Tuesday, April 08, 2008

I am Not a Conspiracy Theorist: 9/11 Facts of Fictions?

Living in the world today can be quite difficult, especially if you feel the need to avoid the moral and intellectual pitfalls that “modern” life provides. However, this is something that only becomes difficult if you feel a need to avoid compromising your moral compass (assuming such exists), otherwise it should not be a serious impediment. There are many things about myself and my character that I like to believe are true and reasonably noble, amongst that list would be that I am willing to take correction from others when I make mistakes and that I try to be as generous of my time, energies and resources as much as I am able. While these are not the only traits that I would like to trumpet, humility is also a trait that I am aware that I have, but am in need of more.

Having said that, there is one thing that I am truly thankful that I possess, and that is the ability to reason. This is by no means a unique gift as it defines our species in our ability to look at information and make decisions based on the facts that have been presented to us. Being reasonable means that we are able to look at information and ideas even if they come to us from people and sources that we may not immediately trust and assess that information. We look at material without prejudice, allowing the truth to be revealed, allowing the obfuscations and machinations of the special interest groups, lobbyists and anyone else with something to gain by the perpetration of lies to be shut out through the acknowledgement that the truth shall, indeed, set you free.

Unfortunately, alas, that is not how the “real world” seems to operate. Alas, that seems to be just the opposite as to how things work. Before anything else is said, there is one other trait that I am very proud to possess: I am not, in any way, shape or form, a conspiracy theorist. I believe that men walked on the moon. I believe that a lone man, using a single rifle (having been trained as a Marine by the United States and having attained sharp shooter status) assassinated JFK. I believe that Area 51 is, in fact, a Top Secret (UMBRA) Military Base used for the testing and development of new aircraft for the USAF (including the U2, SR71, B1, B2, F117, F22, F35, and the UCAV’s that are currently being deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan).

I am not a believer in conspiracies.

We have not been told the truth about 9/11; we have been lied to and the people that have told the lies know that the truth has been concealed from the public; furthermore, they know that the truth is not “out there”, it has been examined by experts in their field, experts that are willing to openly dispute the “findings” of the “9/11 Commission”, a work of fantasy and fiction that fed the American people a pile of obfuscation that stank of the stench of the rotting corpses trapped in the rubble of Ground Zero.

I will never be able to forget that morning; I was in the basement working on the computer when the phone rang. My step-father’s frantic voice told me to turn on CNN; a plane had just crashed into the WTC. The rest of that day I watched. I watched, prayed, wept, cried, sobbed, prayed, and cried some more. My parents are from New York and I spent the majority of my summer vacations visiting family there; even though I had been born and raised in Canada, this felt like an attack on my own home. I was talking to a friend in Toronto when the first tower collapsed. It seemed wrong then, too fast, too symmetrical … too … perfect. Then the second tower fell.

While there seemed to be two nearly identical attacks, the facts of the matter are quite different, as we were able to see after the numerous replays of the events revealed and the still-photos began to appear all over the world. When we examine the attack of Flight 11 on WTC 1, the North Tower, there are some interesting facts that should be noted: the crash took place (according to seismic readings) at exactly 08:46:26 am, a time that is adjusted in the “9/11 Commission” to 08:46:40, for some reason.

The angle of the crash indicates that the plane was flying at an aspect of approximately 20 degrees leaning to the port (left) side, with the left wing hitting the 93rd floor and the right wing hitting the 99th floor. It is important to note that I came to this conclusion through my own examination of the photos, not through any other forensic examinations. One of my favourite hobbies is using the Microsoft Flight Simulator X which, while it does not qualify someone to be a real pilot, it does provide a basic understanding of certain aerodynamic principals (and was one of the methods used, supposedly, by the terrorists to prepare for the 9/11 attacks). Remember, my calculations would indicate that the angle of inclination encompasses (approximately) 3.5 floors for every 10 degrees away from level flight (and I may be wrong).

The second crash took place at 09:03:06 am (09:03:11 in the “Report”) and Flight 175 struck between the 77th and 85th floors. Now, every time I have seen video of this event, video that makes my stomach churn and my blood run cold, it amazes me that what I am seeing is the belly of a commercial airliner. These are not planes that you would ordinarily think of as something that capable of performing the type of acrobatics normally seen from military aircraft, but the angle that this plane was coming in at was only (according to the calculations of 3.5 floors per 10 degrees that seemed to work for WTC 1) 30 degrees. While this would not have been a comfortable position for passengers, it was certainly not something that a commercial airliner could not handle.

