- Did you know that according to the "official, government" account of the events of September 11, 2001 all three of the foregoing steel-framed buildings had metal pilings which were weakened due to extreme heat and these weakened pilings led to the eventual 'pancake' collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings?
- Did you know that both the north and south towers of the World Trade Center were constructed using a set of 47 massive steel columns running around the inner core of these buildings and, in addition, there were 236 steel columns running along the periphery of each of these buildings?
- Did you know that Building 7, a 47 storey-building and part of the World Trade tower complex, was constructed with 24 massive steel columns running around the core of the building, together with 57 perimeter steel columns?
- Did you know that Building 7, which is some 350 yards from the twin towers, was not struck by an airplane, but it collapsed?
- Did you know that the "official" government story is that the diesel fuel stored in Building 7 somehow caught fire and engulfed the building in a raging inferno?
- Did you know that according to photographic evidence, the fires which were burning at Building 7 were not substantial and were limited to scattered areas on only a few floors?
- Did you know that in the report prepared by FEMA concerning, among other things, the collapse of Building 7, very little credibility was given to the idea that the diesel fuel being stored in Building 7 caught fire and caused the building to collapse, and part of the reason for the low credibility of that hypothesis is no one has advanced a plausible explanation about how the diesel fuel stored in the building caught fire?
- Did you know that the 9-11 Commission did not explore the circumstances surrounding the collapse of Building 7?
- Did you know that very few of the peripheral steel columns of either of the twin tower buildings were lost due to the impact of the planes and that the building was specifically designed to retain their structural integrity by means of the remaining, intact peripheral and core columns in the event of damage due to commercial airline crashes, hurricanes, and other calamities?
- Did you know that steel starts to melt around 2800 degrees Fahrenheit, but hydrocarbon fires arising from, say, burning jet fuel would not reach more than 1700 degrees Fahrenheit ... or 1100 degrees Fahrenheit less than what would have been necessary to melt any one section of the 47/24 core columns or the 236/57 perimeter columns, let alone all 47/24 of the core columns or all 236/57 of the perimeter columns of the three World Trade Center buildings?
- Did you know that in order for steel to melt, the steel would have to be exposed to a sustained source of, at least, 2800 degrees Fahrenheit ... brief or very limited exposure to such high temperatures is not enough?
- Did you know that some experts who support the government's "official story" concerning the events of 9-11 say that if steel is heated to a temperature of 1300 degrees Fahrenheit, then, the steel will lose 80 percent of its strength? But, did you know that these same experts tend to leave out the fact that one would have to subject such steel to a very, very high source of heat for a considerable period of time in order to heat even one portion of a massive column of steel to 1300 degrees Fahrenheit?
- Did you know if one were to heat one section of a steel column that heat transfer would tend to radiate away some of the heat from the section being heated, thereby, making it harder to attain and sustain 1300 degrees Fahrenheit at any given point?
- Did you know that in 2004 a fire raged for 17 hours in a 54-story steel-frame building in Caracas, Venezuela and that the intensity of the fire was such that it completely gutted the top 23 stories of the building, and, yet, the building did not collapse?
- Did you know that in 1991 a fire burned in a steel-structure building (One Meridian Plaza) in Philadelphia for 18 hours with such intensity that 8 out of 38 stories were gutted and even though many of the building's beams and girders sagged and twisted due to being exposed to the intense heat for such a long period of time, yet, the building did not collapse?
- Did you know that less than fifteen minutes after the second of the twin towers was hit, photographs of the towers, as well as the testimony of both firefighters and people temporarily trapped in those buildings, indicate that the fires in the buildings were only scattered and slight, as well as not being even sufficiently hot, in most places, to either melt or break the exterior glass of the buildings?
- Did you know that although the south tower of the WTC was hit second, suffered less structural damage than the north tower, and exhibited fewer fires than the north tower, nonetheless, the south tower collapsed first, some 56 minutes after being struck by the airplane?
- Did you know that the north tower collapsed 1 hour and 42 minutes after being struck ?
- Did you know that tests were carried out in Great Britain during the 1990s in order to investigate the extent of damage which might occur if steel beam structures were enveloped in high-intensity heat (1500 - 1700 degrees Fahrenheit) for many hours (4), and no collapse of the steel beams was observed in any of these experiments?
