the south tower leaning towards us. It looked like it was coming over. You could see the windows pop out just like in the picture, looked like a movie. I saw one floor of windows pop out, like poof, poof. I saw one and a half floors pop out.” (Chief STEVE GRABHER) * “The building started collapsing, the north tower started collapsing. It tipped down first and then the thing fell within itself. It was an amazing sight to see. It was really unbelievable. I thought I was watching a movie with special effects.” (EMT MICHAELMEJIAS)
* “As I’m looking up at this stuff that’s going on up there now, I just like — I’m saying to myself I’ve seen this in a movie. My whole recollection is going back to a movie or something I saw. I just saw this before.” (Fire Marshal STEVEN MOSIELLO) * “ … it looked like a bomb, of course, had gone off, almost like a nuclear bomb. That’s all I could think of. I’ve never been at war. I equated it to being like when I saw something like when I was a kid and I saw Godzilla in the movies or something, when he crushes those buildings and stuff like that, that’s what it looked like to me.” (Firefighter EDWARD KENNEDY) * “I’m standing on top of the rig between the bucket and the cab, between the ladder and the cab. People were blessing themselves in this gloominess of going down. It was like out of a movie. I couldn’t believe what was going on.” (Firefighter TIERNACHCASSIDY)
* “I just recall that those first — those first minutes from the time that sound started, the rumbling started to occur and the dust started to fall and then stopped to get gear and equipment from the fire truck and then continue down to West Street and getting there and seeing the crushed fire trucks, crushed cars, vehicles on fire. It was like a movie set.” (Firefighter DANIEL LYNCH) * “Then like a Godzilla movie, everybody that had been standing in that little park there across from One Liberty Plaza and had been just looking up and watching the north tower burn just started running eastbound like they were being chased by someone.” (Battalion ChiefBRIAN DIXON)
* “Then, you started to run, your helping people, helping them run. You saw it, it was amazing … like out of a movie, you know, the cloud’s just chasing you. As you look back, you see it engulf people.” (EMP PETER CONSTANTINE) * “ … as I turned on Albany I looked over my shoulder and I saw the big cloud of dust that was already on the ground like just making its way down the block, just like a movie.” (EMS Captain FRANKD’AMATO)
* “The first thing came in my mind was the movie Armageddon, and this was reality, with the black smoke 30 floors high, debris falling everywhere … .Because I have never seen anything like that in 21 years of emergency work.” (EMT RUSSELL HARRIS) * “Then as soon as we got over there, as soon as we got off of the Brooklyn Bridge, the people were running like it was a Godzilla movie, and we had to stop there for a while. People were overcome, were shaken, were scared … ” (EMT CHRISTOPHER KAGENAAR) * “But I ran and ran, and finally I could see the light. When I got to where the tunnel was, I’m looking everywhere. It was just like that movie the day after with the atomic bomb. They drop it and nobody’s left and I’m the only one.” (Paramedic ROBERT RUIZ) * “I remember seeing the rubble, seeing the rubble fall and actually start to chase down the street, and, you know, it’s strange because you wouldn’t expect — you wouldn’t expect debris to do that, but it literally traveled, like, you would see these movies with like a tidal wave that flows through the streets and hits down any path it can.” (ROSARIO TERRANOVA) These comments, selected from a wider set of similar comments, are intriguing, but what is their significance? As we examine them closely we recognize that the September 11 event was not just filmic but exclusively filmic. By this I mean that the narrative presented to us by authorities could not have unfolded outside of a film. Since at least as early as 1902, when the French film _A Trip to the Moon (Le Voyage dans la Lune _) took its viewers into space, audiences have been enjoying the ability of movies to deliver dramatic action through special effects, and especially by suspending, fictionally, the laws of physics. This is part of the power of film and there is nothing inherently wrong with it. But it is important to know when we are in the theatre and when weare not.
In the original 1933 film, _King Kong_ , director MERIAN COOPER was determined to make the appearance of his monster dramatically powerful, and to this end was prepared to change the monster’s size repeatedly to fit particular scenes. “I was a great believer in constantly changing Kong’s height to fit the settings and the illusions. He’s different in almost every shot; sometimes he’s only 18 feet (5.5 m) tall and sometimes 60 feet (18.3 m) or larger … but I felt confident that if the scenes moved with excitement and beauty, the audience would accept any height that fitted into the scene.” Cooper understood what mattered in a movie. But imagine what would happen if audiences remained convinced by the suspension of the laws of physics after they left the theatre? This, it seems to me, is what has happened with the events of September 11, 2001. Many people are still deceived by the special effects. They are still captured by the_movie_ of 9/11.