When commercial jets are designed they go through rigorous testing, including being asked to do things that would never be experienced during the normal operation of the plane. Boeing has performed rolls in passenger airliners, proving the structural integrity of their machines. Having heard the conspiracies that commercial planes could not have crashed into the WTC’s, I am sure that this is not the case for the simple reason that while the flying and the penultimate course adjustments towards their target were extreme, it was a scenario that was obviously not beyond the realm of imagination.

Having seen documentaries on the issues surrounding the planes striking the towers I cannot say that I agree with those who contend that these were not commercial airliners. The contention that the planes made manoeuvres that simply could not be accomplished by an amateur pilot is a compelling argument, but I must ask the following question: how much knowledge do you ever know that a person possesses? The assumption that the hijacker is unable to execute the precision flying is based on the premise that the “amateur” pilot did not have the requisite experience to handle the aircraft.

As I have mentioned, while using the MS Flight Simulator over the past two years I have learned a great deal about the handling of various different types of aircraft, including the Boeing 767-800, the most popular passenger aircraft in the world today. Both of the planes that crashed into the WTC were variants of the 767, a plane that can best be described as handling like “a dream”. This is one of the most enjoyable “big jets” to fly in the simulator for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that it can fly at treetop level while making you grip the controls with white-knuckled fear … something that real-life pilots probably would not indulge in, but on a simulator it is “only a game”.

There is something very important about this, however, and that is that the program realistically models the stresses on the airframe of the plane according to what you are doing; in other words, if you over-stress your plane, you die. Well, having said that, I can also say that it is possible (with the wing tanks empty and no passenger or cargo weight) to do some seriously dramatic flying … including a full loop. Of course, this is a simulation, not real flight … but, according to the “official” story, the terrorists trained on this same program (actually, I believe it was an earlier edition).

The rest of the scenario, however, is not entirely as it would seem to appear; at least, that is what I have come to believe after carefully considering the arguments, presentation of known facts, assumptions by “experts”, reports by the officials, and rebuttals by experts who have absolutely nothing to gain (and much to lose) by taking a stance against the “official” story.

The official story, also known as “Bush’s Dream” is fairly easy to find. The Commission Report may be found here, if you desire, but remember to get the cowlick out.

I am not going to go into every nuance of every issue surrounding what is questionable regarding the “story” as we have been told; many others have already done a far better job than I could possibly do in a single article, and I do not intend to dedicate the rest of my life to this issue. An excellent site to begin with, a site that does not compromise in the way it presents the news in all of its ugliness, is run by Michael Rivera, and is called “What Really Happened”. By navigating down the left column of the page you will find links to all of the materials associated with the things relating to the destruction of the Twin Towers … the things that cannot be reconciled with the crashing of two commercial aircraft into the towers.

What disturbs me the most about the lies behind 9/11, what makes me see the most inconsistencies screaming out to be noticed, inconsistencies that make me wonder how much of the entire “story” from the “official sources” should be questioned, comes from the way the buildings collapsed. I watched as those buildings fell, a word I use intentionally. “Free fall” has been a word used to describe the way in which the THREE towers fell. Yes, there has always been that pesky WTC 7, untouched by a plane, and yet it too fell, at the speed of a building in “free fall”. Why? As one commentator I heard that day said, “it was like watching a controlled demolition.”

Controlled demolition? How can people suggest that there was a use of thermite to intentionally collapse the World Trade Centre, and WTC 7, a building that had not been struck by an airplane? The three buildings did, in fact, have something else in common that was reported on, though it would be better if we all forgot about it: even after the fires had been extinguished there was still a significant amount of molten metal preventing workers from cleaning up the Ground Zero area near the basements of each building. This phenomenon explained in the video featuring Steven Jones, a Professor of Physics from Brigham Young University, as being the result of the use of thermite in a controlled demolition.

Then there is that issue of all that pesky “ear” witness testimony (from the Complete 9/11 Timeline). I have added some emphasis in italics and bold in order to highlight a few, noticeable, comments that seem to be recurring themes.

