False flag : 9/11 : demolition : proof!


Richard Moore

If WT7 was collapsed by demolition explosives, as
Silverstein admits, then those explosives were planted
well in advance of 9/11, requiring special access to the
building. 'Al Qaeda' could not have had such access. It
had to be an inside job. I see this as incontrovertible
evidence that 9/11 could not possibly have happened
according to the official story.

Venturing now into speculation, my guess is that the plane
shot down in Pennsylvania - evidently by a National Guard
pilot on orders from the Governor, contrary to plan - was
intended for WT7. Without a plane, and with all that bomb
evidence present in the building, 'pulling it' would have
been the best available ad hoc choice for damage-control.

Our second article, below, reports on the analysis by a
physics professor, to the effect that all three buildings
must have collapsed by demolition.



This admission appeared in a PBS documentary originally
aired in Sept. of 2002 entitled "America Rebuilds". Mr
Silverstein's comments came after FEMA and the Society of
Civil Engineers conducted an extensive and costly
investigation into the curious collapse of WTC 7. The
study specifically concluded that the building had
collapsed as a result of the inferno within, sparked,
apparently, by debris falling from the crumbling North

In the documentary Silverstein makes the following
   "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire  department
    commander, telling me that they were  not sure they were
    gonna be able to contain the  fire, and I said, "We've had
    such  terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing  to
    do is pull it."  And they made that decision  to pull and
    we watched the building collapse."

[This can be heard in the audio file
http://VestigialConscience.com/PullIt.mp3 (also at
http://sirdave.com/mp3/PullIt.mp3 ).  Thanks to Sir Dave
'tmo' Soule for transfering this from the video to an MP3
file.  "America Rebuilds",  PBS Home Video, ISBN
0-7806-4006-3, is available from
http://shop.pbs.org/products/AREB901/ .] 


Deseret Morning News, Thursday, November 10, 2005 

Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC 

By Elaine Jarvik 
Deseret Morning News 

The physics of 9/11 - including how fast and symmetrically
one of the World Trade Center buildings fell - prove that
official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a
Brigham Young University physics professor.

In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned
explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says
Steven E. Jones.

In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for
peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice
to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of
the Web site www.wtc7.net , whose research Jones quotes.
Jones' article can be found at
www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html .

"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in
all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven
E. Jones says.

Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News

Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at
BYU, is calling for an independent, international
scientific investigation "guided not by politicized
notions and constraints but rather by observations and

"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in
all three buildings and set off after the two plane
crashes - which were actually a diversion tactic," he
writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing
down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.

As for speculation about who might have planted the
explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's
no point in doing that until we do the scientific

Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11
Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards
and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what
happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the
47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official
explanation - that fires caused structural damage that
caused the buildings to collapse - can't be backed up by
either testing or history, he says.

Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science"
conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the
explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of
repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk
science.' "

In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published
in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier,
Jones offers these arguments:

* The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically,
falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon
associated with "controlled demolition" - and even then
it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists
undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers
when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work
and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?"
Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary
skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical
implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here,
along with other data, provide strong evidence for an
'inside' job."

* No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC
buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives
can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

* WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed
in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would
take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground.
"Where is the delay that must be expected due to
conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of
physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors
strike lower floors - and intact steel support columns -
the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted
mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then,
and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?"
The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive
demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed
lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and
allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations
were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission,
he says.

* With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically
be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the
material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder
while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we
understand this strange behavior, without explosives?
Remarkable, amazing - and demanding scrutiny since the
U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this

* Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were
observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon
common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish
buildings, he says.

* Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would
require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to
evaporate steel - and neither office materials nor diesel
fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by
jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few
minutes, and office material fires would burn out within
about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

* Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade
Center may have been the result of a high-temperature
reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he
says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have
insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large
quantities of metal," Jones says.

* Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported
by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these
explosions occurred far below the region where the planes
struck, he says.

Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC
collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a
woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman
mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade
Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a
lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which
point "everyone around me started applauding."

Following several months of study, he presented his
findings at a talk at BYU in September.

Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899
photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for
"independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a
small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.

E-mail: •••@••.••• 

© 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company 


"Apocalypse Now and the Brave New World"

Posting archives:

Subscribe to low-traffic list:
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.