Emergency Official Witnessed Dead Bodies In WTC 7

In An Exclusive Video, Barry Jennings Discusses Explosions In Building 7 Before Collapse Of  The Twin Towers

By Paul Joseph Watson

Exclusive video of emergency official Barry Jennings discussing explosions inside WTC 7 before either of the twin towers had collapsed and having to step over dead bodies of victims as he attempted to vacate the building has been released for the first time.

The clip, which was originally intended to feature in Loose Change Final Cut but had to be withdrawn according to Jennings' wishes after he had received threats, has now been made public in anticipation of a BBC documentary about Building 7 which is expected to skew Jennings' account in an attempt to reinforce the official story.

In reality, what Jennings witnessed completely contradicts the official story of what happened to Building 7.

On the morning of 9/11 in his capacity as Deputy Director, Emergency Services Department, New York City Housing Authority, Jennings and Michael Hess, who is a founding Partner and Senior Managing Director of Giuliani Partners LLC, visited the Office of Emergency Management inside Building 7 only to find it had been abandoned.

"Upon arriving into the OEM EOC, we noticed that everybody was gone," said Jennings. "I saw coffee that was on the desk, the smoke was still coming off the coffee, I saw half-eaten sandwiches," he stated, adding that he and Hess were told to leave the building right away.

Jennings and Hess found a stairwell and descended the stairs.

"When we reached the 6th floor the landing that we were standing on gave way, there was an explosion and the landing gave way, I was left there hanging, I had to climb back up and walk back up to the 8th floor," said Jennings.

"The explosion was beneath me....so when the explosion happened it blew us back....both buildings (the twin towers) were still standing," he added.

"I was trapped in there for several hours, I was trapped in there when both buildings came down - all this time I'm hearing all kinds of explosions, all this time I'm hearing explosions, said Jennings, adding that when firefighters took them down to the lobby it was in "total ruins".

"For me to see what I saw was unbelievable," said Jennings.

Barry Jennings.

The firefighters kept saying to Jennings "do not look down" because, according to Jennings, "we were stepping over people and you can tell when you're stepping over people."

A police officer then told Jennings, "you will have to run because we have reports of more explosions."

"I'm just confused about one thing....why World Trade Center 7 went down in the first place - I'm very confused about that - I know what I heard I heard explosions," said Jennings, adding that the explanation that the explosions were as a result of fuel oil tanks in the building did not add up.

"I'm an old boiler guy, if it was a fuel oil tank it would have been one side of the building," he stated.

Footage inside the Millennium Hilton building lobby, which was closer to the WTC twin towers than Building 7, shows minimal damage after both towers had collapsed in comparison with devastating damage in the lobby of WTC 7, as reported by Jennings, before either tower had even collapsed.

Jennings' eyewitness report of explosions inside WTC 7 before the towers had collapsed as well as dead bodies inside the building completely contradicts the official story, which maintains that there were no fatalities inside Building 7.

If WTC 7 collapsed as a result of damage it sustained from the fall of the twin towers, as the official version claims, then why were explosions taking place inside the building before either tower had collapsed?

The BBC hit piece documentary, which airs on July 6th, features an interview with Jennings but according to Loose Change's Jason Bermas, the program will distort Jennings' comments in an attempt to sideline the shocking nature of what he witnessed and the blatant manner in which his experiences contradict the official story.

According to Bermas, during their interview with members of Loose Change, the BBC denied that Jennings had stepped over dead bodies when he left the building, a claim disproved by Jennings' own statements in the video below.

New Nanomaterial Can Detect & Neutralize Explosives

A test strip changes from blue to colorless in the presence of peroxide-based explosives like those favored by terrorists. (Credit: Allen Apblett)


Mar. 31, 2011
Courtesy Of "Science Daily"

Scientists have described development and successful initial tests of a spray-on material that both detects and renders harmless the genre of terrorist explosives responsible for government restrictions on liquids that can be carried onboard airliners. They reported on the new ink-like explosive detector/neutralizer on March 31 at the 241st National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS) in Anaheim, California.

"This stuff is going to be used anywhere terrorist explosives are used, including battlefields, airports, and subways," said study leader Allen Apblett, Ph.D. "It's going to save lives."

The material is a type of ink made of tiny metallic oxide nanoparticles -- so small that 50,000 could fit inside the diameter of a single human hair. The ink changes color, from dark blue to pale yellow or clear, in the presence of explosives. It also changes from a metallic conductor to a non-conducting material, making electronic sensing also possible.