At the time that WTC 2 Collapses:

Numerous witnesses, including fire-fighters and other rescue workers, hear explosions at the start of, and during, the collapse of the south WTC tower. Some of them report hearing a single explosion:
Jeff Birnbaum: “There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down.” [Electrical Wholesaling, 2/1/2002]

Battalion Chief John Sudnik: “[W]e heard a loud explosion or what sounded like a loud explosion and looked up and I saw Tower Two start coming down.” [City of New York, 11/7/2001]

Firefighter Edward Kennedy hears “a tremendous boom, explosion… and the top of the building was coming down at us.” [City of New York, 1/17/2002]

Firefighter Edward Sheehey hears “an explosion, looked up, and the building started to collapse.” [City of New York, 12/4/2001]

Battalion Chief Thomas Vallebuona: “I heard ‘boom,’ an exploding sound, a real loud bang. I looked up, and I could see the Trade Center starting to come down.” [City of New York, 1/2/2002]

EMT Julio Marrero: “I heard a loud bang. We looked up, and we just saw the building starting to collapse.” [City of New York, 10/25/2001]

Other witnesses report hearing multiple explosions:
Journalist Pete Hamill: “We heard snapping sounds, pops, little explosions, and then the walls bulged out, and we heard a sound like an avalanche.” [New York Daily News, 9/11/2001]

Police officer Sue Keane, who is an Army veteran, is located in the north WTC tower: “[I]t sounded like bombs going off. That’s when the explosions happened.… It started to get dark, then all of a sudden there was this massive explosion.” [Hagen and Carouba, 2002, pp. 65]

Firefighter Keith Murphy, who is in the lobby of the North Tower: “[T]he first thing that happened, which I still think is strange to me, the lights went out.… I had heard right before the lights went out, I had heard a distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions.… At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out.… I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of a sudden this tremendous roar.” [City of New York, 12/5/2001]

Firefighter Craig Carlsen hears “explosions coming from building two, the South Tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.… We then realized the building started to come down.” [City of New York, 1/25/2002]

Firefighter Thomas Turilli, who is in the lobby of the North Tower: “[A]ll of a sudden you just heard like it almost actually that day sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight, and then just a huge wind gust just came… It just seemed like a huge explosion.” [City of New York, 1/17/2002]

Firefighter Stephen Viola: “[T]hat’s when the South Tower collapsed, and it sounded like a bunch of explosions. You heard like loud booms.” [City of New York, 1/10/2002]

Firefighter Lance Lizzul: “[W]e heard some bangs. That made us look up, and that’s when the first Trade Center came down.” [City of New York, 12/10/2001]

Paramedic Kevin Darnowski: “I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and Tower Two started to come down.” [City of New York, 11/9/2001]

However, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which conducts a three-year study of the WTC collapses, will subsequently claim it found “no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives” (see October 26, 2005). [National Institute of Standards and Technology, 9/2005, pp. 146 pdf file]

At the time that WTC 1 Collapses:

Many witnesses hear explosions during the collapse of the north WTC tower. Some report hearing a single explosion:
Reporter Mike Sheehan hears “another deafening explosion. I looked up and saw the top of the North Tower, the mast, begin to fall.” [Gilbert et al., 2002, pp. 126]

Fire Lieutenant William Wall: “[W]e heard an explosion. We looked up and the building was coming down right on top of us.” [City of New York, 12/10/2001]

Firefighter Roy Chelsen: “All of a sudden we heard this huge explosion, and that’s when the tower started coming down.” [City of New York, 1/18/2002]

EMT Jason Charles: “I heard a ground level explosion and I’m like holy shit, and then you heard that twisting metal wreckage again.” [City of New York, 1/23/2002]

Firefighter Kevin Murray: “When the tower started—there was a big explosion that I heard and someone screamed that it was coming down.” [City of New York, 10/9/2001]

Firefighter James Ippolito: “I heard an explosion and turned around and the building was coming down.” [City of New York, 12/13/2001]

Fire Lieutenant Gregg Hansson: “[A] large explosion took place. In my estimation that was the tower coming down, but at that time I did not know what that was. I thought some type of bomb had gone off.” [City of New York, 10/9/2001]

Firefighter Kevin Gorman: “I heard the explosion, looked up, and saw like three floors explode, saw the antenna coming down.” [City of New York, 1/9/2002]

Others report hearing multiple explosions:
EMT Gregg Brady: “I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the North Tower is coming down now.” [City of New York, 11/1/2001]

Firefighter Richard Carletti: “I remember seeing the antenna do a little rock back and forth and I could just hear the floors pancaking. I heard it for about 30 pancakes, just boom, boom, boom, boom.” [City of New York, 1/2/2002]

