Controversies, anomalies of 9/11 narratives
Simon Massey Correspondent
It has been 18 years since the infamous September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States shook the world, and the anniversary passed a fortnight ago with barely a word in the mainstream media.
Even recent findings from a four-year study published last month by researchers at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, which reveal enormous inaccuracies in the official investigations regarding the collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7, have received disturbingly little press.
For nearly two decades the mainstream media has been promotng 9/11 as the basis for the disastrous “war against terror”. Why have they now become so keen to avoid the subject?
On a Tuesday afternoon in 2001 during a late summer break on the Mediterranean island of Ibiza, I watched aghast as the Twin Towers of New York City’s Word Trade Centre collapsed shortly after being struck by two fully fuelled and apparently hijacked passenger airliners.
Upon returning to the UK a few days later I began to look into the world’s worst terrorist attack to date. Within a few weeks, rumours had begun to percolate on the Internet discussion forums I was using that things were not right.
Some rumours appeared absurd, for example that Jewish people had been warned in advance to avoid the World Trade Centre that day, or that five Israelis had been arrested after being seen celebrating the attacks while dressed as Arabs.
Others seemed less absurd. Architects and engineers were expressing concern about the way the Twin Towers had collapsed. How was it that two buildings designed to withstand the impact of aircraft had fallen perfectly into their own footprints in such a short space of time, despite each suffering completely different impact damage at different levels of the building?
Within weeks I had developed the distinct impression that either the US government had known that 9/11 was coming and they let it happen, or that they ordered the act against themselves.
As time has worn on the anomalies surrounding 9/11 have mounted, and after 18 years it has become apparent to me that Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda had nothing to do with it.
Here I will introduce just a few of the most apparent anomalies.
The single most apparent anomaly regarding 9/11 is found in the dust that blanketed southern Manhattan in the wake of the destruction of the Twin Towers.
Deutsche Bank, whose offices at 130 Liberty Street became filled with this dust, contracted industrial forensics laboratory RJ Lee to analyse it, due to concerns the dust might be toxic.
The analysis revealed an unusually high percentage of iron microspheres in the dust compared to that of background samples collected from representative office buildings in typical urban locations unaffected by the World Trade Centre disaster.
While iron microspheres constitute only 0,04 percent of typical building dust, the World Trade Centre dust samples contained 5,87 percent, over 100 times the expected amount.
A high percentage of iron microspheres is usually indicative of extreme temperatures, and would not usually be expected in such abundance in the dust of normal building collapses or demolitions.
The official investigations into the attacks on New York City — first the 9/11 Commission Report and then the Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology — failed to examine the dust.
During a press conference, Dr Shyam Sunder of the National Institute of Standards and Technology claimed the dust had not been analysed because there was no obvious reason to do so: it was already apparent to any reasonable person that the buildings had been brought down by hijacked airliners.
But if Al-Qaeda terrorists had managed to simultaneously hijack four airliners, they might also have managed to install a truck bomb in the basement of the World Trade Centre, as terrorists had succeeded in doing in 1996. Or they might have managed to get explosives onto the planes with them. Without a proper examination of the dust following the collapses on 9/11, no one would have known if either of these things had happened.
It was the work of physicist Stephen Jones that finally exposed the truth. Jones claimed the microspheres in the dust to be irrefutable evidence of an inside job on the World Trade Centre, and lost his position at Brigham Young University for refusing to back down.
Jones’ work was verified by Danish scientist Niels Harrit, and in 2009 they published a peer reviewed scientific paper titled “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Centre Catastrophe”.
The paper demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that Nano-Thermite, a military grade explosive, was involved in the collapsing of the Twin Towers on 9/11.
At the time of the disaster, Nano-Thermite was a state-of-the-art demolition incendiary, used mainly to disable tanks and other large pieces of technology left on the battlefield during a hasty withdrawal. Nano-Thermite burns through metals extremely quickly and effectively.
Jones and Harrit’s paper presented evidence of unreacted Nano-Thermite particulates in the World Trade Centre dust. When these particulates were heated in a laboratory, they rose in temperature incredibly quickly and burst into flames, a classic thermite reaction.
The presence of active unreacted Nano-Thermite helped to explain the high amount of iron microspheres also found in the World Trade Centre dust.
Had the Twin Towers collapsed due to damage suffered from the airliners and resultant fires alone, the temperatures should not have been nearly high enough to melt the steel of the buildings. Had Nano-Thermite been involved on the other hand, the steel would have heated to extreme temperatures and melted, resulting in a high percentage of iron microspheres in the dust.
The discovery of iron microspheres concurrent with unreacted chips of Nano-Thermite in the dust are probably the most apparent evidence of a controlled demolition and inside job at the World Trade Centre on 9/11.
Several other anomalies support the notion that controlled demolitions were used in the destruction of the Twin Towers.
Watching slow motion footage of both plane impacts reveals an enormous bright flash just before each plane is about to strike. These flashes have never been discussed by mainstream media outlets, far less explained.
William Rodriguez, who worked in the basement of the World Trade Centre, claims his building was struck by an enormous blast in the sub-basement, after which, moments later, he heard the plane impact far above.
Footage from the streets of down-town New York filmed by a camera crew for TV channel WNYW also appears to have picked up the underground blast that Rodriguez and others report. The sound of an underground blast is heard before the camera then picks up the sound of the first plane impacting the North Tower.
