More Americans Are “Rethinking” 9/11?

By: Ben Swann
690

Did you know that a 3rd building fell on 9-11?  That bill board is today over Times Square.  It was placed there through donations to a campaign called Rethink 9/11.

In fact, that group has placed posters and signs across the world, from Australia, to Canada, from San Francisco to right here in New York City.


So what is Rethink 9/11?  Wouldn’t only a fringe group of people would still question 9/11?  Perhaps not, because today we will tell you about new polling that shows a majority of those polled either question the official 9/11 story or don’t believe it at all.  Is that possible?

The first step toward truth, is to be informed.

Here in New York City, today at the site of the 9/11 Memorial, promises to never forget what happened the morning of September 11th, 2001.  But never forgetting doesn’t mean that you don’t rethink what you have been told.

Rethink 911 is the first ever global 9/11 anniversary campaign. Sponsored by a coalition of more than 40 organizations, ReThink911 is placing ads in 11 major cities around the world this September 2013.

But what is there to rethink? According to a group called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, you need to start by rethinking the third building that fell that day.

Building 7,  behind me.   That rectangular building is the new building 7.  It stands a little smaller but in the same place where the original World Trade Center 7 once stood.

To be fair, the collapse of building 7 has long been the claims of conspiracy theorists. In 2008, the National Institute of Standards and Technology or (NIST) released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade Center 7.  The lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists,  “WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires.”

But that claim has been taken on by that rapidly growing group known as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Rethink 911

Today, more than 2,000 progressional architects and engineers from around the world have joined together to say that the NIST claim that Building 7 came down because of office fires is not only untrue, it is not possible.  That no skyscraper in history has ever come down that way.

That the way Building 7 fell was without the building tipping or rocking and that in order to fall like this, a building could only come down IF all the internal columns supporting building were to give way at the same time.

Enginneering is a technical field but most of us would know this as a controlled demolition.

To better understand the claims of AE for 9/11 Truth, I talked with Tony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer with 27 years of experience in the aerospace and communications industries and one of the 2,000 engineers calling for an a new, independent investigation of the collapse of Building 7 and the World Trade Center towers.

Swann:  “So you look at this image of the building falling, again NIST says that its office fires that have caused this.  You say.. ‘give me another example?’”

Szamboti:  “There is no other example.”

Swann:  “No other example in the world?”

Szamboti: “They have no other example,”
Swann:  “So this has never happened?  This would be the first building in the world to come down this way?”

Szamboti: “And they say that.  They say that thermal expansion caused it.  What I say caused it and you can cut this out or leave it in, but I think they took out the core columns for 8 full stories, and that pulled in the exterior.  When you have controlled demotion, and when take the core out, you pull in exterior and it comes down.  When you take out 8 stories it all comes in.”

Swann:  “What happens if you leave half of them?  If it is not a controlled demolition and you have a failure of some columns?”

Szamboti: “Then you have a partial collapse.”

And there is another issue of how NIST says Building 7 came down.  The say it was normal office fires.  The technical explanation is that floor beams expanded because of heat and ultimately pushed a single column, column 79 off of its seating.  That, NIST says, caused the entire collapse of the building.  But what NIST told the public in 2008 was the reason these columns were pushed loose is because they were unrestrained.

What was discovered last year in 2012 after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was granted, that claim was not true, that the columns were not unrestrained.  In fact there were 3,896 shear studs holding those columns in place.

Szamboti: “One is, the beams could not expand far enough and if they could expand enough, those stiffeners would stop that girder from falling off.  They were bonded.”

Swann: “But for the person that say, so you have so disagreements on some technical things.”

Szamboti: “No, no, its much more than that, it can’t happen to start.  It would be sorta like me saying, I can put something thats a half inch wide and if i push it a half inch it will fall off this rail and thats not true.  Thats what they’re saying, its that simple.”

There is something else Tony is passionate about.  The claim by NIST in 2008 was that not only that building 7 came down as as the result of office fires but that the north tower fell down because of something called “deceleration”.  Simply put, when you use a hammer to strike a nail, the force used does two things, it drives the nail downward but a certain moment pushes the hammer upward.

When you watch the video of the north tower coming down, Tony says there is no moment of impact where the burning top of the tower creates impact against the rest of building.  Instead it all just free falls.  Without that impact, the top of the tower could not have cause the rest of the building to collapse.

Szamboti: “What a legitimate investigation would have done would be to have interrogated anyone who had access to those interiors.  I’m not talking about office people, (I’m talking about) security people, contractors, those types of people.  That has never been done, that has never been done. I think our government is responsible to do that but we would want it to be above board.  I don’t think the investigations we have had so far have been above board.”

So that is the professional challenge to the official story.   Only a controlled demolition could have brought the building down and again, during the government investigation the evidence of explosive materials or a demolition was ruled out, not because the evidence didn’t exist, but because the inspectors didn’t bother to look for it.

How do families of 9/11 victims feel about this?  Are they insulted by this campaign?  Some may be but others are the ones supporting it.

Bob McIlvaine lost his son on 9/11.

McIlvaine:  “Bobbie had just started Merrill Lynch two or three weeks before 9/11.  Bobbie was VP of media relations, he was going to be writer and he was writing for a PR firm and their only client was Merrill Lynch and they loved his writing so much that they hired him.  That day Merrill Lynch was holding a training on the 106 floor of the north tower.  No one was able to get a hold of Bobbie.  The tower was hit.  We weren’t that worried because we knew he worked at Merrill Lynch.  150 people called him that morning.  No one ever got a response.”

Swann:  “But if he worked at Merrill Lynch why was he in the north tower?”

McIlvaine:   “Well, this is what we are guessing because Merrill Lynch was sponsoring a seminar on the 106 floor that day.”

For Bob the most shocking thing about his son’s death, unlike most 9/11 families, Bob was able to recover parts of his son for burial and he actually received a cause of death from the coroner.

McIlvaine:  “I got up to the morgue, talked to the doctor who examined him. He gave me the pictures, he asked me if I wanted to see the actual pictures and i didn’t want to see it.  I felt bad about it.   But no matter how you look at it, he got hit by a sudden force.  He was impacted by something, yeah, a force, the top of his head was taken out.  His right arm was blown off and his body had lacerations.  If he had been on the 106 floor, we would have heard from him because a lot of people would have been calling out on the 106 floor.

But part of that autopsy reveled that Bobbie was not killed by being burned.  In fact, the burns he received came after he had died.

McIlvaine:  “So post-mortum means that he had burns after he died.  I can say with confidence that Bobbie died, and I can say with confidence before the planes hit.   So the point is, the planes had nothing to do with his death and I could prove that in a court of law pretty easily.  And therefore if the planes had nothing to with his death, who killed him?”

The claims being made by Bob and Tony are compelling but the question we must ask, where is the American public on this issue?  A newly commissioned poll on this very subject finds that 12 years after the 9/11 attacks, there is growing skepticism in the public.

According to that poll, 38% of Americans have doubts about the official account of 9/11 and 10% do not believe it at all.  That is compared to only a minority of those polled, 40% who are completely satisfied.

But there is more. Because when you start asking questions about Building 7, the public is even more skeptical.  46% suspect or are sure it was controlled demolition, compared to 28% who say it was fires (the official story), and 27% who don’t know.  And of those polled, the largest group, 41% support a new investigation of Building 7′s collapse, compared to 22% who opposed.

What you need to know, is that the idea that we rethink 9/11 some would call unpatriotic, others would call conspiratorial, but increasingly, those folks are now in the minority.

How far we come in 12 years.

But regardless of how you feel about this campaign, rethinking 9/11 is about more than just what happened in 2001.  Over the last 12 years, we have watched just about every single constitutional liberty afforded to Americans taken away as a result of our “war on terror”.  We have watched our government take away our right to speech, due process, freedom from search and seizure, the right to privacy of your person or papers, all taken away in the name of security.  We can argue about whether that quest for security has made us more secure but what is beyond argument is that we are certainly less free. Despite all the rights that have been taken away, at least one right that still remains… the right to question who took those rights, how and why.

