Almost from the beginning, there have been doubts about the government’s version of events regarding the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. And those doubts have only grown as independent research has deconstructed the official story.

Rather than discuss all the misinformation put forth by the government and the mainstream media, this article will cover the main evidence that contradicts the official version of what happened in New York on 9/11.

In particular it will focus on what really brought down the World Trade Center buildings.

As most people are aware, the US government and NIST (The National Institute of Standards and Technology) claim that it was the impact of the hijacked airliners hitting the buildings along with fire that brought down the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11. Click here for NIST Report. This despite the fact that:

1) fire alone has never brought down a steel framed building either before or since 9/11;

2) three steel frame skyscrapers came down on 9/11 even though only two of them were hit by airplanes;

3) police, fire, and other eyewitnesses reported explosions in the basements of the WTC prior to the planes hitting the buildings as well afterwards.

The wealth of forensic, seismic, and eyewitness evidence put forth in the years subsequent to 9/11 totally disproves the government’s version of events and confirms that explosives were used to bring down the WTC buildings. Since it would have taken months of planning and preparation to wire the buildings for demolition, we can rule out foreign terrorists and instead the focus needs to be on the enemy within.

Forensic Evidence

NIST and the government claimed that the jet fuel combined with the impact of the airplanes hitting the buildings brought them down. However the maximum temperature that jet fuel – which is mainly kerosene – can burn is 1472 degrees Fahrenheit and steel doesn’t melt until close to 2795 degrees. Steel is also a good conductor of heat and the steel on the floors where the planes impacted would have cooled once the jet fuel was used up which was within the first fifteen minutes of impact. Even the burning of the office contents would not have been hot enough to melt the steel in the buildings since it would burn at a temperature even lower than the jet fuel. Click on link for article Building a Better Mirage.

The impact of the planes hitting the buildings would not have seriously damaged them either because they had been designed to withstand just such an event. Frank A. DeMartini, Manager of WTC Construction and Project Management, stated that the WTC towers were specifically designed to take multiple hits from airliners and not collapse. Indeed when the planes first hit, the buildings swayed slightly and then righted themselves – exactly as they had been designed to do. Click for video clip WTC Designed to Withstand Jet Airliner Impacts,

NIST maintains that the impact of the airliner crashes and resulting fires caused the steel girders to weaken to the point that the floors pancaked. But there were no pancaked floors in the rubble. Nor were any bodies found in the rubble which would be expected if the floors had collapsed with people trapped inside. Instead the concrete in the buildings, along with the bodies of the victims and office furniture, were pulverized into small fragments and dust. The identities of many of the victims could not be confirmed because not even small pieces of their bodies could be found in the rubble.

A further point is that even if the floors of the WTC had pancaked, what would have been left behind would have been the central core of each building. At the center of WTC Buildings 1 and 2 were 47 steel columns along with 240 perimeter steel beams. A total of 287 steel columns in all. These core columns measured 52 by 22 inches and were five inches thick at the base. Below is a picture of one of the towers under construction. However according to NIST, instead of remaining intact, these massive columns spanning 110 floors all collapsed into neatly cut pieces.

Examine the cut beam in the picture below and the angle of the cut. How does fire sever a five inch thick steel beam at an angle?

You can also see that the beam is melted at the lower end of the cut. How can an office fire and jet fuel melt steel beams that are almost a thousand feet below where the fire started?

Click on link How Can Jet Fuel Do Such Extreme Damage?

Tons of steel from the WTC were also ejected hundreds of feet laterally. Some pieces were ejected with such force that they ended up implanted in adjoining buildings. In one case a 600,000 pound piece of steel – twice the weight of a Boeing airliner – was thrown 400 feet into a building on Vesey Street. How can fire eject tons of material laterally? The answer is, it can’t.

Besides being cut, some of the steel girders were actually bent as in the example below. It would take thousands of degrees to bend a steel girder like this. An office fire could not have weakened a steel beam this size, much less bend it in half.

Tons of molten steel were also found at the base of the WTC buildings. NIST officials deny the existence of the molten steel but firefighters and other eyewitnesses working at the WTC reported streams of molten steel flowing “like you were in a foundry”. It takes temperatures approaching 5,000 degrees to melt steel and neither jet fuel nor an office fire comes even close to generating that high a temperature.