- Did you know that video and photographic evidence indicates that when the south tower started to collapse, the collapse began at a point much lower than the point where the airplane struck the building and much lower than where fires were burning?
- Did you know that there was a rumor (started by whom?) circulating in conjunction with the events of 9-11 at the World Trade Center that the fuel from the commercial jets which struck the buildings leaked into the pit formed by the core of the building and started intense fires throughout the twin towers, and, yet, there is not any evidence supporting this rumor or any evidence to indicate how the fuel was ignited on the lower levels or how the fire escaped from the core into the interior of the buildings or what the fire fed on until it could find its way into the offices on the lower levels?
- Did you know that even if it were the case that some steel pilings -- whether peripheral or core -- were heated sufficiently so that they lost a substantial portion of their strength and, as a result, buckled, thereby, starting a pancake-domino effect which brought the buildings down, nonetheless, the pancaking would not have been symmetrical (which would require that all 47 core and all 236 peripheral steel columns weakened and buckled at precisely the same time and in precisely the same way) but would have been highly asymmetrical and that this is direct contradiction of the video evidence with respect to the collapse of the two twin towers?
- Did you know that there is absolutely no evidence that any of the 47/24 massive core columns in the three WTC buildings that collapsed were subjected to the sort of intense heat for extended periods of time which would have been necessary to weaken those columns?
- Did you know that of the 16 perimeter beams from the World Trade Center that were examined, only three showed evidence of having been subjected to temperatures higher than 482 degrees Fahrenheit ( far below the 1300 degrees Farenheit needed to structurally weaken steel provided that the steel is heated for a a sufficiently long enough period at such an elevated temperature) and, in addition, there is absolutely zero evidence that any of the core steel columns were subjected to temperatures even as high as 482 degrees of Fahrenheit?
- Did you know that criminal evidence was removed from the World Trade Center complex (and ramming two commercial jets into buildings resulting in substantial lost of life is a criminal offense many times over) when the metal wreckage from the buildings (more than 100 tons of it) was carted away and sold to companies overseas before the evidence could be rigorously analyzed to be able to reconstruct exactly what did cause the WTC buildings to collapse?
- Did you know that all three of the World Trade Center buildings which collapsed did so at very close to free-fall rates of speed (i.e., free fall would occur if one were to drop an apple off the top of any of these buildings and there was nothing, but air, resisting the fall of this body)?
- Did you know that if the pancake theory of collapse for the three buildings were correct, then, the steel frame and concrete materials below each collapsing floor should have provided resistance to the collapse and, thereby, produced a rate of collapse much slower than what was actually observed and recorded by video with respect to each of the WTC buildings?
- Did you know that when tall, many-storied buildings fall at, or very near, to a free-fall rate that this is evidence for concluding that the building collpsed due to "implosion", or controlled demolition, rather than as a result of a random, pancaking effect due to fire-weakened, buckling beams and girders?
- Did you know that there are only a few companies in the world with the experience and expertise necessary to collapse tall skyscapers in a controlled way that directs the building to collapse straight down into its own "footprint" -- that is the area circumscribed by the buildings foundation?
- Did you know that part of the art and science of implosions or controlled explosions in relation to collapsing skyscrapers is to set the explosive charges so that they go off in a precise sequence that removes the concrete, steel girders and beams from the floor below the one which is collapsing in order that the collapsing floor will meet with neither resistance (and, thus, the free-fall-like signature of imploding skyscrapers) nor anything which would interfere with the symmetrical collapse of each floor (and, thus, the symmetrical collapse into the building's footprint)?
- Did you know that the report issued by the NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology) put forth a theory -- entirely unsupported by any forensic evidence -- that the destruction of the twin towers came about as collapsing floors tugged on the perimeter columns of each of these buildings, resulting in a structural instability in these peripheral beams that increased the overall gravity load on the core columns, thereby, leading to a 'global' collapse of the buildings?
- Did you know that besides lacking any actual evidence to substantiate the NIST theory for building collapse, the NIST theory cannot explain either the quality of near free-speeds of the collapse of the three WTC buildings nor can that theory explain the symmetrical footprint property of all three collapsing WTC buildings -- in fact, the NIST theory would only be consistent with a non-free-fall-like collapse which was very asymmetrical ... neither of which was observed in the collapsing WTC buildings?