This color-change feature allows the material to work as a sensor for quickly detecting the presence of vapors produced by explosives, Apblett said. Soldiers or firefighters could wear the sensors as badges on their uniforms or use them as paper-based test strips. Airports, subways and other facilities could use the sensors as part of stationary monitoring devices. The sensors could even be engineered into jewelry and cell phones, the scientist added.

The same color-changing material can also serve as an explosives neutralizer. Firefighters and bomb squad technicians could spray the ink onto bombs or suspicious packages until the color change indicates that the devices are no longer a threat, Apblett said. Technicians could also dump the explosives into vats containing the ink to neutralize them.

Apblett notes that authorities are concerned about peroxide-based explosives, made from hydrogen peroxide, which are easy to make and set off. These explosives first drew public attention in 2001, when thwarted "shoe bomber" Richard Reid tried to use one such substance as the detonator onboard a commercial airliner. In particular, they are concerned about a substance called triacetone triperoxide, or TATP, sometimes used in suicide vests and improvised explosive devices that have claimed such a toll among troops and civilians. However, current methods of detecting this explosive are ineffective, allowing the material to easily escape detection at airports and other locations.

The new ink provides a quick way to detect and test these explosives, which might be hidden in clothing, food, and beverages. The ink contains nanoparticles of a compound of molybdenum, a metal used in a wide variety of applications including missile and aircraft parts. The dark blue ink reacts with the peroxide explosives and turns yellow or clear.

When used as an electronic sensor, the highly-sensitive material is capable of detecting TATP vapors at levels as low as a 50 parts per million, equivalent to a few drops of the vapor in a small room, within 30 seconds. The same chemical reaction allows the materials to serve as an explosives neutralizer. In lab studies, the scientists showed that they could add the material to TATP or HMTD and make them nonexplosive.

"This does a really good job of neutralizing terrorists' explosives," said Apblett, a chemist at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater, Okla. "I'm excited to see it moving from the lab to the real world."

The material can also improve safety at laboratories that use explosive chemicals. Recently, Apblett developed pellets containing the ink that can be added to laboratory solvents to prevent the build-up of levels of dangerous peroxides, which can cause accidental explosions. The color-changing feature allows the users of the solvents know that they are safe.

Apblett and colleagues founded a company called Xplosafe to develop and market the material. They hope to see the explosive detecting ink used in airports in as little as a year.

The scientists acknowledge funding from Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, the National Science Foundation, Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology, Xplosafe, and Oklahoma State University.

Discovery Of Nano-Thermite In WTC Dust

By Jeremy R. Hammond
March 7, 2011
Courtesy Of "The Foreign Policy Journal"


Face to Face with Dr. Niels Harrit: "There is no doubt that this building was taken down in a controlled demolition..." from I.C.T.V. Victoria on Vimeo.

Dr. Niels Harrit is a retired associate professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and one among an international team of scientists who published a paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal on the discovery of nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center collapses on September 11, 2001. He has recently finished a lecture tour of Canadian universities, where he spoke on the subject.

In this interview on the cable program Face to Face with Jack Etkin, Dr. Harrit discusses this finding and its implications. Dr. Harrit notes that World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7), a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper that was not hit by one of the planes on 9/11, collapsed symmetrically into its own footprint, and that the official explanation for this is that it was due to fire. However, the finding of nano-thermite in the dust, along with other available evidence, leads inescapably to another conclusion. “There is no doubt that this building was taken down in a controlled demolition,” says Dr. Harrit. “I consider this to be [a] mainstream scientific conclusion. There’s no way around this conclusion. There are so many observations that are only compatible with a controlled demolition.”

“Science is based on observation and experience,” says Dr. Harrit in the interview. Pointing out that it had never occurred before 9/11, he says, “A steel framed high rise simply does not collapse due to fire.”

Among the other evidence is the observation that WTC 7 fell at the acceleration of gravity, or free-fall acceleration. Fire, says Dr. Harrit, cannot do that to a building. “All of these columns had to be cut at the same time for this phenomenon to happen,” he says.