Consider two of the most traumatizing elements in the attacks, the disappearance of the Twin Towers and the ensuing debris cloud. The destruction of the Twin Towers stunned first responders. Their previous experiences, including experiences with high-rise fires, did not lead them to suspect these buildings would come down. “I’ve worked in Manhattan my whole career in high rises and everything else … you looked back, all you see–you know how fast those buildings came down … it just doesn’t click that these buildings can come down … you just couldn’t believe that those buildings could come down … there’s no history of these buildings falling down.” (Lieutenant WARREN SMITH) “Whoever in their right mind would have thought that the World Trade Center would ever fall down … Nobody in the world, nobody ever would ever have thought those buildings were coming down.” (EMS CaptainMARK STONE)
Investigations over the last 16 years have demonstrated that the first responders’ surprise was justified. The explanations offered by official U.S. agencies have been shown to violate basic laws ofphysics.
Awed by the spectacle of the Twin Towers coming down, and by the later fall of World Trade 7, we are supposed to forget our high school physics. We are not supposed to notice that the official explanations given to us leave these spectacles every bit as peculiar as King Kong’s ever-changing size. So this central dramatic element, as edited for TV, interpreted by ponderous official voices, and played repeatedly for a world audience, belonged to the _9/11 movie_. Behind the scenes the director had ordered that explosive charges be set in the buildings. Well over one hundred members of the Fire Department of New York witnessed explosions at the beginning of the so-called collapses of the Twin Towers. Their testimony fits with the controlled demolition hypothesis and does not fit with the script of the 9/11 movie. Since promotion of the government’s movie would have been difficult if these voices were heard, they were suppressed. The second deeply impressive event of September 11, which appears repeatedly in the FDNY musings about the filmic nature of what they witnessed, was the cloud of material that rushed through the streets of Manhattan in the wake of the destruction of each of the Towers. Several films are mentioned by name in this connection, including those featuring Godzilla, King of Monsters, created for Japanese films less than ten years after the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a deliberately provocative meditation on the forces of thenuclear age.
The FDNY World Trade Center Task Force interviews give a lively sense of what it felt like to be trapped in this debris cloud. “I’m about ten feet in front of it, running, actually sprinting because I’m an athlete and I’m running … Ash came around another building in front of me, and it caught me in front of me and in back of me, and everything was pitch-black. Where it hit me from the front and the back, it actually lifted me off the ground and threw me. It was like someone picked me up and just threw me on the ground. Everything was pitch-black. You couldn’t see anything. All I saw was big bolts of fire, fire balls. I could feel the heat around me. It was pitch-black. I couldn’t see anything at all. My lungs, my airways, everything filled up with ash. I couldn’t breathe.” (EMT RENAEO’CARROLL)
“All of a sudden the noises stopped, the sound of the building falling stopped. We all turned around and it was dark now. We really couldn’t see … The cloud was in there. All eating the cloud, whatever it was like, very thick. I keep saying it was like a 3 dimensional object. It wasn’t smoke. It was like everything. It was like a sand storm.” (Firefighter TIMOTHY BURKE) “So I’m running, and people are running in front of me. They stop. They turn around. I think everything’s over with. So I stop, all of a sudden the thing is coming at us. It was like in dark hell, like a nuclear blizzard. I couldn’t explain it. You couldn’t see in front of you. You couldn’t breathe. You’re inhaling. You’re coughing. You’re running. You can’t see anything.” (EMT MARY MERCED) “You still can’t see it because it’s dark as a mother. You can’t breathe. It’s so heavy with smoke and dust and ash. I can’t breathe. I have, for lack of a better term, dust impaction in my ears, in my nose. I was coughing it out of my mouth. It felt like I had a baseball in my mouth. I was just picking it out with my fingers.” (Paramedic LOUIS COOK) _People on 9/11 running from the debris cloud_ As is clear from these testimonies, words like “smoke” and “dust” do not do justice to the cloud in which people were trapped. That is because _the clouds were the Towers_. Each Tower was converted in less than 20 seconds from a powerful, massive structure over 415 metres (1362 feet) high into cut steel and pulverized matter. While the steel lay on the ground, much of the remainder was rapidly propelled through the streets of Manhattan. Just as the dramatic tale of building destruction involved deception, so did the equally dramatic tale of this engulfing cloud. This cloud was not the result of a gravitational collapse caused by Muslim terrorists flying planes into buildings. It was the result of an explosive building demolition. That this cloud could not have been caused in the manner claimed by the official narrative has been argued several times, beginning at least as early as 2003. The demonstrations are independent of the proofs of explosive destruction of the buildings. Credible scientists have calculated the amount of potential gravitational energy in the Twin Towers–the only major form of energy available, according to the official narrative, at the time of the “collapse” since the energy contributed at that point by the fires was minimal and indirect–and have compared it to the amount of energy that would have been required to create the pulverized debriscloud.