And that is Reality Check.

 

Sources:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110442.PDF

http://rethink911.org/docs/ReThink911_YouGov_Poll_Results_Summary.pdf

Support the Truth In Media Project


"Like" Ben Swann on Facebook
  • Myth, Lies and OIL Wars

    It is an inside job. plain and simple.
    Neocon can bomb brown people and get their oil.

    • GaryTruth

      If by NeoCon you mean every.single.person connected with 9/11, then “thumbs up!

  • tk

    awesomeness!!!!!!!!

  • PecosinRat

    Wow! Thank you, Ben! Thank you!

  • rascal

    Nothing new here

  • Adam

    Ben,

    I know it seems like I’m nitpicking, and some will call me a grammar nazi… but this article is full of grammatical errors. You have got to get someone to proofread your stuff. It’s hard to be taken seriously as a journalist with writing like this.

    • GaryTruth

      Yeah, that’s what we all should be concerned about.

    • jgibsosman

      Examples?

      • TwelveOhOne

        I replied with a list of at least 26 items from the article. That was a few days ago, so I guess the editors don’t want the help as it never made it out of moderation. Oh well!

        I tried to help. Not point out failures or weaknesses, but HELP. I will think more carefully before investing an hour of my time in the future.

  • yairasparkle

    NICE!! you did a great job!!

  • Liberty Mom

    Incredible investigation. Thank you. My husband’s uncle was murdered on 911. He was in the first plane. And thank you for the script since I have a friend who cannot hear.

  • oldskoolsoldier

    Being in the scientific field, I am not interested in the conspiracy theories, I am only interested in scientific fact. The “science” of how these building came down does not mend well in the NIST report. It is an insult to the scientific method to accept the NIST report. I can appreciate what AE911 and ReThink911 stand for, but all of the conspiracy theories that surround it that cannot be proven destroys its credibility. Please people, let’s focus on the scientific method and the things that we CAN prove, and worry about whodunnit later.

    • Binkster

      Physics isn’t a conspiracy theory

      • oldskoolsoldier

        I Agree!

        • Binkster

          If you visit those sites you mention – they stick to facts. Nothing destroys their credibility.

          • Oldskoolsoldier

            I watched an interview with Richard Gage and he started talking about his conspiracy theories about the government, and that’s when I became frustrated because there is an actual credible call for a reinvestigation of the scientific evidence and AE911′s spoke person is going into his government conspiracies. There is actually a case for the validity of the scientific evidence and here’s Richard Gage putting on the tin foil hat. SO FRUSTRATING.

          • Binkster

            Source ?

          • Oldskoolsoldier

            You’re going to have to bear with me while I find it. I saw it over a year ago when I was looking into a lot of their materials.

          • Oldskoolsoldier

            Okay, I found it faster than I thought I would: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POiXd47MCHo
            it’s at approximately 37:00 mins he starts talking about the “Higher Powers” controlling the left and right and using the collapse to promote a war in Afghanistan. Those are interesting theories, but if he is a scientist, he needs to keep emotion and theories out of it because it makes him look crazy. That is the main problem I have with these organizations. If I was him (being the spokesman for this organization) I would leave my personal opinions about the mix when asked about it in interviews and say that I’m only interested in scientific proof.

          • Binkster

            During a 56 minutes interview he talks about the results of 9/11 – wars and loss of civil liberties. Who on the so-called left or right of US government has questioned the impossible government story ? Hardly ‘tin foil’ comments from Gage. Nice try.

          • Oldskoolsoldier

            That’s fine because you agree with his theories, but I don’t believe what I cannot see. Where is his proof that the “Powers” that control the left and right portions of the government caused these towers to collapse to create a war in the middle east and take away our civil liberties? See what I mean? Just crazy jabber. I appreciate that most of the time Gage talks about the science, but sometimes he starts on about his conspiracy theories…. Until a group is ready to treat the 911 “evidence” as a scientific dilemma and not a crazy conspiracy theory, that’s all it’s going to be: a crazy conspiracy theory.

          • Binkster

            (You’ll notice B Swann draws similar results of 9/11 at the end of this piece – I think the “crazy jabber” is just oldskool..)

          • oldskoolsoldier

            Which is exactly why I wrote my original post in the first place. Why is it crazy to expect evidence for someone’s claims? You’re doing a good job at shutting out the skeptics and inviting only conspiracy theorists. Good job.

          • Binkster

            Gravity and resistance aren’t conspiracy theories. It’s not called evidence. It’s called proof.

          • awake

            Your answers lie here. http://www.corbettreport.com/who-was-really-behind-the-911-attacks/

            More details can be found in Kevin Ryan’s book, “Another Nineteen”. If you don’t know who Kevin Ryan is, here’s his background:

            http://www.911truth.org/ul-executive-speaks-out-on-wtc-study/

            He wrote this letter to the NIST because his superiors at the laboratory were blocking the release of their studies that showed there was no way fire could have caused WTC7′s collapse. Frustrated with their unexplained obstruction, he took matters into his own hands and wrote the public letter (covered by the NYT) He was later fired for writing this letter.

            The video I posted and the details in his book are all facts supported by evidence. Many of them can be “confirmed” with simple Wikipedia searches as a lot of the evidence is public record.

            In my humble opinion, you can probably take that book alone and start handing out indictments tomorrow. At the very least, a lot of people have a lot of explaining to do about a TON of very suspicious coincidences.

          • ResearchGuy

            So, because Gage went off your ideal script once or twice, suddenly his website is blank? Talk about missing the forest because your nose is up against one tree.

          • jgibsosman

            Link please.
            Usually the AE911truth people don’t go into conspiracy theories about the government. If Gage did so, I’d like to hear it. You will have to give a source, before this is believable.

      • jgibsosman

        Perfect. If that isn’t a bumper sticker, it should be.

    • GaryTruth

      Yes. Everyone, please ignore that every single person in the 9/11 chain of events is connected to our special “friend” in the Middle East. Every. single. person.

      You lose all credibility when you discover these facts.

      • oldskoolsoldier

        Like I said, we can worry about who did it later, but right now let’s focus on the facts surrounding how the buildings came down, which is our most compelling evidence.

        • HE3

          I agree. Make the evidence indisputable. It alrealdy is, but make it clearer that it is, to the average person. Help them with more clarity and less persuasion. Clarity wins over–is more permanent than–persuasion.

          • awake

            The key to exposing the lies surrounding the official story of the building’s collapse are a key first piece. Once that, happens, the rest of the dominoes will fall.

            It’s important though, to not put all of your eggs in that basket alone. The criminal investigation must take place in parallel.

            A MUST watch for anyone seeking truth about the potential suspects. Their means, motives, and opportunities. Basic criminal investigation 101…

            http://www.corbettreport.com/who-was-really-behind-the-911-attacks/

    • Ron Paul

      Baloney, oldskoool. If you are an expert in Java programming, you should not pass your judgement on server performance tuning. Few US intellectauls with degree can actually calculate what lateral force is needed to provide sideway visible displacement to overcome inertia within the timeframe of the collapse.

      • oldskoolsoldier

        So tell me how the NIST report employed the scientific method? With computer models?!? Really…..

      • ResearchGuy

        Whatever sideways displacement occurred would have required energy, correct? That energy could only have come from the gravitational potential energy of the building, if you are ruling out explosives. The fires certainly wouldn’t have provided enough energy, nor would it have been directed sideways. If you divert enough of the gravitational potential energy into bending of the columns sideways so that the upper section of the building can come straight down, you wouldn’t have enough left over to accelerate it AT FREEFALL. You can’t have it both ways. Freefall means there was NO resistance — NONE. You can’t tell me that you wouldn’t have been able to measure the difference between the kind of collapse you are describing and what actually happened — not when that lower section supported the upper section against hurricane force winds with a safety factor. Do the math.