Fire Lieutenant Michael Cahill: “That’s when the second collapse started to come down. All kinds of noise. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, very loud.” [City of New York, 10/17/2001]

Firefighter Sal D’Agostino is actually inside the North Tower, around its fourth floor, when the collapse occurs. He says, “It’s pancaking from the top down, and there were these huge explosions—I mean huge, gigantic explosions.” [Providence Journal, 9/11/2002; Dwyer and Flynn, 2005, pp. 241-242]

Firefighter Bill Butler, who is with D’Agostino inside the tower, says, “It was like a train going two inches away from your head: bang-bang, bang-bang, bang-bang.” [Providence Journal, 9/11/2002]

EMT David Timothy: “[Y]ou started hearing more explosions. I guess this is when the second tower started coming down.” [City of New York, 10/25/2001]

CTV will later assert, “When eyewitnesses claim to have heard explosions prior to the collapse, those were just the sounds of a massive building contorting and crushing anything inside.” [CTV, 9/12/2006]

How much more needs to be said before we look at this tragedy as something more than an attack on American soil? How many more American soldiers need to die in Iraq fighting a war that has nothing to do with the attack against the United States? How many Americans must die before America wakes up?

What really happened on 9/11? Perhaps we will never know, but I do know this, it isn’t what the government is telling us. Think, evaluate and reason; it is your responsibility as a human, it is your responsibility to not blindly accept that which is being fed to you as news by those who serve as the thinly-veiled mouthpieces of the government.

Think, evaluate, reason, and reject that which does not stand the test of logic. When scientists that have nothing to gain (and more to lose) are refuting the “official” findings of the government, I have to ask the question why. Then the process begins again.


Anonymous said...

I think it is time to put these questions and concern to bed. There is NO physical evidence to support anyother explanation then can be found in the exhaustive NIST reports - verified by work of Seffen from Cambridge.

Move on guys - if the War on Terror and Freedom is only half as successful as the War on Drugs we will be that much closer to Heaven.

Mr. Ken said...

Very nicely done!

There are, of course, other odd facts.

Ever try to buy or sell stock anonymously? Seems like someone was able to sell American Airlines, Boeing and United short prior to the event and we don't know who.

How is it our trillion dollar defense fiasco could not intercept the aircraft?

Why is the hole in the Pentagon so small?

How do two news organizations report Building 7 collapse about 20 minutes BEFORE the building fell?


Anonymous said...

While I find it admirable that you're examining the evidence that shows that the official conspiracy theory regarding 911 is bunk, and you've laid a lot of it out quite nicely, the fact that you accept the Warren Commission Report on the JFK assassination displays an alarming gullibility that I wish you well in dispelling.

Anonymous said...

You don't believe in conspiracies??
Try reading Rockefeller's book "Memoirs", chapter on Internationalism. He admits to a conspiracy. Americans...wake up!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

all should know, the NIST reports are total bull shyte. The NIST is a part of the US Commerce Dept, which report directly to Pres Busch. How would the NIST ever be allowed to reach a conclusion indicating controlled demolition ??
It would blow the whole cover story of how we were attacked by radical islamist arabs.

jack rabbit said...

Perhaps you will be interested to see article on this subject at

Anonymous said...

To the first poster: it's "than" not "then."

And by the way, go to hell.


paul said...

So you "reason" that the bullets Oswald fired (faster than is physically possible with a bolt action rifle) created a vacuum behind JFKs head that sucked his head backwards just before impact?
Ever heard of the law of conservation of momentum?

CrazyComposer (aka Peter Amsel) said...

Thank you for all of the comments … I guess I should have known a post on this topic would be like a lightning rod. A few … rebuttal comments and other things to clarify what has been posted:

Why should we consider “putting these questions to bed” as “anonymous” no. 1 suggested when the war that has resulted from these “attacks” have resulted in the deaths of over four thousand American lives – more than were killed on 9/11, not to mention the hundreds of thousands killed in this “War on Terror”. To quote, “if the War on Terror and Freedom is only half as successful as the War on Drugs we will be that much closer to Heaven.” Well, the “war on drugs” has been – and is – a MISERABLE failure! People are being imprisoned for minor drug offences rather than receiving rehabilitative treatment (that would cost the government LESS money) and when they are released the rate of recidivism is astronomical as the first thing that they want to do is chase the high that they have been denied while serving their time. Since they have no money, they must turn to the commission of petty crimes in order to “earn” that first hit … and they cycle continues. Yes, anon, comparing the “war on drug’s” success rate to that of the “war on terror” instils a tremendous amount of confidence.

