Submitted by Professor Steven Jones
12/24/2012

In October of this year, I gave two talks in Missouri discussing 9/11, challenging the official narrative. Certainly I talked about the fall of the Towers and WTC7, but there is more to it than that. May I emphasize areas that are evidence-based and that I find also important in our discussions of 9/11:

1. How the government lied about factual dangers of the WTC dust, how thousands of people were in fact hurt by the WTC dust (see below);
2. The whistleblower testimony of Sec’y of Transportation Norman Mineta (50 miles out, 30 miles out, etc., reported to Dick Cheney);
3. The lack of air defenses that day, including at the Pentagon (2 and 3 are generally all I say about the Pentagon);
4. The whistleblower testimony of Sec’y of Treasury Paul O’Neill (he noted -from day one it was about getting us into Iraq; his opposing pre-emptive war, and how he was canned by Dick Cheney);
5. The whistleblower testimonies of Kevin Ryan, April Gallop, Susan Lindauer and Sibel Edmonds;
6. The attempts to discredit/marginalize whistleblowers (including myself) that also speaks of conspiracy to cover-up facts regarding 9/11;
7. Historical use of false-flag events by Germany, USA, and others to further political agendas; the Big Lie principle and why many people hesitate to question “official narratives”;
8. The strange coincidence that emergency gear and hundreds of personnel were assembled in Manhattan on 9/10/01 (the day BEFORE the tragedy);
9. The destruction of evidence, that over 99.5% of the steel from the Towers and WTC7 was shipped to Asia for melting, contrary to the protests of scientists and engineers;
10. The remarkable growth and efforts of AE911Truth.org — with over 1,700 architects and engineers and over 16,000 supporters now calling for an investigation. When questions arise about Judy Wood’s book on DEW, I often refer to the FAQ at AE911Truth on this subject: http://www.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/505-ae911truth-faq-6-… .
11. Public polls show that large numbers of the public question the “official 9/11 story.” We are making progress despite the opposition.

As an example, the following is from one of my PPT slides for point # 1:

“At the White House’s direction, the Environmental Protection Agency gave New Yorkers misleading assurances that there was no health risk from the debris-laden air after the World Trade Center collapse, according to an internal inquiry…. The White House “convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones” by having the National Security Council control EPA communications after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, according to a report issued late Thursday by EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley.” http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/136350_epa23.html

The EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley then lost her job like so many other whistle-blowers. A compelling talk could be given focusing on whistle-blowers and what the government/corporation complex has done to squelch them.

Clearly, there is more to understanding 9/11 than just the fall of the Towers and WTC7 and evidence for thermitic materials (as important as these are). We may reach more people by broadening our discussion points.