DOUBLE-LENGTH
ARTICLE
While
out walking with my sons, a few days after Christmas, the younger one asked:
‘Dad, what happened on 9/11?’ I do not know what prompted him to ask – perhaps
something he had just read online or heard on television.
The
official narrative, approved and heavily propagandized by the US government
(Figure 119.1), was that four huge passenger aircraft were simultaneously hijacked
by a motley bunch of undistinguished foreign nationals. Three were subsequently
flown squarely into iconic buildings, two of which disintegrated, whereas the
other crashed in a field. Is this true?
Figure
119.1: The US government waited more than a year to set up a commission to
investigate 9/11. Its funding was an insignificant $15 million. (This contrasts
with $60 million allocated to the inquiry into President Clinton’s sexual shenanigans
with a White House intern.) Several commissioners resigned in protest, claiming
they were ‘set up to fail’.
Copyright
© 2004 National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
It
is often said that all objective research starts with a hypothesis – yet it
does not. It begins with painstaking collection and evaluation of validated
pre-existing evidence, from which a hypothesis may subsequently be derived. I
began, therefore, by trying to recall the bare facts.
First,
regarding the two planes that crashed into the Twin Towers of New York City’s
World Trade Center (WTC):
* Two of the four scheduled flights (AA11 & AA77) did not officially exist. There was no record of them ever having taken off.
*
Many experienced airline pilots have since testified, quite vociferously, to
the impossibility of commercial airliners travelling at such high speeds at
altitudes low enough to strike the towers. This is because, at sea level, air
density is too great. The aircraft would have disintegrated on descent. This is why (a) cruising altitudes lie between 30,000 and 40,000 feet, and (b) airliners have to slow to 150 mph in order to land.
*
Bodies of such aircraft consist of aluminium, a low-density ‘soft’ metal, with
a fibreglass nose cone. The outer walls of the towers consisted of thick, load-bearing
steel, designed, with in-built redundancy, to withstand aircraft impact. Any
300-500 mph collision between a 200-tonne aluminium tube and a 100,000-tonne
reinforced steel block would, in accordance with Newton’s Third Law of Motion,
result in spectacular destruction of the former, with the latter remaining structurally
sound. (It matters not which of them is in motion, relative to the earth.)
*
On initial impact with the towers, the aircraft would immediately have
decelerated to zero, almost all wreckage crashing to the ground below. They
could not possibly have penetrated thick steel walls without the slightest
resistance, like a hot, sharp knife passing through butter. This would contravene
Newton’s First Law of Motion.
*
Multiple witnesses, including experienced First Responders, reported
distinctive scenes and sounds of explosions prior
to the towers being hit.
*
No steel-framed building has ever collapsed owing to fire. This is because the
melting point of steel is approximately 1500-1600°C, whereas aviation fuel, for
example, burns at a mere 800°C. Some high-rise buildings have burned throughout
for more than twenty-four hours, but structural integrity has always remained
intact (Figure 119.2). This is why fire-fighters never hesitate to enter them.
Figure
119.2: The Windsor Building, Madrid, Spain was totally consumed by fire on 12th
February, 2005, but its steel frame was largely undamaged.
Copyright
© 2018 Reddit Inc.
*
The towers collapsed to the ground at near free-fall acceleration. This means
that 60,000 to 80,000 tonnes of steel, and multiple floors of reinforced
concrete, offered negligible resistance from below. This, too, flies in the
face of Newton’s Third Law, as well as the Law of Conservation of Momentum.
*
Despite insignificant, arbitrary, asymmetric structural damage, both towers
collapsed neatly downward into their own footprints.
*
The towers’ concrete floors did not fall to earth; they were pulverised to dust
and blasted across the whole of Lower Manhattan. Four-tonne steel sections were
propelled, horizontally at 60 mph, distances up to six hundred feet, impossible
by gravity alone.
*
An adjacent steel-framed tower, WTC 7, was not struck by an aircraft, but collapsed,
nonetheless. This, likewise, occurred almost at free-fall acceleration, with
perfect vertical symmetry, precisely into its own footprint. Its destruction was announced by a BBC reporter, when, in fact, the intact building was still visible behind her.
*
Analysis of building débris proved the existence of chemical derivatives of
thermite, a pyrotechnic which burns at a high enough temperature to cut rapidly
and violently through steel.
A
third impact occurred into the Pentagon (US Military HQ) in Washington, DC.
*
Again, such a complex, high-speed manoeuvre at ground level would have been
physically impossible, even for experienced airline pilots.
* A 757 airliner (with a fibreglass nose cone) could not have penetrated the
Pentagon’s multiple walls of thick, reinforced concrete, yet no wreckage was
found outside the building, not even a tail or wing-tips. None was found inside
either.
*
The resultant hole in the wall was, in any case, too small to allow the entry
of the body of a 757, let alone its full wing-span (Figure 119.3).
Figure
119.3: Adding to the self-evident absurdity of this graphic, had the ground
floor been struck in this fashion, as detailed in the 9/11 report, the aircraft’s
jet engines would have ripped up the lawn. Instead, it was found to be
pristine.
Copyright
© 2015 911research
The
fourth crash site was a wooded field, a few miles north of Shanksville,
Pennsylvania.
*
First Responders noted, incredulously, that traces of neither aircraft parts, nor
human remains and belongings were present at the site.