Thank you, Mr. Ken – your comments were greatly appreciated and directed me to some interesting videos, particularly one on “Fox Noise” showing them talking about the collapse of WTC 7 … they announce that it “has fallen” while the screen shows it standing. As they talk it begins to fall and the male announcer (a duo) tries to save the moment, “watch, there it goes,” … ooops. Dolts. Someone obviously missed the memo and its official timeline.

Regarding my “acceptance” of the Warren Commission – I said nought of the sort; my comment was that “I believe that a lone man, using a single rifle (having been trained as a Marine by the United States and having attained sharp shooter status) assassinated JFK.” This comment is also directed to Paul regarding the use of the rifle and the “vacuum” that would have “sucked” JFK’s head back after the impact. While I do not want this to become too long, I shall preface it with a short comment: as odd as it sounds, I have had experience with firearms (yes, a Canadian that has fired guns!), so I am not talking without having had my hands on an actual gun. For the record, I learned how to use the following handguns while visiting a friend in Illinois. 22 cal, 35 cal, 9mm, 357 (only fired once … what a cannon!) and … yes – the 44 magnum … alas, only fired once – but I scored a target hit. By the end of the lessons I was firing the 22 one handed and hitting around an 8 inch centre mass from twenty-five feet.

The rifles I used were the 22 cal, and a Remington-type bolt action, in a smaller calibre than that which was used against JFK (6.5mm x 52 mm). Much to my joy I discovered that I have a natural affinity to “sniping” … hitting dead-centre to the edge of the property we were on (over 170 yards – not a super shot, but it wasn’t a military SWS either).

Lee Harvey Oswald received a score of 212 while training with the M1 Garand Rifle, a score that qualified him as a “sharpshooter”. Three years later he received a score of 191, a score that qualifies as “marksman”. These are not insignificant achievements, considering he was still trained as a radar operator (you have to be more than a good shot to be … you know). The gun that was used to shoot JFK, the gun that LHO had, was a 6.5 x 52 mm Italian Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifle with a six-round magazine
Serial number C2766 Western Cartridge Co. ammunition with a 160 grain (10.37 g) round nose bullet Side-mounted Ordnance Optics 4 x 18 telescopic sight, a gun that has been demonstrated in several cases to be accurate enough (even with a natural downward drift of the bullet over a distance that would prevent the necessity of leading the shot on a moving target) to take the shots in the time-frame established in the Zapruder film (8.1 seconds). An experienced marksman with a bolt-action rifle can EASILY put three shots downrange in six seconds – in war their life depends on it, that is what they are trained to do, and I have seen it done.

As for the “law of momentum”, yes – and you are forgetting the issues of ballistics. High powered rifles do not “suck” things backwards. A small entry wound and large exit wound. It isn’t as difficult as you imagine.

Anyway, perhaps I will address this at greater length at another time … I must go now. Thanks again for the comments!

Anonymous said...

Hi Peter,

You may be interested in knowing that we have a growing community in Ottawa that is working to educate the public on this issue. We meet regularly to distribute information and have a web site. http://www.ottawa911truth.com/ We are have also started to show documentaries. Perhaps you would like to join us one day.

Have a great day.

Plumb Bob said...

I am Not a Conspiracy Theorist

Yes, you are.

Masher1 said...

I want to know the reason the entire analysis of 9/11/01 OMITS any treatment of the two towers TMD systems? A TMD is a many ton tuned mass damper system to control motion in very tall buildings with huge masses... some 1200 to 1400 tons of UNITS between the two. And being they were 2/3 of the way to the top of these structures AND not hearing ONE word about these systems really bothers me.

The calculations possible to do from memory of those units from a 16 MM documentary i saw in high school on the whiteboard point to the dampers being a concrete cube filled with Uranium 238. This U-238 is almost a 1/4 heavier than even Lead so the need to use it in the cramped 2 floor space for it.

The 2 month fires,The molten steel 65 to 70 DAYS after 9/11,Fire dogs,Visual and auditory cues to indicate RAD danger at the collapse site from monitors firemen are wearing in those videos ... Etc.

I can find NOTHING about those systems in the REAL world and fear i am correct.


shows the Libertarian Producer wachjob Masher1's plod through.

If you could access more stuff like this from Ottawa library's on those systems Even a basic drawing of those two systems in a real bood would help HUGE.

Call me 403:863-1607 with any help if you can. ;)