Indeed the heat from the rubble of the WTC was so intense that it took months of spraying it with water to finally put out the fires. Rescue workers found their rubber boots melting from the heat in the basements of the WTC buildings.

So what could have been the real cause of the collapse of the three WTC buildings? Forensic evidence, the laws of physics, seismic evidence, and eyewitness accounts all confirm that military grade explosives were used to bring down the World Trade Center buildings.

The Tell Tale Chips

Independent researchers examined dust samples produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings. These dust samples contained distinctive red/gray chips. Optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry were used to determine the composition of these chips. The red portion of the chips was found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly explosive.

Nanothermite chips found in the WTC dust

The results of this peer reviewed study was entitled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe and was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in 2009. Click to read the entire article: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe.

Jim Hoffman, a software engineer and independent 9/11 researcher, wrote a summary of the article for non-technical readers. Click to read his article:Explosives Found in World Trade Center Dust.

Niels H. Harrit, an Associate Professor of the University of Copenhagen’s Chemistry Department and an expert in nano-chemistry, was the lead author of the study. Eight other researchers contributed to the study including Dr. Steven Jones, (Ph.D in Physics), Dr. Jeffrey Farrer ( Ph.D in Materials Science and Engineering), Kevin R. Ryan (Chemist and former Laboratory Manager for Underwriters Laboratories), Frank M. Legge (Ph.D in Chemistry), and others.

An interview of Harrit can be seen here.

Thermite is not normally an explosive material. Instead it is highly reactive substance that produces bursts of high temperatures for short periods. It has civilian and military applications including use in weapons and in bringing down buildings in controlled demolitions. However the material found in the WTC dust was not just ordinary thermite but nanothermite.

Nanothermite particles are manufactured at the atomic scale and are far more reactive and explosive that ordinary thermite. Production of these materials is very limited because of the technology needed to create them. Two places in the United States where they are produced are Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and at the Indian Head Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Maryland. Click here to read Advanced Energetic Materials. One place they are not manufactured is a cave in Afghanistan.

Researchers estimate that several tons of explosives, including nanothermites, had to have been planted in the three world trade center buildings based on the proportional amount of nanothermites found in the dust samples that were tested.

Aside from nanothermites, the dust samples also contained microscopic iron-rich droplets. Molten iron is one of the two principal products of the thermite reaction. The molten iron condenses and solidifies into particles whose size is a function of the thermite’s reaction rate. Nanothermites produce tiny droplets that become very nearly spherical due to surface tension. These droplets are further proof of the use of thermites to bring down the WTC buildings.

Another curious fact was that some of the steel recovered from WTC Building 7 – the third building to fall on 9/11 and the one not hit by a plane – was so thin and full of holes that it resembled Swiss cheese. This anomaly is discussed in an article by Dr. David Ray Griffin. An excerpt is below:

Within a few months of 9/11, three professors from Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) had issued a report about a piece of steel from Building 7 that was described in a New York Times story by James Glanz and Eric Lipton as “[p]erhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.”13 Part of the mystery was the fact that the steel was “extremely thin,” indicating that the steel had “melted away,” even though “no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.” Another part of the mystery was that atoms in the steel seemed to have combined with sulfur “to form compounds that melt at lower temperatures,” but as to the source of the sulfur, “no one knows.”[14] Describing this mysterious piece of steel more fully, an article entitled “The ‘Deep Mystery’ of Melted Steel” in WPI’s magazine, said: “[S]teel – which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit – may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies . . . reveal that . . . a eutectic reaction . . . caus[ed] intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese . . .. A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges – which are curled like a paper scroll – have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes – some larger than a silver dollar – let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending – but not holes. A eutectic compound is a mixture [involving sulfur]. . . . ‘The important questions,” says [one of the professors], ‘are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from?’”[15] The thinning and the holes even suggested that the steel had vaporized. Explaining as early as November 2001 why fire could not account for this mysterious steel, Glanz paraphrased one of the three WPI professors, Jonathan Barnett, as saying that it “appear[ed] to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.”[16]