Professor emeritus of civil engineering, ROBERT KOROL has recently discussed this issue. He has calculated the gravitational potential energy of each of the Towers at 508.4 x 109 joules. He has calculated the energy required to pulverize the concrete of each Tower at 857.5 x 109 joules; the energy to destroy the perimeter columns at 219 x 109 joules; and the energy to destroy the core columns at 178 x 109 joules. The total energy required for the concrete and columns is 1,254.5 x 109 joules. Simply put, these figures suggest that it would have taken about two and a half times the amount of energy available through gravity to have destroyed the Towers as witnessed. Professor Korol’s calculations are based on experimental work he has done in the laboratory, the results of which have been published in peer-reviewed journals. He has pulverized concrete. He has buckled and crushed columns. He has measured the force required in each case. His calculations with respect to the Twin Towers are extremely conservative in that they do not attempt to include all forms of destruction attested, such as pulverizing of walls, furniture andhuman bodies.
If, moreover, we were to add to his calculations the energy required to propel the pulverized buildings in all directions through the streets of Manhattan, as some authors have done, we would find the impossibility of the official narrative even more striking. The comment by the FDNY’s Terranova, quoted earlier–“you wouldn’t expect debris to do that–” is an understatement. We cannot avoid the conclusion that the gravity-caused debris cloud was exclusively filmic just like King Kong’s fluctuating height. Both honoured the rules of dramatic action by violating the laws of physics. The apparently fanciful references to Godzilla by first responders are actually perceptive. Gravity was aided by an extremely muscular destructive force. But in Godzilla movies the monster is visible, while the monster of the 9/11 movie was invisible and must be made visible through investigation.OUR CHALLENGE
In the 1958 trailer for the B-movie, _The Blob_ , film-goers are shown sitting in a theatre as a horror movie begins. They are frightened, but only in the distant way that film audiences allow themselves to feel frightened by fictional representations. Then we notice the monster (“the Blob”) oozing into the theatre itself. As the movie-goers wake up to this reality and sense the real danger, they tear their eyes from the screen and run from the theatre. As audiences today watch the War on Terror, hypnotized by the extremist evil-doers, a pitiless oligarchy creeps unseen into the room. Our challenge is to break the spell of the B-movie of 9/11. Only when people sense the genuine danger and leave behind fiction and special effects will they be in a position to deal with the real monster thatconfronts us.
NOTES
_Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World_
(Northampton, MA: Olive Branch Press, 2017) “September 11: A Warning from Hollywood,” _BBC Panorama_ (BBC,March 24, 2002).)
Ibid.
Spectacle, the visual aspect of dramatic action, was included in Aristotle’s Poetics as an essential element of drama. As for conflict and violence, see Lew Hunter, _Lew Hunter’s Screenwriting 434_ (New York: Perigee, 1993), pp. 19, 22 ff. “Hollywood: The Pentagon’s New Advisor,” BBC Panorama (BBC, 2002); Sharon Weinberger, “Hollywood’s Secret Meet ,” Wired, March 16,2007.
Weinberger, “Hollywood’s Secret Meet.”
“Hollywood: The Pentagon’s New Advisor.” Weinberger, “Hollywood’s Secret Meet.”
“September 11: A Warning from Hollywood.”
Ibid.
George W. Bush, “President Addresses the Nation in Prime Time PressConference
,”
(U.S. government archives, April 13, 2004). Condoleezza Rice, “Press Briefing by National Security Advisor Dr.Condoleezza Rice
,”
(U.S. government archives, May 16, 2002). Alec Russell, “9/11 Report Condemns ‘failure of Imagination,’”
_ Telegraph_ly 23, 2004. Sean Alfano, “Iconic Director Robert Altman Dead At 81,”
_CBS/AP_, November 21, 2006. “The Motion Picture As A Weapon of Psychological Warfare.”
Matthew Alford, _National Security Cinema: The Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood_ (Drum Roll Books, 2017), p. 31.Ibid.