While conventional thermite is an incendiary, made from a mixture of powdered aluminum and iron oxide, Dr. Harrit explains that nano-thermite is manufactured from the atomic scale up. The ingredients are much more intimately mixed, he says, so they react with each other much faster. Unlike thermite, “Nano-thermite can be used as an explosive,” notes Dr. Harrit. “You can use thermite for cutting the steel beams, and it’s soundless,” he adds.

Discussing the relevance and importance of the conclusion that the three World Trade Center towers were destroyed in a controlled demolition, Dr. Harrit says, “I think what happened on September 11, 2001 is the most important event to our generation, and for our children…. And the consequences of this event should be obvious to everyone. But it’s not. But it’s happening at such a slow pace that people maybe do not connect the dots.”

It’s not just about getting history right and understanding what truly happened on 9/11, according to Dr. Harrit. “I think the whole civilization is in the balance these days,” he says. “Planet Earth will still be there no matter what we do…. But what we call civilization — if you care about music, this is what we’re talking about. If you care about the health of your grandparents, this is what we’re talking about. If you care about theater, literature, kids playing in the playground. Whatever you care for, whatever you love, this is what’s at stake here. Civilization. And it’s very fragile. And it can easily be lost.”

He discusses issues ranging from the environment to the loss of liberty due to the threat of terrorism stemming from the attacks of 9/11. The U.S. has waged multiple wars using 9/11 as a pretext, even though, in the case of Afghanistan, the publicly stated purpose for the war was to bring to justice the presumed mastermind of the attacks, Osama bin Laden. Yet, Dr. Harrit points out, to this day, “we haven’t seen the evidence for this person actually being guilty in the crime, and he is not wanted by the FBI for this attack on 9/11.” An FBI spokesperson, Rex Tomb, Dr. Harrit observes, in fact explained to reporter Ed Haas that 9/11 is not listed on bin Laden’s “Wanted” poster because the FBI does not have enough hard evidence to connect him to 9/11 to indict him in a court of law.

Dr. Harrit credits Dr. Steven Jones, a retired professor of physics at Brigham Young University, with having the insight to examine the dust to look for evidence of how the buildings collapsed. Dr. Harrit rebuts two of the more common attempts to dismiss the discovery of nano-thermite in the dust. One dismissal that is often heard is that this material was a natural occurrence resulting from the collapses. Dr. Harrit points out that this violates basic chemical principles, and that nano-thermite is a high-tech manufactured substance that cannot result from natural occurrences. Another charge is that the material was planted in the dust samples Dr. Harrit and his team examined, a claim Dr. Harrit regards as preposterous, noting that the chain of custody of each of the four samples examined for the peer-reviewed paper is well-documented.

Nano-thermite, Dr. Harrit explains further, is “produced only in military facilities and big military institutions in the world…. The explosions of the future are based on this technology…. Research is going on, but it’s military research. This is high technology material.”

“We know explosives were used,” says Dr. Harrit, to bring down the towers. However, “We do not know where the nano-thermite fits into this picture. We do not know the exact role played by the reactive remains we found.” Further investigation is required to answer the questions that arise from this discovery. But the bottom line, notes Dr. Harrit, is that “Nano-thermite shouldn’t have been there.”

(Video copyright Lazarus Productions 2011. Source: I.C.T.V. Victoria.)

Jeremy R. Hammond is an independent political analyst whose articles have been featured in numerous print and online publications around the world. He is the founder and editor of Foreign Policy Journal (www.foreignpolicyjournal.com), an online source for news, critical analysis, and opinion commentary on U.S. foreign policy. He was a recipient of the 2010 Project Censored Awards for Outstanding Investigative Journalism. Read more articles by Jeremy R. Hammond.
http://www.jeremyrhammond.com 

MSM Questions Inaccuracies in 9/11 Story

Half of Americans still don't realize that a third building also came down that day, and it wasn't hit by an airplane. There is a long list of federal investigators who say they were not allowed to do their jobs or complete the investigation

By Tim King
First Published 2010-02-25
Courtesy Of Middle-East-Online

The mainstream press is showing interest in a taboo, however glaring subject; the inconsistencies in the Bush White House 9/11 account.

As The Washington Times reports today, "A lingering technical question about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks still haunts some, and it has political implications: How did 200,000 tons of steel disintegrate and drop in 11 seconds? A thousand architects and engineers want to know, and are calling on Congress to order a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center."

The problems with the official federal stories are endless and according to some of the world's top minds, the suggested account is impossible[1].