- Furthermore, did you know that if the government's "officially-adopted pancake theory" were true, then, there very likely would have been massive, largely intact, steel columns -- both core and peripheral -- that still would be standing (albeit, possibly, bent and twisted a little) from the 110 story original structures and that these steel columns would likely extend upward many, many stories into the sky rather than having collapsed into a relatively small, compact, several story-high heap of wreckage?
- Did you know that in controlled demolitions of skyscrapers high explosives such as RDX are used in order to slice through the steel beams and girders like a hot knife through butter and, in the process, cut the beams and girders into much smaller manageable lengths of steel that will both take away resistance to the free-fall-like collapse of the building and, as well, help bring the building down in a symmetrical way within a relatively well-defined, compact footprint landing area?
- Did you know that the same high explosives which are used to slice up the core and peripheral steel columns of a skyscraper are powerful enough to reduce all non-metallic components of the building (such as poured concrete) into powder?
- Did you know that a certain amount of evidence concerning the presence of evaporation as well as sulfidation of steel was found amidst the wreckage of the World Trade Center and that both of these findings are consistent with the idea that there was a detonation of high explosives in the three WTC buildings but inconsistent with a pancake theory driven entirely by the theory that allegedly weakened beams and girders created instability which led, in turn, to a global, gravitational-based collapse of the buildings?
- Did you know that the "official" pancake theory adopted by the government would not have reduced the concrete portions of the three WTC buildings to powder but, instead, would have yielded much larger chunks of concrete because the energy generated through the force of gravity of uncontrolled collapsing buildings would not have been sufficient to be able to produce pulverized powder particles?
- Did you know that for the most part, evidence indicates that the non-metallic portions of the three WTC buildings which collapsed were pulverized into relatively small particles rather than the much larger chunks of concrete one would expect to find if the "official" story concerning the collapsed buildings were true?
- Did you know that there were a large number of independent reports (many from firefighters who were familiar with such phenomena) indicating that people heard a collection of explosions, along with flashes, prior to the collapse of the twin towers -- reports which are consistent with what is known as a "demolition ring" -- that is a series of explosions running around a building during a controlled demolition or implosion?
- Did you know that many of the foregoing reports came from an oral history of 9-11 (consisting of some 503 firefighters and medical workers who responded to the World Trade Center tragedies) compiled by the New York City Firefighters (FDNY) which was released to the public on August 12, 2005 but only after a suit was brought, under the Freedom of Information Act, against Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration in 2002 by The New York Times together with a number of the families who lost loved ones on 9-11, and only after the New York Court of Appeals sided with the Times/9-11 families following a three year legal tug of war concerning the public release of the oral histories?
- Did you know that on the weekend of September 8th and 9th prior to September 11th, 2001, there was a power down in the south tower of the WTC so that there was no power from floor 50 to the top of the building (over half of the tower) which means that this portion of the building was entirely without surveilance cameras or other forms of electronic security, and for about 35-36 hours there were many 'engineers' and 'technicians' who were going in and out of the building for some sort of 'upgrading' of the tower?
- Did you know that in the weeks prior to Septemeber 11, 2001, both of the twin towers were evacuated on a number of occasions?
- Did you know that the company which is in charge of security for the World Trade Center is now called Stratesec, but from 1993 until 2000, this company was known as Securacom and Marvin Bush, brother of President Bush, was on the Board of Directors for this company, while from 1999 until 2002, Wirt Walker III, a cousin of President Bush, was the CEO of Statesec, and, yet, none of this appears in the 9--11 Commission's report?
- Did you know that the "official story" of the government concerning the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings on September 11, 2001 was that an entirely random pancake collapse of three skyscrapers took place, producing near-free-fall rates of collapse (meaning a complete lack of resistance from the floors below), as well as a symmetrical footprint (meaning that there was absolutely nothing skewing the fall and preventing the collapse from proceeding straight down -- including the seventy to eighty floors below where the planes crashed that had none of its beams and girders melted or weakened by the heat from alleged, intense fires in these buildings)?
- Did you know that the "official story" of the government requires one to believe that on one and the same day, within a matter of hours of one another, and within a few hundred yards of one another, three buildings at the World Trade Center collpased, independently of one another, due to a "perfect" storm of chance factors and collapsed in such a way that, in the entire history of humankind, such results have, heretofore, only been able to be generated by very, very highly skilled and expert technicians in a meticulously planned and precisely controlled fashion?