Click here to read the entire article:Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight: The 9/11 “Official Story” and the Collapse of WTC Building Seven

As with the destruction of WTC Buildings One and Two, the vaporized steel infused with sulfur is a clear indication that something other than fire brought down Building 7 Since it can take months to carry out the planned demolition of a building and all three buildings had tight security – especially Building 7 – access to carry out such an operation could not have been gained by outside parties. Instead access had to have been given by the leaseholders of the buildings and government officials. This is especially true in the case of Building 7 because it housed government agencies such as the CIA, the US Secret Service, the New York City Office of Emergency Management, the Department of Defense, and the IRS – among other tenants.
Click on link for A list of tenants in Building Seven.
Click on link for article 7 Problems with Building Seven.

Violating the Laws of Physics

The collapse of the three skyscrapers in New York was a unique event in respect to how many laws of physics were violated on that one day.

For example, all three skyscrapers fell quickly into their own footprint indicating that there was little or no resistance as each floor progressively collapsed. That would only be possible if the underlying floors were being destroyed ahead of the collapse of the upper floors. Keep in mind that World Trade Center Towers one and two were both 110 stories high and Building seven was 47 stories high. NIST admitted that WTC Building One came down in 11 seconds. The 9/11 Commission said WTC Building Two came down in 10 seconds. Building Seven was clocked as coming down in less than seven seconds.

All of these times are close to freefall speed and violate the laws of conservation of energy and momentum. Gravitational energy alone could not have supplied enough energy for the top floors to fall through the greatest path of resistance, cut through 47 to 110 floors of steel beams, pulverize tons of concrete, eject tons of material laterally, vaporize steel in the case of Building Seven, and also leave tons of molten metal in the wake of the collapse. There simply was not enough energy from the jet fuel and office fire to accomplish this unless the laws of physics were suspended for this event. Click on the link to read the entire article Estimates for time to collapse of WTC1.

The first law of thermodynamics was also violated on 9/11. Government officials maintained that the steel became so overheated that it weakened and collapsed. But the fires in the buildings never became hotter than 1,500 degrees and steel is an excellent conductor of heat which means that once the fuel burned off, the steel cooled. Even the office fires were not enough to weaken much less cut the steel into pieces and melt it into puddles. That would have taken fires of close to 5,000 degrees. Yet NIST and the government would have us believe that the laws of physics don’t apply when it comes to 9/11.

Further proof of the fallacy of NIST arguments regarding the collapse is provided in this presentation by Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. He discusses all the facts that support the thesis that the WTC buildings were brought down in a controlled demolition, not by fire. (Part 1 of 13)

Seismic Evidence

Seismic signals were recorded on 9/11 during the period when the WTC towers 1 and 2 were struck and collapsed, as well as during the collapse of Building 7. According to Dr. André Rousseau, former researcher in geophysics at CNRS and specialist in sound waves (1), these signals only registered because explosives were used, not because of the impact of the planes or debris hitting the ground. Below is the summary of his research:

At the moment of the impact by the planes on the Twin Towers and their collapse, as well as that of WTC7, seismic waves were generated. To the degree that (1) seismic waves are only created by brief impulses, and (2) that low frequencies are associated with an energy (magnitude) that is comparable to a seismic event, these waves undeniably have an explosive origin. Even if the planes’ impact and the fall of the debris from the Towers onto the ground could have generated seismic waves, their magnitude was insufficient to be recorded 34 km away, and they should have been similar. However, the composition and magnitude of the seismic signals show significant differences, above all in their propagation speed, even though their paths were identical under identical conditions. This last difference being physically unexplainable in the official version, we must put into question the calculation of the speeds effectuated from the origin shown on the video images.