When we first began to write about these seemingly pressing questions, our Web Designer Matt Lintz caught the US Air Force attempting to hack into Salem-News.com[2].

One person who has never let the matter fade away is Richard Gage. He's a San Francisco architect and founder of the nonprofit Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Gage told The Washington Times, "In order to bring down this kind of mass in such a short period of time, the material must have been artificially, exploded outwards."

The federal government wants you to believe that fires brought the buildings to the ground, yet in all recorded history, no fire has ever toppled a skyscraper. They burn to the framework but they don't fall down.

Even if it was possible, the World Trade Towers were the least likely candidates. The steel core design of these buildings would not have come down, even if the building collapsed.

Even when you get past that, perhaps finding ways to justify the impossible "official" circumstances, how on earth could any logical explanation account for Building 7?

This is curious, I would suggest that half of all living Americans still don't realize that a third building also came down that day, and it wasn't hit by an airplane. But it did contain a lot of records that certain members of the financial industry didn't miss. Then there are the billions of dollars in missing gold evacuated just before Building 7 pancaked to the ground.

The words of Gage are reflected all over the nation in universities and engineering firms. The Trade Tower buildings were specifically designed to withstand the impact of a jet liner, specifically. Jet fuel is similar to diesel and it doesn't burn very hot. Firefighters, talking on radios, talked about how the aircraft crash fire in one building were going to easily be extinguisher by a few firefighters.

One of our writers, Jeff Gates, suggested that the only country that benefited from the ensuing wars is Israel.

"For instance, a skilled game theorist could foresee that, in response to a 911-type mass murder, "the mark" (the US) would deploy its military to avenge that attack. With phony intelligence fixed around a preset goal, a game theory algorithm could anticipate that those forces might well be redirected to invade Iraq-not to avenge 911 but to pursue the expansionist goals of Greater Israel[3].

Enforcing that thought, our writer Maidhc Ó Cathail wrote, "The day after 9/11, Benjamin Netanyahu let slip that the deaths of almost 3,000 Americans was 'very good' for Israel. In particular, the mass murder was very good for an emerging sector of the Israeli economy. In Laboratory for a Fortressed World, Naomi Klein detailed the post-9/11 “explosion of Israel’s homeland security sector.”[4]

Another Salem-News.com writer, Dr. Alan Sabrosky, wrote about the connection between 9/11 and Israel in the article, Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: The Road to 9/11 and Beyond, "Second, only two intelligence agencies had the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground: our CIA and Israel’s Mossad. Only one had the incentive, using the 'who benefits' principle: Mossad."[5]

The answers remain tangled up. Many Americans believe questioning the government over this is unpatriotic, then they turn around and burn effigies of Obama at tea bagger parties. I say it is highly unpatriotic and even disingenuous, to not question facts about the integrity of this nation.

I won't even start on Shanksville and the Pentagon; those stories are packed with more holes and in your face inconsistencies than there is time for in this report, but I have written about the Pentagon in particular, at great length[6].

The tragedy of September 11th 2001 is so far reaching that we could never truly describe it. The event was the reasoning to launch two very costly, ongoing wars. The very notion of Arab terrorists selecting the day that is synonymous with emergency response in the US is as hard to believe as the "terrorists" passports recovered so conveniently on the sidewalks in New York that day.

The Washington Times cites how Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects, managed to persuade more than a thousand of his peers to sign a new petition requesting a formal inquiry.

"The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction. We are therefore calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials."

Gage says technical issues surrounding the collapse of the towers have prompted years of debate, rebuttal and ridicule.

The article cites how he is particularly disturbed by the fall of the 47-story skyscraper, Building 7. This engineer says, like the other two buildings, tower 7 fell in "pure free-fall acceleration."

He also talked about how more than a hundred first-responders observed flashes and explosions during the fall of the towers.

Even more disturbing evidence Gage says, are "multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft. at 60 mph". He also talked about the "mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking."

Firefighters and Trade Tower employees en mass reported explosions before the buildings came down. They also talked about building closures in the weeks preceding 9/11, and men carrying large amounts of equipment into the elevator shafts.

Most experts agree that the buildings could only have come down the way they did if they were imploded. Experts who perform this type of work, common in places like Las Vegas, at least before the nation's economic downturn, place the main explosives in the elevator shafts, but also in many other strategic locations in a building's structure.

If you watch the World Trade Towers fall in slow motion, it is easy to observe what appear to be a series of planned explosions, running essentially the length of each building.