The remains of the Twin Towers burned for an unusually long period of time: weeks and weeks after the buildings had come down. While the recovery workers toiled, a thin but toxic blue smoke rose from “the pile” — the name given to the smouldering remains of the towers — as molten metals flowed beneath it. These metals boiled until Christmas in spite of constant dampening by fire hoses, rain, and despite a lack of oxygen. In the absence of Nano-Thermite, the extreme temperature of these metals is difficult to explain.
World Trade Centre Building 7 was never hit by a plane and yet collapsed anyway. Unlike World Trade Centre Building 3, which suffered significant damage from the debris of the Twin Towers but remained standing, Building 7 sustained comparatively little damage but quickly collapsed into its own footprint, in the same fashion as might be expected from a controlled demolition.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology confirmed that any damage to Building 7 caused by the collapsing of the Twin Towers was not significant enough to bring it down.
The failure of the official investigations to examine the dust for the presence of explosives appears unusual under such circumstances.
Al-Qaeda may have been able to get state-of-the-art demolitions installed throughout the World Trade Centre buildings, but there is no way they would have been able to get those investigating the attacks to cover up that fact. Whoever covered up the attacks must have been complicit in them.
So if the attacks may have had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, then who may have been behind them?
The controversial work of Christopher Bollyn — “Solving 9/11” — has suggested the culprits to be Zionists.
Bollyn’s research found that the wild and unlikely rumours circulating in the immediate aftermath of the disaster were in fact true: some people had been warned to avoid the World Trade Centre on the morning of September 11.
This is corroborated by Haaretz, who published an article on September 26 2001 confirming that two workers for Odigo, an Israeli instant messaging service, had received messages on the morning of 9/11 predicting the attacks would happen.
None of the official investigations into 9/11 have touched on this issue and it has since been otherwise ignored by corporate mainstream media.
In similar vein, Freedom of Information releases from the FBI have confirmed the unlikely rumours that five Israelis were arrested on 9/11 after being seen celebrating the destruction of the Twin Towers while dressed as Arabs.
Moments after the first plane impact, a witness known only as Maria — resident of a New Jersey apartment complex with a view of the Twin Towers — received a phone call from her neighbour describing the attack. Immediately after the call she picked up her binoculars and went to her window.
As she trained her binoculars on the tower, she became aware of five men in the parking lot beneath her.
Maria found the behaviour of these men surprising and disturbing. Three were standing on the roof of a van, filming and photographing the burning tower — which had been struck only moments before — while celebrating, laughing, dancing and high-fiving one another.
The five men — who became known as the Dancing Five or the High Fivers of 9/11 — soon became aware that Maria was watching, and left the parking lot shortly afterwards.
Maria was concerned they must have known about the attacks in advance.
How could they have been prepared with video and photography equipment if they did not know the strike was about to happen and why on earth were they behaving that way?
Maria made a note of their licence plate and reported to the police that she had seen five men dressed as Arabs or Muslims celebrating in the parking lot beneath her New Jersey apartment.
The police contacted the FBI, who issued city-wide instructions to apprehend these individuals on sight: a BOLO or ‘be-on-the-lookout’.
A few hours later five men were stopped in their van and arrested by the police.
It emerged that the five men arrested were Israelis working for a Mossad front company called Urban Moving Systems, the owner of which departed the United States for Israel shortly after his first interview with the FBI.
One of those apprehended — Paul Kurzberg — describes the arrest in a 2004 Dispatches documentary for Channel Four, which sought to debunk some of the emerging conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11.
He describes how passing New Yorkers leaned out of their car windows to spit at him and the other four while they were being detained by the police.
He claims these passers-by thought that they were Arabs and were looking for someone to blame.
Another of the men arrested, Yaron Schmuel, suggests in the same documentary that he was mistaken for an Arab, and draws attention to his blonde hair and blue eyes to illustrate he could not possibly have been the culprit.
But why would passing New Yorkers mistake a group of blonde-haired, blue-eyed men for Arabs, unless of course they were dressed as Arabs?
It seems apparent to me that the five Israelis who were arrested on 9/11 were mistaken for Arabs because they were dressed as Arabs, just as they were when Maria spotted them dancing and celebrating in a parking lot from her New Jersey apartment.
It seems obvious that their job was to implicate Muslims in the attacks on New York City’s World Trade Centre.
In the wake of 9/11, public discourse on the Internet became increasingly Islamaphobic and racist. I feared that Bin Laden — the culprit, I assumed at the time — had put back race relations in the UK by as much as two decades in the two short hours it took to attack America.
Rumours still abound today, encouraged in recent years by Donald Trump, that Muslims were seen in New York celebrating the 9/11 attacks in public. Yet no evidence of this exists. No real Muslims or Arabs were caught for celebrating the attacks in public.
The only Arabs or Muslims caught celebrating the attacks of 9/11 in public turned out to be Israelis.
If it had been necessary for Mossad agents to dress as Arabs or Muslims to implicate Arabs or Muslims in the attacks of 9/11 then it seems perfectly reasonable to consider that no Arabs or Muslims were really involved at all.
The resultant wars in Afghanistan and Iraq cost the lives of untold numbers of citizens of those countries.
As the years have gone on, it has become utterly apparent that the public have been told many lies about 9/11. It’s well past time to set the record straight.