*
The official explanation is that the entire airliner was swallowed up by the
earth, which then closed neatly over the hole, concealing all evidence (Figure
119.4). Such a phenomenon is, not surprisingly, unprecedented.
Figure
119.4: We are led to believe that this field in rural Pennsylvania is the only
ever aircraft crash site not to have been strewn with wreckage.
Copyright
© 2001 US Federal Government
Furthermore:
*
The Eastern region of the USA, despite being the most strictly-controlled air
space in the world, supposedly permitted four hijacked airliners to fly unchallenged for up to an hour and a half. Even with transponders
switched off, primary surveillance radar would have located and tracked them,
allowing swift interception by military fighter jets.
*
None of the supposed hijackers had ever sat in the cockpit of a commercial
airliner, let alone taken sudden control of one, flying in unfamiliar air space at maximum
speed.
*
Audio recordings of passengers speaking to relatives via mobile phones, purportedly
from altitudes exceeding 30,000 feet, were broadcast by mainstream media,
despite such communication being technologically unfeasible at the time.
*
Since 9/11, two of the airliners have retained registration and been identified,
by means of their tail numbers, as being still in service. After 9/11, six of the nineteen
named hijackers, all confirmed as dead, were proved to be still alive and elsewhere.
*
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 were bought (leased for 99 years) by businessman
Larry Silverstein just months prior to their destruction. This was despite decreasing
tenant occupancy (following a bomb blast in 1993) and an urgent need for
asbestos removal, whose cost was estimated at a prohibitive one billion
dollars.
*
Silverstein purchased additional insurance, appertaining specifically to terrorism, worth
billions of dollars, just two months before 9/11. On the fateful morning, he
broke from his daily routine of eating breakfast on the 95th floor of one of
the towers, to attend a medical appointment.
*
WTC ground fires, containing molten steel, burned for three months after 9/11, despite
intensive efforts to extinguish them. This precludes the theory of fire alone, and indicates strongly the use of thermite or something similar.
*
Even though the fallen buildings constituted a vast crime scene, all steel débris
was summarily shipped to China for recycling, thereby destroying much physical,
chemical and biological forensic evidence.
*
Scientific analysis was undertaken by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, a government agency and thus non-independent. In its 12,000-word report,
it fails to posit a theory for the WTC buildings collapse, stating only that,
following impact, it was ‘inevitable’.
*
Despite the destruction caused by aircraft flying at great speed into skyscrapers,
the government claimed that the hijackers’ ringleader’s passport managed to
escape the crash and survive intact, to be found in a nearby street.
These
are all verifiable facts. Up to this point, I had given my sons no subjective
opinions, less still an overall conclusion. They were intrigued, to say the
least. Only then, based on the above evidence, and because of continued questioning, did I postulate the following:
†
No commercial airliners flew, as claimed, on 9/11. Such manoeuvres would have
been aeronautically impossible, the impact physics impossible; and no identifiable
physical evidence was ever seen or has ever been recovered.
†
The collapse of each of the three WTC skyscrapers has yielded distinct
videographic, chemical and seismic hallmarks of controlled demolition, using incendiaries or explosives hot enough to melt steel. It
follows that such a complex operation would have taken months of meticulous
planning and preparation.
†
The damage done to the Pentagon clearly resembled that from a (non-ballistic)
missile strike.
These
conclusions invite further questions. First and foremost, what were the flying
objects, if not commercial airliners? There are several theories, about none of
which I would claim to be sufficiently knowledgeable either to accept or
reject. One is that the aircraft were unmanned, laser-guided weapons, disguised
as civilian aircraft, the technology and capability for which have been
available to the US military for decades. Another, which is beyond me utterly,
is that there were no planes at all, only holographic projections ‘impacting’
buildings pre-set with explosives.
Second
is a question that I can barely contemplate. If the two objects that struck
the Twin Towers did not carry hundreds of passengers, what happened to them?
Whatever
the full truth, it was with some sadness that I told my boys that the depravity of 9/11
was not simply the mass killings of three thousand innocents. Even worse was
that it had to have been pre-planned, strategically and tactically, by those with power. Furthermore,
the subsequent cover-up has been pathetically unconvincing to anyone with a
logical, scientific mind. Did the perpetrators not realize that events of such
magnitude would yield vast quantities of indisputable, publicly-available
evidence (Figure 119.5)?
Figure
119.5: For the benefit of my sons, I was able to quote the great American scientist,
Paul Leland Kirk (1902-70), who made this immortal statement about forensic
evidence: ‘Wherever he
steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve
as a silent witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is
not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human
witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it
cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find
it, study and understand it, can diminish its value.’
Copyright
© 2019 Paul Spradbery
The
events of that sunny September day changed the world, particularly the
relationship between individuals and the State. The post-9/11 world is all my
sons have ever known – or ever will know. As their father, who spent 35 years living in the pre-9/11 world (Figure 119.6), I feel obliged not
just to give them hard facts, but also to warn them of the evil inherent in political
authority, especially as the real 9/11 perpetrators remain in power, unpunished, undeterred, with the capability to pull a similar stunt in future.
Figure 119.6: A picture of Lower Manhattan, taken from Liberty Island. The South Tower of the World Trade Center appears to be sprouting from the top of my head.
Copyright © 1994 Paul Spradbery
Happy
New Year.
Copyright
© 2019 Paul Spradbery
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.