Gage says evidence of "advanced explosive nano-thermitic composite material" was found in the World Trade Center dust. Of course Rudy Gulliani, mayor of New York at the time, had all of the building evidence shipped away from the state almost immediately.

There is a long list of federal investigators who say they were not allowed to do their jobs or complete the investigation. Tie this to the revelations in 9/11 Commissioner John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, where the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version is almost entirely untrue, according to our writer Gordon Duff, and you just might be lifting a corner of the dirtiest rug that ever was used to suppress truth[7].

Gage says the group's petition at ae911truth.org is already on its way to members of Congress.

He Told The Washington Times, "Government officials will be notified that 'Misprision of Treason,' US Code 18 (Sec. 2382), is a serious federal offense, which requires those with evidence of treason to act."

"The implications are enormous and may have profound impact on the forthcoming Khalid Shaikh Mohammed trial."

For me, the biggest story here is that a mainstream member of the press published this article, I am amazed and encouraged. It is hard to suggest that we have perhaps been had in the biggest and worst way possible, but honesty is the only thing that matters.

Tim King is a former US Marine with twenty years of experience on the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist, reporter and assignment editor. In addition to his role as a war correspondent, the Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com's Executive News Editor, where this article originally appeared. Tim spent the winter of 2006/07 covering the war in Afghanistan, and he was in Iraq over the summer of 2008, reporting from the war while embedded with both the US Army and the Marines. He holds numerous awards for reporting, photography, writing and editing. Contact him at newsroom@salem-news.com.

References:

[1] Apr-07-2006 : Huge Contradictions in Official Theories on 9/11 Crash at Pentagon - Tim King Salem-News.com

[2] Apr-16-2006: US Air Force Hackers Caught in Their Tracks by Salem-News.com - Tim King Salem-News.com

[3]Oct-20-2009: How Israel Wages Game Theory Warfare - Jeff Gates Salem-News.com

[4] Jan-20-2010: The Merchants of Fear: Israel's Profiting from Homeland Insecurity - Maidhc Ó Cathail Salem-News.com

[5] Sep-10-2009: Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: The Road to 9/11 and Beyond - Alan Sabrosky Salem-News.com

[6] Mar-21-2006: What Really Hit The Pentagon? - Tim King Salem-News.com

[7] Sep-11-2009: The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies - Gordon Duff Salem-News.com

Why Propaganda Trumps Truth

By Paul Craig Roberts
September 15, 2009
Courtesy Of "Information Clearing House"

An article in the journal, Sociological Inquiry, casts light on the effectiveness of propaganda. Researchers examined why big lies succeed where little lies fail. Governments can get away with mass deceptions, but politicians cannot get away with sexual affairs.

The researchers explain why so many Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, years after it has become obvious that Iraq had nothing to do with the event. Americans developed elaborate rationalizations based on Bush administration propaganda that alleged Iraqi involvement and became deeply attached to their beliefs. Their emotional involvement became wrapped up in their personal identity and sense of morality. They looked for information that supported their beliefs and avoided information that challenged them, regardless of the facts of the matter.

In Mein Kampf, Hitler explained the believability of the Big Lie as compared to the small lie: “In the simplicity of their minds, people more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have such impudence. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and continue to think that there may be some other explanation.”

What the sociologists and Hitler are telling us is that by the time facts become clear, people are emotionally wedded to the beliefs planted by the propaganda and find it a wrenching experience to free themselves. It is more comfortable, instead, to denounce the truth-tellers than the liars whom the truth-tellers expose.

The psychology of belief retention even when those beliefs are wrong is a pillar of social cohesion and stability. It explains why, once change is effected, even revolutionary governments become conservative. The downside of belief retention is its prevention of the recognition of facts. Belief retention in the Soviet Union made the system unable to adjust to economic reality, and the Soviet Union collapsed. Today in the United States millions find it easier to chant “USA, USA, USA” than to accept facts that indicate the need for change.

The staying power of the Big Lie is the barrier through which the 9/11 Truth Movement is finding it difficult to break. The assertion that the 9/11 Truth Movement consists of conspiracy theorists and crackpots is obviously untrue. The leaders of the movement are highly qualified professionals, such as demolition experts, physicists, structural architects, engineers, pilots, and former high officials in the government. Unlike their critics parroting the government’s line, they know what they are talking about.