    • ResearchGuy

      Scientific evidence plus enough self-promotion to keep the organization alive without any possibility of government or institutional grants is exactly what you find at AE911Truth.org. They do not assign blame to anyone. They do state the obvious, which is that, if explosives were planted throughout the buildings, it was undeniably some kind of inside job, because it required long-term access, which in turn means help from security. The kind of security that would be present at a skyscraper that housed the largest CIA station outside Langley, the Secret Service, the IRS, the SEC, and several banks, is not the kind you can fool with a xeroxed drivers license. AE911Truth is merely asking for the kind of investigation that we should have seen from the beginning, if 9/11 had not been an inside job.

    • LAguy323

      If you visit http://www.ae911truth.org you’ll find it’s focused on science and physics.

      • oldskoolsoldier

        Yes, I am a member of AE 911 Truth. I have been there several times. But it makes me frustrated when I see an interview with Richard Gage talking about his conspiracy theories about how the war in Afghanistan were started because of the twin towers toppling and things of such nature. He’s an architect, not a criminal investigator. He’s qualified to give his expert opinion on the physics and chemistry, so when he spouts off his political opinion (with no real credible evidence to back it up), he loses credibility. I have engineer friends who feel the same way about Gage.

  • Fredrik

    GAHHHHHHHH!!!!

    THIS HAS BEEN DEBUNKED!!!!!

    You must know this so one of two things is true.

    1. You and your team are horrifically bad researchers

    2. You are a geady ashole who only wants to take the money from “less intelligent” people.

    For the very few pople here who wants to know what really happened to WTC7 read here:

    http://www.csicop.org/si/show/the_9_11_truth_movement_the_top_conspiracy_theory_a_decade_later/

    http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

    and the NIST which explains things Ben is asking.

    • Myth, Lies and OIL Wars

      Hi, Mr. government agent.

    • Mark Knox

      If “less intelligent” wasn’t surrounded by “geady ashole” and “pople,” I might have taken you somewhat seriously.

      • ashleigh

        don’t forget the spelling of “ashole”

    • GaryTruth

      But 2,000 architects and engineers say your linked “facts” are impossible. People much more intelligent about such matters than the rest of us.

      And first responders heard many explosions.

      And the NIST report says their version “has a low probability” of occurrence.

      Well, you did write GAHHHHH. Good enough for me – very convincing.

    • oldskoolsoldier

      All of your debunks can be debunked: http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/

      “Many people subconsciously make the mistake of only seeing the issues concerning 9/11 in black and white, as opposed to shades of gray. This is known as the black-or-white fallacy. In this case, the false dilemma is: 9/11 was either carried out by Al-Qaeda or it was “an inside job.”
      Just because the evidence suggests that rouge criminal elements of US and other international intelligence agencies were involved doesn’t mean bin Laden and Al-Qaeda hijackers weren’t involved.”

      • ResearchGuy

        Good point and great link! However, some things actually ARE black and white. Over 100 feet of undisputed freefall practically straight down means explosives, full stop.

        • Laughatresearchguy

          No it don’t.

    • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

      Ben had at his disposal tons of data/arguments from both sides. He could have taken all that information and had really hard-hitting interviews with people on both sides. Instead, he essentially just got a summary of the AE documentary. This wasn’t investigative journalism – it was more similar to pandering to those who already believe the conspiracy. I wanted to examine both sides harshly…

    • HE3

      Plant

    • ResearchGuy

      Those sites mostly cherry-pick and throw s***.

      “The NIST” has been thoroughly debunked.

  • Chris James

    Really enjoyed that Ben! When this gets shared and the people who bought the official story see it, I think at the very least watching this will make them curious enough to start digging around the web. Great job, THANK YOU, and I will donate again in the near future. :)

  • Sean Mac

    Great job Ben! Thank you for covering this story!

  • Woodscraps

    You don’t have to be a kook to ask questions and call for a new investigation.

    • Jack

      Only a kook would on 911, since there are hundreds of reports, papers, and studies. Wait. omg, our right to speech is gone; no one will ever see this. lol

      • MrDG
      • ResearchGuy

        More qualified experts are now on record rejecting the official account, then are on record defending it.

        If I were not to make this current comment, you would tell me that quantity is not quality … forgetting that you just implied that it was!

        I’m not committing the same fallacy. I’m telling you that 9/11 activists have BOTH quantity AND quality on their side.

        And if you’re going to call me a kook, I will call you an agent. No bonus for you today.

  • matt

    fantastic job Ben

  • Ron Paul

    Sadly neo-Nazi and populists took over the Libertarian movement. Those collectivists cherry pick information that suits their already pre-defined “thruth.” For example, they ignore that Ron Paul recognizes Israel right to exist and denies 9/11 conspiracy. See youtube – watch?v=v60TWZNVgtk

    • GaryTruth

      Building 7. This video is about Building 7 and how it came down.

      Ron Paul, Neo-Nazi, populists, Libertarian movement – all fun things to discuss.

      Could you tie your comment to Building 7?

      • Ron Paul

        Populists would never mention the real reason of WT7 downfall. Downtown of Manhattan was using electric supply from large transformers located in the basement of WT7. To clear room for the transformers, original design called for all the inner columns to sit on two huge steal trusses. When one truss support yeilded due to the fire, the collapse occured. No lateral force was enough to produce visible sideway dispalcement within several seconds because of huge inertia that works in all directions. When collapse started, nothing was holding the inner columns.

        • HE3

          Can you cite a reference for this?

          • Ron Paul

            I personally read that in the NYTimes may be 6-18 months after 9/11. I am sure USA structural engineering magazines have similar info. You can contact a library or request NYTimes archive on-line.

          • HE3

            no thanks. I think I’ll just call BS.

          • Ron Paul

            Whatever blows up your skirt. Governments like when you concentrate on 9/11 and Zionists. That way you are steadily moving away from free-market capitalism towards national socialism. Because under free-market capitalism, nobody would protect you from “greedy” bankers, “evil” Zionists, and secret societies that “control” things.

          • HE3

            Your logic doesn’t even make sense. We can put some focus on free market capitalism while we also expose the lies related to this atrocity. It’s not all or nothing affair.

          • Ron Paul

            But if Zionists, bankers and secret societies can “control” things now, they would be able to control much more under free-market capitalism. If your life is unbearable because of their “control”, then it would be more unbearable under free-market capitalism. Check your basic premises and see where you are heading.

          • HE3

            First of all, you brought up Zionists, not me. And my life is not unbearable. It’s actually pretty awesome.
            Secondly, I don’t even object to “control”. The starting, moving and stopping of something is control. That’s fine by me. IMHO, we could have more that.
            What I object to is BAD control. example: starting a bank, getting people’s money into it, and the disappearing the money. Or, starting a system of creating derivatives from packages of poorly performing mortgages. that’s just BAD control.
            That can exist in either any type of government or market.
            I prefer the free market because there’s still enough freedom for ethical people who use good control to do good things.

          • awake

            Hello SOCKPUPPET,AKA “Ron Paul”<<<——–cute handle. Your weak attempts to paint this movement and Ron Paul as anti-Semitic loons are as pathetic as the 911 Commission Report.

            You've been exposed. You can go away now

            http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/24/surveillance-us-national-security

        • GaryTruth

          Uh, yeah. Sure. Why not?

          Tell us Mr. Transformer, did the CIA have its second largest office there and was WTC 7 commonly called a “spook building?”

        • ResearchGuy

          None of that explains the freefall, or the Swiss cheese steel showing intergranular melting and even evidence of the EVAPORATION of iron. The New York Times called that steel, described in the BPAT Report Appendix C, was the biggest mystery uncovered in the investigation. This evidence is consistent with high temperature thermite-based incendiaries or explosives, and is not the least bit consistent with ordinary office fires. So why didn’t the official investigation even CONSIDER these more likely hypotheses from the beginning (not after it was pressured by activists, and not just resulting in a bogus answer in an FAQ that conflates thermite with nanothermite)?