- Did you know there is both video and photographic evidence showing that heavy steel beams were ejected from the collapsing twin towers in a variety of directions -- ranging up to nearly two hundred yards -- and these directions of ejection included both horizonal and upward lines of trajectory ... something that a building which was collapsing in accordance with the pancake theory could not replicate since the only force at work in the pancake theory is gravitation which pulls things downward, and does not push material horizontally outward or in an upward direction for hundreds of feet?
- Did you know that the law of conservation for momentum states that a rotating body will continue to rotate at the same speed and with the same direction of rotation unless acted upon by an external torque force, and, yet, although, initially, when the south tower began to collapse, the floors above where the airplane impacted the south tower of the WTC began to move and rotate in a direction toward the hole created by the airplane, nonetheless, subsequently, video evidence shows that, first, the speed and rotation of this portion of the building collapse began to decelerate as well as reverse its direction of rotation (both of which violate the law of conservation of momentum unless one posits a force outside of gravity that caused this), and, then, all of the floors above the point of impact turned into pulverized powder in mid-air, allowing the building to collapse relatively symmetrically into its foundational footprint.
- Did you know that both photographic and eyewitness testimony indicate that whatever struck the Pentagon on 9-11, it was not a Boeing 757 (American Airlines Flight 77, which supposedly struck the Pentagon on 9-11, is a Boeing 757) because the size of the hole created in the Pentagon is not big enough to be consistent with being hit by a 757 jet liner and the nature of the debris created by the impact is not consistent with the wreckage of a Boeing 757?
- Did you know that within minutes of the Pentagon being hit, video tapes from surveilance cameras positioned on various buildings across the street from the west side of the Pentagon were confiscated by the FBI and with the exception of about 5-6 seconds of totally inconclusive, ambiguous footage, has never been released to the public?
- Did you know that the 9-11 Commission did not use its powers of subpoenea to gain access to this video material?
- Did you know that unlike the airplane crashes at the World Trade Center towers, the impact at the Pentagon did not produce any significant or noticeable seismic signature, and, yet, supposedly, large commercial airliners were involved in each incident?
- Did you know that Hani Hanjour, the al-Qaida member who allegedly piloted the Boeing 757 that supposedly struck the Pentagon, was, according to all evidential accounts a terrible pilot who had difficulty operating even small planes, and, yet, this fledgling pilot was reported to have performed a 270-degree downward spiral while lining up to strike the Pentagon -- something which even seasoned, expert pilots are not likely to be able to accomplish?
- Did you know that Flight 77, the Boeing 757 that supposedly hit the Pentagon on 9-11, was, apparently, able to go undetected through U.S airspace for roughly forty minutes despite the fact that the US. military is reported to have the most sophisticated and advanced radar systems in the world and that during this forty minute undetected period the jet airliner turned around somewhere in the Midwest, headed back to Washington, D.C., and performed its final aerial acrobatics before slamming into the Pentagon?
- Did you know that Phillip Zelikow was appointed as the executive director of the 9-11 Commission -- a position which was authorized to direct the research of 75 Commission staff members and, as such, was responsible for determining what issues would, and would not, be pursued by that staff -- or how rigorously -- and what 'facts' and witnesses would, and would not, be examined by the commissioners who conducted public hearings?
- Did you know that Phillip Zelikow had previously worked with Condoleezza Rice in the National Security Council during the presidency of George H. W. Bush and later co-authored a book with her during the 90's, and, then, helped Rice organize the National Security Council during the presidency of George W. Bush, and, then, was appointed to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board where he was the primary author of NSS 2002 (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America] which laid out, in detail, the position first enunciated by President Bush at West Point in June of 2002 concerning the alleged right of the United States to attack anyone who was perceived to represent a potential threat to U.S. interests even if such countries, states, or groups did not currently constitute a 'clear and present danger' to the integrity of the continental United States and had not attacked America or Americans and, consequently, Zelikow had a vested interest in ensuring that the 9-11 Commission reached conclusions which were consonant with NSS 2002 ... which is exactly what happened?