Here is a link to a presentation by the architect, Richard Gage, to a Canadian university audience: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13242 The video of the presentation is two hours long and seems to have been edited to shorten it down to two hours. Gage is low-key, but not a dazzling personality or a very articulate presenter. Perhaps that is because he is speaking to a university audience and takes for granted their familiarity with terms and concepts.

Those who believe the official 9/11 story and dismiss skeptics as kooks can test the validity of the sociologists’ findings and Hitler’s observation by watching the video and experiencing their reaction to evidence that challenges their beliefs. Are you able to watch the presentation without scoffing at someone who knows far more about it than you do? What is your response when you find that you cannot defend your beliefs against the evidence presented? Scoff some more? Become enraged?

Another problem that the 9/11 Truth Movement faces is that few people have the education to follow the technical and scientific aspects. The side that they believe tells them one thing; the side that they don’t believe tells them another. Most Americans have no basis to judge the relative merits of the arguments.

For example, consider the case of the Lockerbie bomber. One piece of “evidence” that was used to convict Magrahi was a piece of circuit board from a device that allegedly contained the Semtex that exploded the airliner. None of the people, who have very firm beliefs in Magrahi’s and Libya’s guilt and in the offense of the Scottish authorities in releasing Magrahi on allegedly humanitarian grounds, know that circuit boards of those days have very low combustion temperatures and go up in flames easily. Semtex produces very high temperatures. There would be nothing whatsoever left of a device that contained Semtex. It is obvious to an expert that the piece of circuit board was planted after the event.

I have asked on several occasions and have never had an answer, which does not mean that there isn’t one, how millions of pieces of unburnt, uncharred paper can be floating over lower Manhatten from the destruction of the WTC towers when the official explanation of the destruction is fires so hot and evenly distributed that they caused the massive steel structures to weaken and fail simultaneously so that the buildings fell in free fall time just as they would if they had been brought down by controlled demolition.

What is the explanation of fires so hot that steel fails but paper does not combust?

People don’t even notice the contradictions. Recently, an international team of scientists, who studied for 18 months dust samples produced by the twin towers’ destruction collected from three separate sources, reported their finding of nano-thermite in the dust. The US government had scientists dependent on the US government to debunk the finding on the grounds that the authenticity of custody of the samples could not be verified. In other words, someone had tampered with the samples and added the nano-thermite. This is all it took to discredit the finding, despite the obvious fact that access to thermite is strictly controlled and NO ONE except the US military and possibly Israel has access to nano-thermite.

The physicist, Steven Jones, has produced overwhelming evidence that explosives were used to bring down the buildings. His evidence is not engaged, examined, tested, and refuted. It is simply ignored.

Dr. Jones’ experience reminds me of that of my Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher, Michael Polanyi. Polanyi was one of the 20th centuries great scientists. At one time every section chairman of the Royal Society was a Polanyi student. Many of his students won Nobel Prizes for their scientific work, such as Eugene Wigner at Princeton and Melvin Calvin at UC, Berkeley, and his son, John Polanyi, at the University of Toronto.

As a young man in the early years of the 20th century, Michael Polanyi discovered the explanation for chemical absorbtion. Scientific authority found the new theory too much of a challenge to existing beliefs and dismissed it. Even when Polanyi was one of the UK’s ranking scientists, he was unable to teach his theory. One half-century later his discovery was re-discovered by scientists at UC, Berkeley. The discovery was hailed, but then older scientists said that it was “Polanyi’s old error.” It turned out not to be an error. Polanyi was asked to address scientists on this half-century failure of science to recognize the truth. How had science, which is based on examining the evidence, gone so wrong. Polanyi’s answer was that science is a belief system just like everything else, and that his theory was outside the belief system.

That is what we observe all around us, not just about the perfidy of Muslims and 9/11.

As an economics scholar I had a very difficult time making my points about the Soviet economy, about Karl Marx’s theories, and about the supply-side impact of fiscal policy. Today I experience readers who become enraged just because I report on someone else’s work that is outside their belief system. Some readers think I should suppress work that is inconsistent with their beliefs and drive the author of the work into the ground. These readers never have any comprehension of the subject. They are simply emotionally offended.