    • HE3

      There’s a method of psyops whereby one simply throws gibberish and confusing concepts, big words, etc. at people to deliberately throw them off a trail.

      • Ron Paul

        More likely another “Operationa Gladio.” After WW2, CIA used Nazis to counter socialism. Today, they may use the same to counter free-market capitalism. But in reality, no CIA is needed: our bad government is a mere reflection of people we have become – paranoid, weak-minded, hysterical.

    • ResearchGuy

      No candidate for public office is perfect. Ron Paul did make the choice to publicly deny that 9/11 could have been an inside job, because he was within some kind of stone’s throw of real power, and he knew that that would mean the death of his career — if not of himself. But he has also said that a new investigation was warranted.

  • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

    I am incredibly disappointed by this. Investigative journalism doesn’t just mean looking at the non-mainstream view and reporting it. It means digging into BOTH sides and helping readers discern fact from fiction. Was no engineer or architect available to interview that actually believed the NIST report available to be interviewed? Plus, the interview with the father was probably the weakest part of the AE documentary, and similarly, it was the weakest part of this video. I was hoping to see an unbiased look at both sides, not just a regurgitation of the AE documentary.

    • Binkster

      The answer to your question is likely no. Learn grade school physics and you’ll understand why.

      • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

        What a patronizing comment. There are engineers on both sides of this argument, and they likely all have a better grasp on “grade school physics” than you do.

        • Binkster

          Free-fall collapse speed through undamaged steel structure is impossible. Therefore 9/11 was an inside job. If pointing that out is patronizing – so be There must be some evening classes or something you could take. Good luck !!

        • ResearchGuy

          Before NIST was forced to admit that WTC 7 had undergone freefall, lead WTC “investigator” Shyam Sunder explained that freefall could not have happened, because when there’s freefall, it means that there is a structure in the way — words to that effect.

          An instructor who taught high school and community college physics for about 20 years confronted Sunder in a technical briefing. After that they posted a graph in the report that showed that freefall did occur, but *the authors changed nothing about their conclusions*. They didn’t explain how Sunder was wrong before when he said that freefall can’t happen when there is structure in the way. They just ignored the most damning fact in the whole report and went forward with their predetermined conclusion, trusting that most people would never notice the mismatch.

          You can find a video that shows Sunder making the statement about the “structure” at David Chandler’s YouTube channel.

          NIST published a list of the changes they made between the draft report and the final report. This change from saying that WTC 7 came down and 40 percent of freefall acceleration to saying that it underwent actual freefall for more than two seconds was not on the list. That is a damning omission — “guilty demeanor” in writing. And scientific fraud, beyond a reasonable doubt.

    • HE3

      If we want more, we should find ways to contribute more. This is a good first step IMHO. I’m sure Ben will iterate more and more towards deeper digging the more of these he does and the more resources he has to help him.

    • Kevin Sereni

      I may be wrong, but I thought this piece was about questioning the official story, not proving what happened…

      • GaryTruth

        He wants Ben to solve this thing and solve this thing now!

      • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

        The piece essentially endorsed a side by only giving airtime to that side. He didn’t question them at all based upon counter beliefs from the myth-debunking community. He essentially was just helping market the Rethink 9/11 endeavor without critically analyzing any of it. People come here because they want a BALANCED view of the world. I don’t want mainstream media, and I don’t want extreme conspiracy media either. I want someone who takes an even handed look at things, investigates them, and then helps me understand. He failed completely in this.

        • oldskoolsoldier

          I agree Brent. I was hoping to see a balanced view of the issue. I have always been impressed with Ben for doing this, but in this case, he did not do that well at all.

          • Binkster

            Yeah he forgot to mention the “Urban Moving System ” boys and nano-thermite found in the WTC dust. Oh well – future shows I guess. On the whole – good job Ben !

          • ResearchGuy

            Have any of you even-handed commentators ever tried complaining to the mainstream media about the subtle or not-so-subtle way that they slant virtually everything they cover? Did you ever get a response?

            This show provided one tiny SLIVER of balance to the 12-foot-diameter sewer pipe of nonstop mainstream media BS that we’ve been subjected to since 9/11/2001. I have issues with Bob McIlvaine’s arguments myself, but many times do we get to see a family member questioning 9/11 in the mainstream media? I don’t think I’ve ever seen it in the MSM or Left gatekeeper media.

          • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

            I just don’t believe that to achieve a balance one has to provide the other side to “counter” the MSM. A good investigative journalist will be a bubble unto him/herself that provides both sides and balance within their sphere. No need to counteract what the MSM does in my opinion, and in fact, all it does is show it’s own form of bias and lessens the integrity of the journalist if he goes this route.

          • ResearchGuy

            Back in the day when newspapers were first getting started, everybody knew that they had a perspective. It was like truth in advertising. Now, the producers of what passes for news are pretending not to have an agenda — even as they have been bought up more and more by the defense industry and other huge financial actors. It makes it much more difficult to find out what’s really true.

            Please read the essay I linked to above.

        • ResearchGuy

          Read this annotated version of the only debate between two highly qualified debaters. Then come back and tell me who you believe.

          http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/Roberts_AnnotatedJones-RobertsonTranscript.pdf

          • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

            Thanks! I’ll check it out.

    • ashleigh

      In my opinion, the point of Ben putting forth this type episode just swung new opportunities wide open. He no longer works for a news station, no longer has network pull and influence, and is doing everything independently, while trying to rally support (financially and mentally) from his viewers and followers. I’m excited for what’s ahead for Ben, because this episode will get more and more people CRAVING more. Give the guy a break and encourage him to keep presenting what he finds and believes.

      • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

        If he had framed it as, “there are two conflicting sides to this interesting debate about what ultimate brought down the towers. We will be digging into both sides over the next several weeks.” I would have been completely satisfied. There is absolutely no problem questioning things, but he didn’t frame it at all like that. He gave a completely one-sided account.

        • Ray

          Your points are noted, but with all due respect the position of the “other side” is pretty well-known by the majority of people, it’s the official account that the average American believes after all. I simply see this as an attempt to bring balance and broadening to the very short list of accepted topics in the media spectrum.

          • brentwilliams2

            I completely understand that thought process, Ray. But as I’ve mentioned in another post, I don’t think this is the proper form of “bringing balance”. If the main stream media is weighing down one side of the teeter totter with their bias, then the answer is not to have someone weigh down the other side with another bias. The answer many of us are looking for is to get off the freakin’ teeter totter and provide a completely un-biased view overall.

          • TwelveOhOne

            Churches do not “need” to give air time to the opposition to “bring balance”.

            This is similar: evil exists and is spreading its words; this article is about good spreading its words. No need to add evil to this article.

            There is no such thing as an unbiased view. It sounds like you are wishing there was more evil in this article. Which is a strange thing to advocate.

          • brentwilliams2

            Have you ever had someone say something so off the wall that it is really hard to even respond? I find myself in that situation right now, amazed at the mental gymnastics you had to go through to interpret my comment as wanting “more evil” in the article. I don’t think I can debate someone who has such a bizarre perception of reality. Unfortunately, this is becoming more common with Ben’s followers. It went from healthy skepticism to people who believe the Smurfs were a secret plot by Fidel Castro. (Ok, I made that up, but some of the people on here are not too far off…)

          • TwelveOhOne

            You can make up all you want; it’s still not reality.

            The truth is, the “official” explanation doesn’t match physics, and you want more of the “official” explanation in this article? You realize what this makes you appear to be, don’t you?

            Nowhere in the article did it mention “bringing balance”. This article shows a specific viewpoint. A commenter mentioned “balance”. Not Ben.

          • brentwilliams2

            I want Ben to not regurgitate anyone’s claims, whether they are from the government or from so called conspiracy theorists. I want him to turn a critical eye on ALL pieces of information and be skeptical of all sources before one emerges as the truth. (Or find truth is a mix from both sides, or neither is found to be true). But apparently wanting to dig into both sides is considered “evil” to you.