“History Commons: Military Exercises Up to 9/11,”
n.d.
The _New York Times_, having obtained the World Trade Center Task Force Interviews from the City of New York through a lawsuit, hosts the documents on its website. The interviews are in the form of separate PDF files. Each file is identified by the interviewee’sname.
“World Trade Center Task Force Interviews”
(City of New York, 2002 2001) From an interview with Cooper quoted in “King Kong,”
Wikipedia, accessed August 6, 2017. “World Trade Center Task Force Interviews.”
See note 18.
Ibid. See note 18.
The best summary in recent years is Ted Walter, _BEYOND MISINFORMATION: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7_
(Berkeley, California: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc.,2015) (free pdf ;
free e-version ).
Graeme MacQueen, “118 Witnesses: The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers,” _Journal of 9/11 Studies_, August2006.
Tim Martin, “Godzilla: Why the Japanese Original Is No Joke,”
_The Telegraph_, May 15, 2014. “World Trade Center Task Force Interviews.”
See note 18.
The earliest attempt I know of is by Jim Hoffman. See “The North Tower’s Dust Cloud: Analysis of Energy Requirements for the Expansion of the Dust Cloud Following the Collapse of 1 World TradeCenter, Version 3.1
,”
_9-11 Research_, October 16, 2003. Ted Walter, _BEYOND MISINFORMATION: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7_
(Berkeley, California: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc.,2015) (free pdf ;
free e-version ). Full references to Korol’s articlesare given in Adnan
Zuberi’s compilation accompanying “9/11 in the Academic Community: Academia’s Treatment of Critical Perspectives on 9/11—Documentary” .
Hoffman, “The North Tower’s Dust Cloud: Analysis of Energy Requirements for the Expansion of the Dust Cloud Following the Collapse of 1 World Trade Center, Version 3.1;”
Reijo Yli-Karjanmaa, “Energetic Examination of the Collapse of the North Tower of the WTC, Version 3.1,”
June 18, 2005
_Trailer, The Blob_ ,1958, _YouTube_.
_Images in this article are from the author._ The original source of this article is Global Research Copyright © Graeme MacQueen, Global
Research, 2017
Tweet Share5
REVIEW: BUSH AND CHENEY: HOW THEY RUINED AMERICA AND THE WORLD _On August 11, 2017 _ Review of Prof. David Ray Griffin’s Book by Elizabeth Woodworth , co-founder, consensus911.org; originally published on globalresearch.ca As a prominent Whitehead process theologian, scholar David Ray Griffin attracted much attention when the first of his ten books about 9/11 came out (“The New Pearl Harbor,”
2004).
Since the appearance of that book – which built on the work of several scholars and analysts – a worldwide movement has grown up challenging the official account of 9/11 and its tragic sequelae, Islamophobia and the all-consuming “war on terror.” In his new book, Griffin updates the evidence from his last book (“9/11 Ten Years Later,”
2011), and points to extensive new research on the Twin Towers from a large body of architects and engineers, and also to the investigations of the international 22-member 9/11 Consensus Panel.
From 2012-2014, Griffin turned to a full analysis of the climate crisis. His 2015 book, “Unprecedented: Can Civilization Survive theCO2 Crisis?
”
was described by an expert reviewer from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as “the best book today on the issue of all issuesof all time.”
Griffin’s new book on the Bush-Cheney administration shows that both 9/11 and the climate crisis derive from the neoconservatives who came to power in 2000 as the Bush-Cheney administration. Using the great lie of 9/11, and never ceasing to drill into the pubic the fear of terrorism, the neocons and their media have metastacized into a full-blown “neoconservative movement” that has gradually come to dominate both the Republican and Democratic parties. Looking more deeply than the captured media, Griffin shows that the neoconservatives have been “the major source of the violence, illegal regime change, killings, and dislocations of millions of people since the attacks of September 11, 2001” – including the destruction of Iraq and Libya. Yet for more than 15 years, the 9/11 attacks have enabled a primitive neocon/media drumbeat telling us that we should fear the aggression of Iran and the Muslim world. Most recently we are urged to fear the “unsubstantiated claims that Putin interfered in the US presidentialelection.”
This is all propaganda serving America’s war for the “greater Middle East,” which began in 1953 and has led to global chaos. The public needs protection from the increasingly incoherent media lies so that democracy can once again stand on a platform of truth. Dr. Griffin’s new book is a reliable and readable tool for people who want to base their thinking on solid evidence and lucidscholarship.