What I find puzzling is the people I know who do not believe a word the government says about anything except 9/11. For reasons that escape me, they believe that the government that lies to them about everything else tells them the truth about 9/11. How can this be, I ask them. Did the government slip up once and tell the truth? My question does not cause them to rethink their belief in the government’s 9/11 story. Instead, they get angry with me for doubting their intelligence or their integrity or some such hallowed trait.

The problem faced by truth is the emotional needs of people. With 9/11 many Americans feel that they must believe their government so that they don’t feel like they are being unsupportive or unpatriotic, and they are very fearful of being called “terrorist sympathizers.” Others on the left-wing have emotional needs to believe that peoples oppressed by the US have delivered “blowbacks.” Some leftists think that America deserves these blowbacks and thus believe the government’s propaganda that Muslims attacked the US.

Naive people think that if the US government’s explanation of 9/11 was wrong, physicists and engineers would all speak up. Some have (see above). However, for most physicists and engineers this would be an act of suicide. Physicists owe their careers to government grants, and their departments are critically dependent on government funding. A physicist who speaks up essentially ends his university career. If he is a tenured professor, to appease Washington the university would buy out his tenure as BYU did in the case of the outspoken Steven Jones.

An engineering firm that spoke out would never again be awarded a government contract. In addition, its patriotic, flag-waving customers would regard the firm as a terrorist apologist and cease to do business with it.

In New York today there is an enormous push by 9/11 families for a real and independent investigation of the 9/11 events. Tens of thousands of New Yorkers have provided the necessary signatures on petitions that require the state to put the proposal for an independent commission up to vote. However, the state, so far, is not obeying the law.

Why are the tens of thousands of New Yorkers who are demanding a real investigation dismissed as conspiracy theorists? The 9/11 skeptics know far more about the events of that day than do the uninformed people who call them names. Most of the people I know who are content with the government’s official explanation have never examined the evidence. Yet, these no-nothings shout down those who have studied the matter closely.

There are, of course, some kooks. I have often wondered if these kooks are intentionally ridiculous in order to discredit knowledgeable skeptics.

Another problem that the 9/11 Truth Movement faces is that their natural allies, those who oppose the Bush/Obama wars and the internet sites that the antiwar movement maintains, are fearful of being branded traitorous and anti-American. It is hard enough to oppose a war against those the US government has successfully demonized. Antiwar sites believe that if they permit 9/11 to be questioned, it would brand them as "terrorist sympathizers" and discredit their opposition to the war. An exception is Information Clearing House.

Antiwar sites do not realize that, by accepting the 9/11 explanation, they have undermined their own opposition to the war. Once you accept that Muslim terrorists did it, it is difficult to oppose punishing them for the event. In recent months, important antiwar sites, such as antiwar.com, have had difficulty with their fundraising, with their fundraising campaigns going on far longer than previously. They do not understand that if you grant the government its premise for war, it is impossible to oppose the war.

As far as I can tell, most Americans have far greater confidence in the government than they do in the truth. During the Great Depression the liberals with their New Deal succeeded in teaching Americans to trust the government as their protector. This took with the left and the right. Neither end of the political spectrum is capable of fundamental questioning of the government.

This explains the ease with which our government routinely deceives the people.

Democracy is based on the assumption that people are rational beings who factually examine arguments and are not easily manipulated. Studies are not finding this to be the case. In my own experience in scholarship, public policy, and journalism, I have learned that everyone from professors to high school dropouts has difficulty with facts and analyses that do not fit with what they already believe. The notion that "we are not afraid to follow the truth wherever it may lead" is an extremely romantic and idealistic notion. I have seldom experienced open minds even in academic discourse or in the highest levels of government. Among the public at large, the ability to follow the truth wherever it may lead is almost non-existent.

The US government's response to 9/11, regardless of who is responsible, has altered our country forever. Our civil liberties will never again be as safe as they were. America's financial capability and living standards are forever lower. Our country's prestige and world leadership are forever damaged. The first decade of the 21st century has been squandered in pointless wars, and it appears the second decade will also be squandered in the same pointless and bankrupting pursuit.

The most disturbing fact of all remains: The 9/11 event responsible for these adverse happenings has not been investigated.

Nano-Thermite In The WTC Dust

Danish Scientist, Niels Harrit On Nano-Thermite In The WTC Dust

By Niels Harrit, Danish Scientist
TV2 News, Denmark
Monday, Apr 13, 2009
Courtesy Of Axis Of Logic

Niels Harrit and 8 other international scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center. Harit is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the roots." -Thoreau