            I’m done arguing with you – you have a distorted view of reality, so no matter what I say, if it doesn’t fit exactly with what you believe, you are going to claim it is somehow evil.

          • Ray

            Fair enough. I do agree with your last sentence. I also will say that I think both approaches can be done concurrently, for the betterment of the discussion. Yes, perhaps not as well as a completely unbiased view, I will agree with that.

  • HE3

    Nice report. I’m thankful you’re willing to risk your rep to revisit this. I know it’s not cheap to put this kind of stuff out. Hopefully people will do as much $ contributing as they do opining and commenting. This is definitely a step in the right direction–something to balance the incredible, undeniable bias of main stream media these days.

  • Rich Helm

    Apparently our gov’t is incompetent at most everything except massive conspiratorial attacks against our own country. Nonsense.

    Debunking the 9/11 Myths
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

    9/11 THE FALL OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=53c-JUrFtvE

    • oldskoolsoldier

      I’ll quote this again:

      “Many people subconsciously make the mistake of only seeing the issues concerning 9/11 in black and white, as opposed to shades of gray. This is known as the black-or-white fallacy. In this case, the false dilemma is: 9/11 was either carried out by Al-Qaeda or it was “an inside job.”
      Just because the evidence suggests that rouge criminal elements of US and other international intelligence agencies were involved doesn’t mean bin Laden and Al-Qaeda hijackers weren’t involved.”

      • Ray

        Very good point to bring up…the main thing to me is that this HAS to be investigated in a completely independent manner. No amount of huffing and puffing and “debate” can persuade me otherwise.

    • GaryTruth

      First time in the history of mankind that a steel building ever collapsed and you believe that this happened accidentally three times during the same 24 hour period?

      You would rather believe this than understand that a person named Chertoff wrote the Popular Mechanics article and is related to the same guy who has the job of investigating who was responsible for 9/11.

      Coincidences abound but please do not pay attention to any of them.

      • Rich Helm

        Actually it is the first time in the history of mankind that a jet airliner was ever flown into a steel skyscraper.
        Now we have two proofs for the history of mankind that a jet airliner flown into a steel skyscraper will take it down.
        But hey, you cling to the fantasy that the US gov’t is competent enough to pull off such a massive conspiracy. Fantasies are full of abounding coincidences that add up to nothing in reality but something to those who cling to conspiracies. I’m sure you will believe what you want to believe, regardless of reality.

        • Ray

          So…about that building 7…

      • RC

        Chertoff = dual US/Zionist citizen. Look up how many others in the administration. Should we be worried?

        • GaryTruth

          Outraged.

  • qui bono

    So the official theory is that
    9/11 was caused by 19 Islamic radicals armed with box
    cutters and very limited flying abilities who managed to overcome our 30
    billion dollar air defense system to steer aluminum planes over
    500mph near ground level directly into two steel framed structures magically pulverizing them into microscopic dust and causing a symmetrical collapse of 3 skyscrapers into their own footprints…..all while
    taking orders from a bearded guy on dialysis living in a cave some 7000 miles away in Afghanistan. What’s not to believe?

    • Kevin Merck

      I love you bro – great comment! LOL!

    • D

      Well said. And WITH SUCH DELIVERY!!!!!
      i bet ya ol bushes balls shrunk after that one.

    • Junoh315

      Well, the Iron Oxide in the building mixed with the aluminum of the planes would combine into thermite. The amount of thermite would easily ignite due to the amount of energy focused in that area. The planes hitting the building could easily take them out since these were pretty huge planes.

      The only question should be “how did those planes get taken over?”

      • Palmer Eldrich

        lol

  • Jack

    Missed a chance to expose the fraud of AE911 truth. AE911 truth spreads lies, and earns $300,000 to $400,000 a year (one main person). Over a million dollars already. AE911 truth have done nothing to help understand 911, they only push the “need a new investigation” scam. Exposing AE911 truth and this “rethinking” scam would be hard, you have to understand Tony was spreading BS, that takes a real investigator.

    Less than 0.1% of all engineers endorse AE911 nonsense . You could have exposed AE911 truth tax fraud; you picked the easy road, fantasy.
    On the plus side,,the right of speech, the one taken away by “our government”, was a silly claim; proof is this fluff story on AE911 truth’s attempt to keep the donations coming. Did you check AE911 truth financials? Is that too hard? And this is Reality Check.

    • Brandon Curtin
    • Black widow

      Less than 1 percent agree with A&E for 911 truth? 57.5 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot… Shill

      • jack

        Yes, and less than 1 percent is 0.1. Good job.
        Some people make up statistics; the less than 1 percent and less than 0.1 percent are facts, not stats. Too hard to look up how many engineers are running around?
        It is a fact, not a statistic. AE911 truth is spreading BS, and less than 0.1% engineers support them. Called math, it is covered in first grade, along with cause and effect. Those two skills are enough, to understand the engineers who support AE911 truth have failed to figure out 911. Given 12 years, and the answers, AE911 truth engineers are the only ones who failed to figure it out. Not sure why “engineers” can’t figure out 911 after 12 years. It took minutes for Flight 93 Passengers to figure out 911. Minutes. Flight 93 Passengers took action, AE911 truth took a million dollars in donations spreading nonsense.
        Now some math free 911 truth “followers” will make the living in caves Islamic guys can’t kill and fly aircraft, only McVeigh can do terror and murder. The “own footprint” stuff is pretty stupid.

        • ResearchGuy

          People who don’t express an opinion or don’t have an INFORMED opinion don’t get to be counted in your combination of appeal to authority and appealed to popular opinion. That’s pretty basic. How many of those millions of engineers who have not signed a petition calling for a new investigation have actually even read the NIST report AND any of the well written and referenced criticisms of it? If they haven’t, they don’t count. Even experts in a field who simply take a guess at a question in their field that they haven’t looked at before, are often completely wrong.

          Too bad for you it’s too hard to get to the truth by your “rule of thumb” method.

          People can help get us all get more of the truth in “minutes” by taking “action” at http://www.ae911truth.org/en/take-action.html.

          • Tony Z

            Actually it will take hours to go through all the signatures to see who is an engineer with knowledge of highrise structures. Why dont you ask Richard Gage how many structural engineers are on his list.

          • Ray

            Architects and engineers….but it doesn’t take either to see that WTC7 was demolished…that’s just the bottom line, I’m sorry. No matter how much people try to distract from this, it will always be there as the smoking gun that there is more to the story than most have been LED to assume.

          • TrutherLogic

            oh…they why do you need another investigation? You already know by looking at it. Love Truther Logic.

          • Ray

            To be blunt, and I mean no disrespect, but the answer to your question is rather obvious. What are investigations of crimes for? To determine who is responsible for the crime based on the data and evidence available.

            Putting all the hard, physical evidence together officially is necessary for legal action to be taken, but I’m saying that I know what I see…it simply doesn’t take someone else telling me how to interpret what I see to come to that conclusion. Sure it helps me to form answers, and solidify my understand of the underlying principles involved in various fields, but at the end of the day I trust in my senses, experience, and knowledge to guide me.

            Similarly, I don’t just take what the investigation (read “cover-up”) of the 9/11 Commission vomited out at face value, and I sure as heck don’t take the blatantly unscientific conclusions that NIST ended up with as constituting a real investigation.

    • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

      I don’t think income = fraud, but it does mean that it should be more heavily scrutinized. Also, it’s not easy to come out in favor of this type of thing – most people will automatically put you in the “nutbag” category no matter how compelling the argument is. So saying that 0.1% of engineers endorse this doesn’t mean much.

      I don’t see anything in your post that is proof that it is a scam. But I do think that you showed that it needs to be researched further.

      • ResearchGuy

        Gage works insanely long hours every week. He more than earns his money. You can look at the Form 990 online, although I don’t think the number of hours people work is listed there. Most of the staff members are volunteers.