***
TITLE: Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World AUTHOR: David Ray Griffin PUBLISHER: Olive Branch Pr (August 16, 2017)ISBN-10: 1566560616
ISBN-13: 978-1566560610 Click here to order. _Image is from Amazon._ The original source of this article is Global Research Copyright © Elizabeth Woodworth, Global
Research, 2017
Tweet Share4
PRESS RELEASE: AWARD-WINNING FILM-MAKER MAZZUCCO SHORTENS CLASSIC 9/11FILM TO 42 MINUTES
_On September 10, 2016 _ NEW YORK, SEPTEMBER 10, 2016 – Italian film-maker Massimo Mazzucco, a member of the
9/11 Consensus Panel, has just released an elegant summary of his classic 5-hour2013 documentary ,
_September 11: The New Pearl Harbor_. Mazzucco writes, “The original film contains the entire history of the debate on 9/11, seen from both sides of the aisle – the 9/11 Truth Movement and the ‘Debunkers’ worldwide. This summary is intended only as an introduction to the complete film, and not as a stand-alone piece on 9/11.” To show the quality of the original film, we include parts of a 2013 review by Dr. David Ray Griffin,
co-founder of the 9/11 Consensus Panel: There have been several good films and videos about 9/11. But the film by award-winning film-maker _Massimo Mazzucco_, released in 2013, is in a class by itself. For those of us who have been working on 9/11 for a long time, this is the film we have been waiting for. Whereas there are excellent films treating the falsity of particular parts of the official account, such as the Twin Towers or WTC 7, Mazzucco has given us a comprehensive documentary treatment of 9/11, dealing with virtually all of the issues. Because of his intent at completeness, Mazzucco has given us a 5-hour film. It is so fascinating and fast-paced that many will want to watch it in one sitting. But this is not necessary, as the film, which fills 3 DVDs, consists of 7 parts, each of which is divided into many shortchapters.
These 7 parts treat Air Defence, The Hijackers, The Airplanes, The Pentagon, Flight 93, The Twin Towers, and Building 7. In each part, after presenting facts that contradict the official story, Mazzucco deals with the claims of the debunkers (meaning those who try to debunk the evidence provided by the 9/11 research community). The Introduction, reflecting the film’s title, deals with 12 uncanny parallels between Pearl Harbor and September 11. The film can educate people who know nothing about 9/11 (beyond the official story), those with a moderate amount of knowledge about the various problems with the official story, and even by experts. (I myself learned many things.) Mazzucco points out that his film covers 12 years of public debate about 9/11. People who have been promoting 9/11 truth for many of these years will see that their labors have been well-rewarded: There is now a high-quality, carefully-documented film that dramatically shows the official story about 9/11 to be a fabrication through andthrough.
###
429 words
Source:
The 9/11 Consensus Panel @consensus911Contact list:
www.consensus911.org/media-contacts/E-mail:
consensus911@gmail.comTweet Share17
← Previous Entries*
LANGUAGES
* English
* Français
* Nederlands
* Deutsch
* Italiano
* Español
*
* News
* Dedication
* ABOUT US ↓
* Intro
* Contact Us
* Media Contacts
* Panel Members
* Honorary Members
* What is “Best Evidence?”* Methodology
* THE 9/11 CONSENSUS POINTS ↓ * _GENERAL POINTS_ ↓* Point G-1
* A Claim Regarding Osama bin Laden* Point G-2
* A Claim that there was No Insider Trading in Put Options beforeSeptember 11, 2001
* _TWIN TOWERS_ ↓
* Point TT-1
* A Claim about the Destruction of the Twin Towers: Impact, JetFuel, and Fire Only
* Point TT-2
* A Claim about the Destruction of the Twin Towers: Impact, Fire,and Gravity Only
* Point TT-3
* A Claim Excluding Explosions in the Twin Towers* Point TT-4
* A Second Claim Excluding Explosives in the Twin Towers* Point TT-5
* The Claim that the World Trade Center Dust Contained No ThermiticMaterials
* Point TT-6
* The Claim That There Was No Molten Steel or Iron in the WTCBuildings
* Point TT-7
* Why Did the Twin Towers Collapse? The Seismic Evidence* Point TT-8
* Why Did the Twin Towers Collapse? The Physical and TestimonialEvidence
* Point TT-9
* The Claim of Widespread Infernos in the South Tower vs the FDNYRadio Transcript
* _BUILDING WTC 7_ ↓* Point WTC7-1
* The Claim that WTC 7 Collapsed from Fire Alone* Point WTC7-2
* The Claim in NIST’s Draft Report that WTC 7 Did Not Come Down at Free Fall Acceleration* Point WTC7-3
* The Claim in NIST’s Final Report that WTC 7 Came Down in Free Fall Without Explosives* Point WTC7-4
* Did the Official Simulation of the Fall of WTC-7 Match theObserved Collapse?