- Did you know that prior to his position as executive director of the 9-11 Commission, Phillip Zelikow had a number of conversations with Richard Clarke, the former National Security Counterterrorism director in 2000 and 2001, about al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, but Zelikow was never called as a witness by the 9-11 Commission concerning the nature of those discussions?
- Did you know that at least half of the ten commissioners, both Democrats and Republicans, who conducted the televised public inquiries had the sort of associations, ties, histories, and conflicts of interest (either with oil companies, Saudi Arabia, George Tenet, the intelligence community, the Iran-Contra cover-up scandal, the Bush administration, or who were active proponents for attacking Iraq long before 2003) which should have precluded them from serving as members of such an inquiry ... especially, if one wanted to avoid even the appearance of impropriety and, thereby, eliminate the possibility of questions being raised in relation to the integrity of the conclusions and findings of such a commission?
- Did you know that on many occasions, official commissions are often not meant to arrive at the truth but are, instead, a political tool used to give the impression of seriousness without much underlying substance?
- Did you know that such commissions are often exercises in misdirection away from root problems and causes so that vested interests will remain protected despite an illusory veneer of critical investigation and thoroughness?
- Did you know that every theory, without exception, concerning the causes of the events of 9-11 is a conspiracy theory, including the "official" theory of the U.S. government which maintains that 19-plus individuals conspired together as members of al-Qaeda to attack the United States on Septemeber 11, 2001, and, therefore, the task of any such conspiracy theory is to be able to plausibly account for all or the vast majority of the available data and evidence?
- Did you know that the official theory of the United States government concerning the events of 9-11 cannot plausibly and reasonably account for all of the foregoing facts and evidence in a way that is consistent with their theory?
- Did you know that in the coming days more "Did you knows" will be published which also indicate that the official theory of the United States government concerning the events of 9-11 does not reasonably, plausibly, or credibly account for the available facts and evidence with respect to the pre-September environment leading up to the events of 9-11, as well as in relation to the failure of the military to follow standard operating procedures in conjunction with dealing with hijackings on 9-11?
- Did you know that 40 % of those who view Fox television on a regular basis still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9-11 and/or conspired with al-Qaeda to set the events of 9-11 in motion despite the fact that after much disinformation, misinformation, hemming, hawing, and evasion from members of the Bush administration, even President Bush finally admitted in a September-2006 interview with Brian Williams of NBC that the President knows that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11?
There were a lot of innocent people who were murdered on 9-11 by someone ... by a group of conspirators. Everyone agrees that conspirators were responsible for these murders, but there is a difference of opinion concerning the precise identity of such conspirators.
The ones who died left behind families, friends, and colleagues. I believe all Americans have a duty of care toward those who died on September 11, 2001, as well as their families, to bring to justice those who are responsible for the events of 9-11.
I do not think that it is an overstatement to say that the viability of democracy in America may very well be at stake if steps are not taken to redress the wrongs which have been done to the American people and to people in other lands due to the events of 9-11. This is all far from over, unless, of course, one just wishes to go back to sleep or be annoyed that someone has disturbed his or her somnambulating ways.
If you wish to read further on these matters, then, there are a number of books and web sites which not only corroborate the material covered in the foregoing "Did you know" queries, but, as well, these books and websires critically analyze many more issues surrounding the events of 9-11, Afghanistan, Iraq, and beyond. Even if one wishes to adopt a skeptical stance concerning the implications of the foregoing queries (or the following books/web sites), there are a vast array of crucial questions which are left that still require answers -- too many questions of substantial, abiding importance to just let slip away.
Crossing the Rubicon - Michael C. Ruppert, New Society Publishers
The New Pearl Harbor - David Ray Griffin, Olive Branch Press
Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11 David Ray Griffin, John Knox Press
The War On Freedom - Nafeez Mosaddaeq Ahmed, Tree of Life Publications
The War on Truth - Nafeez Mosaddaeq Ahmed, Olive Branch Press
Behind the War On Terror - Nafeez Mosaddaeq Ahmed, New Society Publishers
In addition to the foregoing, you may want to visit the following web sites:
9-11 Video - Raises a lot of important questions
From The Wilderness
911 Truth
Global Outlook - The Magazine of 9-11 Truth Movement
9-11 Research
9-11 Citizen's Watch
No comments:
Post a Comment