        Anybody who wants to make big bucks hyping practically nonexistent threats — or making them bigger so there’ll be something to fight — works in the defense industry. They don’t become peace activists or activists of any other kind in the normal sense of the word.

        • jack

          Gage “cuts and pastes” claims from the 911 truth fantasy plot, presents a presentation like snake-oil salesman asking for donations. Spreading silly claims of thermite backed with nonsense to support his one man world wide travel show. I have seen the 990s. You are right, most the money goes to Gage to support his travel club, and most volunteer their time as he pays himself to the strategic end of the 15 percent bracket; keep the money to buy the new stuff.
          Gage presents plagiarized claims from 911 truth sources, and asks for donations. A simple way to make over 300,000 to 400,000 dollars a years with nothing to do but more silly campaigns of woo, like rethink.
          Hard work “plagiarism”.
          Proof all his work is BS; You can’t take his “overwhelming evidence”, team with a news paper, and take home the Pulitzer; you know like Watergate. Why can’t you break into reality? Why? Because you have the exact same evidence Bigfoot believer have. Fantasy.

          • Ray

            lol…who comes up with this stuff?? Seeing this nonsense really makes me wonder who’s behind this all…

    • misterkel

      Uh – tax fraud? They’re a legal non-profit. Since they don’t pay taxes, what fraud are you talking about?
      Shill.

      Also, less than .001% of engineers have officially endorsed the NIST conclusion.

      • simba

        where does that number come from?

    • Ray

      The fact they get that much money tells me how people really do feel. It tells me that’s probably a legitimate organization, especially because it’s trying to inform people of something that is EXTREMELY unpopular…to the point where it can ruin your entire future chances of a career, etc. as has happened to many on the side of those who seek the truth despite the repeated assurance that we already have it.

  • israeltucker

    Excellent Post. Follow @BenSwann_ and #911truth online for more info.

  • israeltucker

    2,000 Architects and Engineers have studied the evidence and agree. Find out more at ae911truth.org

    • Ron Paul

      If 10,000 Java programmers cast their judgement on server tuning, that may be not an authority. For informed, of cause. There are only a handful structural engineers of caliber who understand dynamics of tall buildings taking into consideration inertia, frame design and wind-resistance lateral design.

    • Tony Zamboti

      That is not true- 2,000 “professionals” signed a petition. Ask Richard Gage how many of those “professionals” are licensed structural engineers. You may not like the answer.

      • D managment

        Heres the MEAT of this whole motherfucking CONVERSATIONAL DEBATE, that all need get through there heads. WE, whom know the goverment did this to make us gungho to go slughter some brown people again, need not get HUNG UP on the intellectual, nor raw logical arguement, bottom line. we agree THEY did this to turn us into happy murderers.
        THOSE HERE WHOM DONT AGREE THAT THE GOVERMENT DID IT, get to stepping. weirdo’s, thats like being a striahgt, alpha male, and hanging out with ur buddies at a gay bar to get drunk at. LIKE WTH???
        OR perhaps ur just a bunch of closet cases whom cant admit there curios.
        IF u really think the goverment isnt capable of doing horrific things against there own species simply to maintain there own personal intersts, JFK MLK jr. nuffffffff said.

        • James Randi

          STUNDIE MATERIAL!!! Who’s taking it?

  • israeltucker

    You can not bake a frozen pizza 200 degrees. It has to be 450 for 20 minutes. You can not melt steel at 1600 degrees. 1600 is as hot as jet fuel gets and NIST even admits it burned out in minutes. That’s like baking a frozen pizza at 200 for 2 minutes when you need to leave it in there for 20 minutes at 450. NOT POSSIBLE. The Industrial Steel would have had to have all been over 3200 degrees for hours. Luckily Nano Thermite ignites at 4800 degrees so that might help cut some columns. Nano Thermite Demolition Technology was something researched and Patented by Marsh & MacKlennan with Komatsu and their offices were on the 81st floor and hit directly by the first plane. It’s CEO was conveniently on TV calling for invading Iraq to get Bin Laden That day. Later he went on to be Bush’s Governor of Iraqi Operations. He was even a guest on the Daily Show. His name is L Paul Bremer, and he is one of many war criminals who’s connections and coincidences lead anyone with common sense to suggest at least an investigation.

    • Ron Paul

      You may be a good spokesman for Iranian PressTV – they use the same “logic” and “facts” to find “truth.”

      • israeltucker

        Nice use of Casuistry. Did you attend a Jesuit University?

        • Ron Paul

          There are hundreds websites that promote your theories. Polluting Liberty movement is what makes me upset with Benn Swan who became a populist like Alex Jones & DailyPaul followers. If Zionists, bankers and secret societies can “control” things now, they would be able to control much more under free-market capitalism. If your life is unbearable because of their “control”, then it would be more unbearable under free-market capitalism. Check your basic premises and see where you are heading.

          • israeltucker

            There are hundreds websites that promote your theories. Polluting Liberty movement is what makes me upset with YOU who became Mainstream Misinfo like Anderson Cooper, Maddow, Wolf Blitzer . If Jesuit influenced, Vatican’s City of London Banks & it’s Wall St ‘Markets’ DO “control” things now, they will control even more under total domination of discussions through topics such as “free-market capitalism.” If your life is unbearable because you are a gold-bug, then it would be more unbearable under the “free-market capitalism” controlled to serve the already established elite. Check your basic premises and see where you are heading. Or follow the numbers, financial & phsics concerning the evidence and context of September 11, 2001. #911Truth

          • Ron Paul

            You are the brink of being emotional, as all anti-”zionists.”

          • israeltucker

            You are that the brink of being emotional, as all COINTEL tends to get when they realize, “Wait a minute, these Jesuit-Zionists aren’t paying enough financially or temporally.

          • SimplyTruth

            spread more bs there israeltucker. Just hide back under the shadows of us that you are tryin’ to get to do YOUR job in Syria.

    • Kevin Clark

      Jet fuel does burn at around 1600 degrees but when you add in the paper, cloth, foam, paint, the aluminum from the plane and the fact that whe design of the building produced a blast furnace for the central columns the temperature was much higher. Steel does not have to melt to fail structurally. Prolonged exposure to lower temperatures than required to melt the steel can cause it to crystalize, significantly reducing its effective strength. Additionally the heat causes the steel to become deformable and a minor twist, bend or even a flange being bent can devastate a steel column or beams ability to handle its designed strength. A bent flange means that the stress that was supposed to be equally shares by each flange is now not equally handled by all 4 because 1 flange has a significantly reduced ability to handle the stress load, leading to an increased risk of the buckling of that component. The sudden failure of any component could easily provide the impulse for the structure to begin to fail. That failure is likely to compromise the structure below it. That would cause each floor to overload the one below, the result is eavh vloor pancaking inti the one below. a nearly vertical failure.

      • Ray

        Sorry, but this post is full of lies and half-truths. Blast furnace, temperatures being “much higher” because of office materials, the pancake theory, all lies.

        The steel was seen to have melted, it was not just bent. More office materials don’t increase the temperature significantly (I note you don’t give any figures for that).

        There was no such “blast furnace” that completely removed the core columns (as would be necessary for the collapse to occur as it did).

        The pancake theory is neat and all, but it’s not what we saw happen. Even if the pancake theory could become reality in some instance, we would not see the lack of resistance that we saw on 9/11/01.

        “The sudden failure of any component could easily provide the impulse for the structure to begin to fail.”

        Sure, it could begin to fail…a piece here, a piece there, maybe. The whole building coming straight down? No way.

        • Kevin Clark

          Nope no numbers, just experience in failure analysis. And you have proven you have no understanding of force vectors, shear points or inertial moments. That is what you have to be able to understand to even begin the analyze any physical failure. I could start throwing numbers and formulae in but most people would not understand them anyway then I would be accused of just trying to confuse people with a bunch of mathematical mombo jumbo.