* Point WTC7-5
* World Trade Center Building 7: NIST’s Analysis of the Collapse Initiation Is Not Valid* Point WTC7-6
* The Fraudulent NIST Claim That There Was No Steel Recovered from Building WTC7 for Analysis* Point WTC7-7
* Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7* Point WTC7-8
* The Omission of Evidence that Barry Jennings and Michael Hess Experienced an Explosion in WTC7 the Morning of 9/11* _PENTAGON_ ↓
* Point Pent-1
* Why the Attack on the Pentagon Was Not Prevented: The FirstOfficial Account
* Point Pent-2
* Why the Attack on the Pentagon Was Not Prevented: The SecondOfficial Account
* Point Pent-3
* The Claim Regarding Hani Hanjour as Flight 77 Pilot* Point Pent-4
* Was There Foreknowledge by Officials that the Pentagon would beattacked?
* _FLIGHTS_ ↓
* Point Flt-1
* A Claim Regarding Hijacked Passenger Jets* Point Flt-2
* The Claim that Flight 93 Crashed Near Shanksville, Pennsylvania* Point Flt-3
* Were Hijackers Responsible for Changes to September 11 FlightTransponders?
* Point Flt-4
* Unexplained Black Box Anomalies for the Four 9/11 Planes * _MILITARY EXERCISES_ ↓* Point ME-1
* Did Military Exercises Show that the Military was Prepared for Domestic (as Well as Foreign) Hijackings?* Point ME-2
* The Claim that the Military Exercises Did Not Delay the Responseto the 9/11 Attacks
* _MILITARY AND POLITICAL COMMANDS_ ↓* Point MC-Intro
* Overview of Contradicted Claims about Key Military and PoliticalLeaders
* Point MC-1
* Why Was President Bush Not Hustled Away from the Florida School?* Point MC-2
* The White House Claim as to How Long President Bush Remained in the Florida Classroom* Point MC-3
* The Claim about the Time of Dick Cheney’s Entry into the WhiteHouse Bunker
* Point MC-4
* When Did Cheney Authorize the Shoot-down of Civilian Planes?* Point MC-5
* Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s Behavior Between 9:00 and 10:00AM
* Point MC-6
* The Activities of General Richard Myers during the 9/11 Attacks* Point MC-7
* The Time of General Shelton’s Return to his Command* Point MC-8
* The Activities of Brigadier General Montague Winfield between 8:30and 10:30 AM
* Point MC-9
* The Activities of General Ralph Eberhart during the 9/11 Attacks* Point MC-10
* The Activities of NYC Mayor Giuliani on September 11, 2001* _HIJACKERS_ ↓
* Point H-1
* Mohamed Atta’s Mysterious Trip to Portland* Point H-2
* The Claim that ‘Able Danger’ Failed to Identify Mohamed Atta’s probable Presence in the US in January 2000* Point H-3
* The Claim that the Hijackers Were Devout Muslims* Point H-4
* The Claim that Mohamed Atta Had Become a Fanatically ReligiousMuslim
* _PHONE CALLS_ ↓
* Point PC-1
* The Alleged Calls of Todd Beamer, Flight UA 93* Point PC-1A
* The Todd Beamer Call from UA Flight 93: A Serious Problem in theTimeline
* Point PC-2
* The Reported Phone Calls from Barbara Olson* Point PC-3
* Point PC-3: Cell Phone Calls from the Planes: The First OfficialAccount
* Point PC-4
* Cell Phone Calls from the Planes: The Second Official Account * _VIDEO EVIDENCE_ ↓* Point Video-1
* The Alleged Security Videos of Mohamed Atta during a Mysterious Trip to Portland, Maine, September 10-11, 2001* Point Video-2
* Was the Airport Video of the Alleged AA 77 Hijackers Authentic? Official 9/11 Videotaped Evidence* Archived News
* Press Releases
* References, Evidence-Based* Links
*
SEARCH IN CURRENT LANGUAGE:*
DONATE TO CONSENSUS 911Donation Amount:
( USD)
Details
Copyright © 2024 ArchiveBay.com. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | DMCA | 2021 | Feedback | Advertising | RSS 2.0