We can only conclude that in reality, the (explosive) source was manually detonated, thus accounting for the variable shift for each origin in relation to the videos. The composition of the waves is revealing both in terms of the location of the source and the magnitude of the energy transmitted to the ground. The subterranean origin of the waves emitted when WTC1 collapsed is attested by the presence of the P and S volume waves along with the Rayleigh surface waves, which are present in all five explosions. The placement of the source of the four other explosions is subaerial, attested by the unique presence of Rayleigh waves. The aerial explosions visible on the videos of the upper floors of the Twin Towers do not produce seismic waves 34 km from the source. There is a factor of ten between the power of the explosions at the time of the impacts on the twin Towers (as well as at the time of the collapse of WTC7) and the strength of those more powerful ones at the time of their collapse, the subterranean explosion under WTC1 being the one that transmitted the most energy to the ground. Note as well that the degree to which the surface waves disperse (their speed depends upon their frequency), the duration of the recorded signal is not representative of the duration of the signal at the source. Finally, the controlled demolition of the three towers, suggested by the visual and audio testimony, as well as by observations of their collapse, is thus demonstrated by the analysis of the seismic waves emitted at the moments of the plane impacts and at the moments of the collapse.

(1) CNRS is the The National Center of Scientific Research. (Centre national de la recherche scientifique.) It is the largest governmental research organization in France and the largest fundamental science agency in Europe.
For the complete article go to:Seismic Signals Reveal Explosives Were Used at the WTC on 9/11

Eyewitness Accounts

Initial media reports and eyewitness accounts on 9/11 all established that explosives were present in the WTC buildings. Explosives that went off before and after the planes hit the buildings. However these reports were quickly replaced by the ‘official story’ and after that was issued anyone who questioned the official story was dismissed as a ‘conspiracy theorist’.

Below are media clips from reporters that day. Many reported hearing and experiencing explosions in the WTC towers. Journalist Dan Rather commented that the way the buildings came down reminded him of the deliberate destruction of old buildings. That comment was never heard again on the mainstream news.


Eyewitnesses and Media Report Explosions at Twin Towers on 9/11

World Trade Center | MySpace Video

Following the events of 9/11, the New York Fire Department made the decision to interview firefighters, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians about their experiences. Over 500 people were interviewed. However those oral histories were not released until the New York Times sued the City. In August of 2005, over 12,000 pages of oral histories and radio transmissions were released. Below are video clips of some of this oral history. The New York Times published all of the accounts and they are available at the last link. What these accounts prove is that the fires in the buildings were relatively small and that multiple eyewitnesses heard and experienced explosions in the WTC buildings.

Click on link to read Oral histories of 9/11 rescuers.

Aside from the emergency workers and journalists, two other witnesses are particularly important in contradicting the official narrative about 9/11. William Rodriguez and Anthony Saltalamacia both worked in WTC 1 and were in the building on the morning of 9/11. In the video interviews below, both attest to the fact that bombs exploded in the basement prior to the plane hitting the building. Rodriguez helped rescue hundreds of people that morning and only barely escaped death himself by hiding under a vehicle as the building collapsed. He was later proclaimed a hero and even encouraged to run for public office until he questioned the events of 9/11. After that he became persona non grata.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzpaZE5XSfg

Barry Jennings was another important witness. He worked as an emergency coordinator for the New York Housing Authority. On 9/11 he made his way to WTC Building 7 which was the headquarters for the New York Office of Emergency Management. This was after the first tower had been struck by a plane. He was inside WTC 7 when the second plane struck. While in the building, Jennings heard and experienced multiple explosions. When firefighters and police finally rescued him later that day, they made their way to the lobby which by then was littered with debris and dead bodies. Yet the media and the government would have us believe that WTC 7 came down due to a few isolated fires at 5:30 that evening. An interview of Mr. Jennings is in the video clip below.

Summary

This article is by no means a complete summary of all the evidence that contradicts the government’s version of what happened in New York on 9/11. However there is now enough forensic, seismic, and eyewitness evidence to establish without a doubt that the official account is a complete fabrication.

From the beginning the 9/11 attack violated common sense. With time and additional research it has been revealed to be nothing more than a cheap, venal, and stupid trick that depended on shock, a blood sacrifice, and the gullibility of the American public to engineer.

It is also apparent that those who carried out the 9/11 attacks are within the US government itself with the assistance of operatives from other countries. Otherwise the true perpetrators would have been investigated and brought to justice long ago and the mainstream media would have reported what ordinary citizens have uncovered over the past nine years. For every piece of evidence and analysis that contradicts the official story has come from people who at great personal sacrifice and risk, have sought the truth for themselves. Taking Patrick Henry’s statement to heart, they decided that:

“We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth… For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it.”