    • William

      Steel expands at 150°C loses half it’s strength at roughly 600°C. It doesn’t need to melt to reach a point of being unable to support weight.

      • Sevi99

        So all the steel in building 7 lost half its strength at exactly the same time so that it fell exactly like a controlled NT pull? Wow.

  • Kevin Clark

    As a former engineering tech trained and experienced in failure analysis, his claims only hold water when you assume all forces act only in one direction. When there is a failure of a column all the surrounding columns experience forces in all 3 dimensions, and the result can be quite unexpected. Take a look at the photos at the Harbor Cay Condominiums in Cocoa Beach. There was no initial columnar failure or “hammer force” however it perfectly pancaked. The failure was in the slab, resulting in horizontal forces to the columns. They were over stressed and failed resulting in a complete and progressive collapse. The only exceptions were a detached elevator shaft and the areas that were still shored (multiple temporary columns or scaffolds to provide extra support the the forms and concrete deck slabs while the concrete is curing to its full 28 day strength). The article above indicates the impact force would have to be first however several things can provide it and it may be for down the chain of events. http://failures.wikispaces.com/Harbour+Cay+Condominiums

    • Binkster

      LOL ! Explain free-fall collapse speed. Nano-Thermite. Molten Metal in the ruins. Where was NORAD ? The Urban Moving system boys. Or this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg

      • Tony Z

        Truther….. did you read…and understand the NIST report? I didn’t think so. You are spewing the debunked conspiracy theories from 2005.

        • Ray

          Denier, I read the report, as did many others. Did I understand it? No, and that’s the point. It doesn’t compute from a scientific standpoint, from the fundamental laws of the universe.

          Denier, did you read the scientific, peer-reviewed paper published by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen ?? http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

          Denier, have you seen and read of the dozens of eye-witness testimonies to explosives detonating in succession, explosions which are curiously exactly like what you’d expect in a controlled demolition and nothing else??

          Denier, why are peddling the nonsense of “conspiracy theories” when we’re dealing here with hard scientific evidence? We have little time for this sort of nonsense anymore. Some of us want the truth, period.

          The only reason I’m calling you “Denier” is because you insist on labels, I’m attempting to show how meaningless they are, I can call you something derogatory too, pretty neat huh? It doesn’t help the discussion to be so demeaning…this is a very important topic, please treat it as such.

          • TrutherCantSpell

            Ray – do you have any clue who “peer reviewed” the paper you mentioned? Start there….and see what you come up with. You have no idea what you read on the NIST report. If you did, you would not be giving your hard earned money to a charlatan like Richard Gage.

          • Ray

            You’re right, I don’t know who “peer reviewed” it, but I have no reason to doubt the statement…

            I have no idea what I read on the NIST report? OK, I’m done talking to you…

          • Ray

            Why you place so much emphasis on me needing to know who performs this process is a bit odd to me. I’m not even sure how one would go about figuring that out. Peer-review is a standard process, done for any scientific article published in a peer-reviewed journal. Regardless, the point is that the journal is well-respected and to publish something without reviewing it is potentially damaging to the journal, as well as those who publish and are published in it. Plus, I don’t have to know what their names are to see that the article is solid. Just like I don’t care who wrote the NIST report, I can see that it is NOT scientific, and furthermore appears to be a deliberate cover-up of the truth, as it ignores some blatantly obvious facts that fly directly in the face of their conclusion.

            Certainly publishing something like this, which provides solid reason for a deeper investigation, doesn’t win the journal any fans among those who have the power to assassinate your character (or heck, maybe your physical body too) such as the corporate media was so fond of doing after 9/11 to anyone who questioned the official narrative, nor is it something that would cause the average American to be persuaded to give more money to supposed “charlatans”….the average American simply doesn’t care about this type of information. They are consumed by pop culture and endless distractions. And as for Gage himself, if doing what he does seems like a good idea to you for making money, you’re nuts.

        • D Managment

          WTF is with this truther garbage coming out of ur mouth u barely conscince ninny…If its supposed to be an insult, thats makes u acting defensivley…ur ur REACTING out of defense, that would mean ur simply behaving as an erradic, and emotionally diahrretic female.

          IF we “truthers” then inevitabley, WE are on ur side…u illiterate sub monkey. This place is not for you..now go ask ur daddy if its ok, to be offended at this remark.
          n btw tony, if we “Truthers”
          Wouldnt that make u a “sheepers”
          I think the proper term ur looking for is shepard to the weak minded. At the end of all of this, we are ur friend, not ur enemy. Now grow a backbone.
          Thx, Managment

          • TrutherCantSpell

            Truther Spelling …….Did you even finish the 4th grade? What is conscince?…defensiveley? erradic? diahrretic? inevitabley? You are such a genius…you spelled your own name wrong!!LMFAO “managment”

            Try http://www.dictionary.com next time you attempt to post.

        • Binkster

          You didn’t answer any of the questions. View the video ‘Cutter Charges in the North Tower’ Gravity did that ? Seeing is believing. The truth hurts.

          • 7/11WasAnInsideJob

            I believe your questions were answered back in 2005. Try reading a legitimate book…not an alex jones website.

    • Peter

      LOL squared.

      I, with explosives, could mimic the acceleration profile of WTC 7 in ONE attempt. You with your book of matches couldn’t do it given a thousand tries.

      Troll, I suspect. Plus you got your facts wrong. Towers DID NOT PANCAKE.

      • Kevin Clark

        Sorry if using technical terms confused you. Instead of pancaked lets say vertical collapse, which is generally referred to as pancaking…after 40, 60 or 80 stories or more the rubble will no longer be in nice neat layers. Sections will have rotational force, impart it to other sections and you end up with a jumble. Had it been a planned and organized demolition there would be less of that.

        • Peter

          Don’t try to talk down to me. I am not
          “confused”, but you apparently are. NIST never explained nor described the collapse, but said it was “inevitable” once collapse initiation had begun. The closest there is to an ‘official theory’ on the destruction of the twin towers was put forth by Bazant in his paper published TWO DAYS after the destruction on 9/13/01. His paper has been refuted (google Chandler, Szamboti, et al) and well it should, he having formed a ‘theory’ without examining physical evidence, without taking accurate measurements nor conferring with witnesses.

    • HE3

      All three buildings did the exact same free fall. it doesn’t take an engineering degree to see how unlikely, if not impossible, that would be.

      • HE3

        PS, plus I don’t have to be one. There are 2,000 engineers who already agree.

      • ResearchGuy

        I agree with your conclusion but I take issue with your claims. The towers were blown to smithereens, with far more energy than was needed to bring them down, with pulverized concrete powder spewing out of the building long before any pieces even hit the ground. My guess is that the towers were blown up that way in order to achieve a “shock and awe” effect that would tend to make it harder for people to observe the event critically. I also believe WTC 7 was supposed to be brought down earlier when the dust cloud from one of the other collapses would have obscured it. At least, if I had been planning the crime, I would certainly have not wanted anyone to get clear video of 7 coming down straight down in freefall.

      • Tony Z

        You are wrong. As most truther…..you are unable to back up your ignorant comments with data. There was not any free fall with 1 or 2. 7 – was a brief period of free fall acceleration. Read the NIST reports before you comment.

        • HE3

          I don’t trust the NIST reports. Plus you can WATCH them fall. The odds of them all falling essentially same way are just inconceivable, unless of course it was planned that way. It’s never happened once like that before, let alone three times in a row.

          • crazyredneck

            Actually, they didn’t fall in the same manner. Bldg 7 was a typical demolition style fall. Towers 1 and 2 fell from the top down.

          • 7/11WasAnInsideJob

            You don’t trust the NIST reports…. but you trust an unemployed architect like Richard Gage? LMFAO…. I love Truther mentality.

          • HE3

            I “love” that seeking out answers about arguably the most significant American event in at least the last 100 years has been made into a derogatory term. Undoubtedly this was done by those who don’t really want others to ask questions and find the truth.

