Even 13 years after 911, most Americans refuse to accept the official version of the events. Architects, structural engineers and academics continue to raise pertinent questions that the Washington warlords refuse to answer.
The attacks of 9/11 have been compared to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941 that led the US into war. The attack on Pearl Harbour was real enough; the Japanese have not denied it — but who was responsible for 9/11? The official version is that 19 people, 15 of them Saudis, one Egyptian, two Emiratis and one Lebanese hijacked four civilian airliners and flew them into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon resulting in the deaths of 2,823 people. The “hijackers” used box cutters to overpower the crews and then took control of the planes. They “changed” the computerized programs and manually flew the planes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
For the record, all “hijackers” were allegedly getting training on single engine planes but could not handle even these properly, according to the flying school instructor. The “hijackers,” reported to be “pious Muslims,” were found to be drinking and consorting with lap dancers in a Florida bar the night before their alleged suicide mission! Even if one were to accept all these assertions without question, there are other questions that remain unanswered.
How could novices take control of jumbo jets and fly them without help into towers hundreds of miles away? Why were US air force planes not scrambled as is standard procedure? Only a year ago, when the plane of an American golfer lost contact with a control tower, an air force plane was scrambled into the air and within 20 minutes it had reached the strayed plane. In the 9/11 hijackings, four huge planes changed course from west to east and flew for hours without evoking any response from the air force. Why? There are other glaring questions. Before getting into the technical aspects, let us consider this: while hundreds of people were brought on television to discuss the issue, no pilot of any airline was invited to explain whether it is possible to disable a plane’s computerized program and take over control by flying it manually.
Two buildings that were hit by planes collapsed on their own footprint, according to American architect Richard Gage who has mobilized 1,200 architects and structural engineers throughout the US to demand answers to these questions. He has questioned how the buildings could collapse on their own footprint without the use of explosives? Indeed, an even more basic question is: why did two buildings collapse in this manner when never in the history of steel-frame buildings has this occurred before, even when hit by a plane as happened in October 1992. An Israeli jumbo jet slammed into an apartment building outside Amsterdam airport; the plane was carrying chemicals from the US for Israel’s chemical weapons factories. The building was burning for seven days but did not collapse.
Even more critical is the question of the collapse of World Trade Center 7. No plane hit it, yet by 5 pm that day, it too collapsed on its own footprint. How and why did that happen? Everyone familiar with building demolitions says explosives were used to bring down the building. The explosives must have been planted weeks in advance. The owner of the World Trade Center, Larry Silverstein, who purchased the buildings by paying an installment of $250 million, had the buildings insured for $3.5 billion. Further, he inserted a terrorism related clause into the insurance policy. When the buildings collapsed, he called in the claim. The insurance company paid him $3.5 billion. He insisted on double that amount because he said there were two planes that hit the buildings. The presiding judge just happened to be Silverstein’s friend. He awarded him $7 billion in damages. What are friends for? But how did Silverstein know that there would be terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center? For an investment of mere $250 million, he collected $7 billion!
One final point is in order. Neils Harrit, Professor of Chemistry at a University in Denmark and his colleagues published a peer reviewed paper in the Chemistry Journal in April 2009. In that article, they said they had found traces of unexploded nano-thermite in the buildings’ dust. Nano-thermite is used in explosives and only military personnel have access to it. Their article immediately evoked charges of “conspiracy theory.” This has been the standard excuse advanced by those that insist on the official version. Doubts about the official version, however, persist and are growing. Even American senators have called for the release of information blacked out in 28 pages of the official report. Who is being protected?
Unless the American regime comes clean with explaining what really happened, the list of questions will grow and people will increasingly say there has been a massive cover-up. Who can blame them when the explanations offered are so pathetic?