    • ResearchGuy

      Did that building undergo freefall acceleration?

  • Kevin Merck

    I thought this was a good start. Ben is trying to be fair and God bless him for that.

    There is more than enough evidence to prove well beyond any reasonable doubt that the three towers were brought down by controlled demolition. The government stooges are here is force promoting their lies and nonsense.

    What we all need to do is ***demand*** a legitimate investigation.

    The best part of Ben’s presentation was at the end. We all need to think long and hard about how much freedom we have lost because of this staged false flag event.

    We need to deal with the reality of 9/11 or we will cease to exist as anything you would recognize as America.

    • jack

      Where is your Pulitzer? What newspaper teamed with you to earn the biggest Pulitzer in investigative journalism since Watergate?
      You say you have what? More than enough evidence? That means for 911 truth followers more than enough, which equates to Zero in the real world. Good luck with your more than enough, another fantasy of 911 truth. Zero in 911 truth fantasy-land, is “more than enough”, usually labeled “overwhelming”, but that is only if you divide your fantasy number by zero. Which defines the entire 911 truth movement, and their evidence.

      • ResearchGuy

        Argument from authority. Simply ignoring arguments that have been presented. Ad hominem argument.

        I don’t see anything else in Jack’s comment.

      • Ray

        “their evidence” is nothing of the sort you seem to be suggesting…it’s available for all to test, completely available for public viewing, and furthermore it is scientifically sound. NIST on the other hand, presents quite the opposite.

    • GaryTruth

      Powerful comment. Obvious questions then become:

      Who first put out the fairytale about Osama CIA Laden?

      On ABC, it was John Miller. On NBC, it was Jerome Hauer. On BBC, it was Ehud Barak.

      Is there a commonality among these individuals? Is there a common background, or interest, or association? Most obviously yes.

      • israeltucker

        L Paul Bremer was on TV that day. He was making the rounds calling for Military Strikes. He later became Bush’s Governor of Iraqi Operations. He was a guest on Daily Show. He still free. He was CEO of Marsh McKlenan who had a project with Komatsu for Thermite Detonation Technology. His office was on the 81st floor. Many of his employees showed up for a meeting and died. He was making the TV rounds. Coincidence? … Google or Bing: L Paul Bremer. Youtube: 9/11 Masterminds Explosive Evidence.

        • awake

          If I’m not mistaken, Bremer’s office was a direct hit by one of the planes. He was supposed to be there that day at that meeting, but changed his mind at the last moment.

          Here he is on NBC4 the day of the attack, look how calm and nonchalant he is considering the fortune he had to luckily escape getting directly hit by that plane. Many of his co-workers and employees were just vaporized, and not one lick of emotion.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgGxmBGZwYU

  • Ryan

    Can you please make this clip viewable in Facebook. It’s the only way my lazy friends will watch it.

    • Morino Ginrikuzuma

      Go grab the youtube link.

    • Zach Mann

      You can share the youtube video.

      • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

        Ironically, he’s too lazy… :)

  • Ron Paul

    One should understand why USA and Europe lost capitalism. When meritocraty and gold money ruled the day (considering that free-market capitalism was never fully implemented), people became paranoid, envious and hysteriacal. Majority could not compete well against more able minority. They felt envy and injustice. The main complains of non-Jewish anti-capitalists were 1) bankers, 2) “secret societies”, 3) Jews. Jewish socialists substituted “all religious” for “Jews.” A tyranny of majority (democracy) was devised to control bankers, secrete societies and Jews.

    Now you all whine the same old, same old while still wanting to go back to free-market capitalism. No wonder neo-Nazi is so popular among “libertarians.” Weak minded cound not accept that the elected government is a mere reflection of its people – weak-minded, paranoid, hysterical.

    • ResearchGuy

      I don’t disagree with everything you say, but could we keep this discussion more focused on the topic of the video on this page?

      • Ron Paul

        Obsession with the 9/11 minutia only reinforces the mistaken assumption of outside “control.” Like a rich person can control others, permanently.

        Asking for another investigation from a government you should not trust is waste of time and energy.

        • Ray

          The investigation sought must be independent, it’s not asking anything from the government…if government officials choose to get on board, more power to them. The key is that people KNOW what’s going on, instead of being ignorant. The key to freedom is Truth, and we have very few people aware of it today. That needs to change. Pushing for an independent investigation to, at the very least, educate the average citizen that simply doesn’t know the facts is well-worth the effort. The constant war-mongering around the world, closing of the society here at home, all sorts of insidious agendas being pursued…this all has to stop.

          • Ron Paul

            It is impossible without government cooperation. Your glasses are too foggy.

          • Ray

            Perhaps the investigation would not be fruitful, sure. But as I said, the biggest thing that must be done is to bring about awareness to the average citizen. Things can change real fast when the majority speaks.

          • Ray

            What’s impossible without government cooperation?

  • Thomas B.

    For those who wish to learn more, James Corbett recently did a show naming names: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWLis-TVB2w

  • Demoman

    On the broadcast live they said they brought building 7 down because it was dangerous to leave it standing. They said on live tv it was a demolition. Afterward they changed the story.

    • LAguy323

      That is incorrect. They said it collapsed “because the building had been weakened” and the collapse was announced 23 minutes BEFORE it actually occurred.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc

  • VL123

    Ugh…truther BS.

    • Me

      You gullible fool, ever have a thought of your own? “truther” Like the truth is a bad thing? …. MORON!

    • Alex Masters

      Obviously, you can’t handle the truth…Automoton!

  • Tony Zamboti

    Tony Z? HE has been proven as crack pot many times. Go to the JREF forum and read….and laugh at his claims.

  • Me2

    Like Bush said,.. “fool me once, er, ah, you can’t be fooled again”

  • israeltucker

    ae911truth.org or just go on twitter and follow #911truth. I’m Hoping Ben digs into ‘Project Hammer’ and the ‘Black Eagle’ trust. That might be too deep. But maybe he can look into L Paul Bremer. That would be an interesting Reality Check for People.

    • William

      Since we’re throwing around URL…
      http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

      • Ray

        They can “debunk” all they want, building 7′s collapse is all that any rational mind needs to know that we haven’t been told the truth.

      • GaryTruth

        Yeah, because we can see Building 7 come down exactly like a controlled demolition – in fact in perfect synchronicity in a side by side comparison. And we’re going to be swayed by nonsensical arguments?

  • A. Edelstein

    My son is still here because of a text message he received hours before the buildings were hit. Some anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists believe this is proof of foreknowledge of the event. I say only G-d could have known and he warned my son to get out.

    • http://www.multifamilyinsiders.com brentwilliams2

      So G-d doesn’t care about the other 3,000 that got killed? That’s pretty harsh…

      • Daniel James Dannheim

        Brent Williams, go home and slap ur mother for raising a direspectful asshole…Understand one thing outta me little man, I dont beleive in G0D, nor religion….But i do beleive Mr. Edelstien deserves the respect of his own beleifs, and the warmth of knowing his son survived this ordeal….
        One the other hand….dont be such a tool you emotional bag of wind, this post of Mr. Edelstein was not for those who were lost, but to the ONE (HIS SON) that made it. This sir, is a good thing. In my opinion you owe this man an apology…..but seeing as ur veiw is to narrow to have realised this before posting, i doubt that will occur.
        But for what its worth Mr. Edelstein, on behalf of my entire rude generation …and on behalf of this guy here…I apologize.
        Im glad ur son made it out sir.

        • GaryTruth

          Yes, let’s throw rational thinking out the window.

          Apologize because he thinks God warned his son instead of some criminal with inside knowledge who spoke Hebrew and used Odigo messenger service!

          You Sir are a tool.

        • brentwilliams2

          Daniel, do you know what is truly disrespectful? Going to a forum where there are bound to be people that have lost loved ones at 9/11, only to tell everyone that God spared HIS son specifically. You have a severe lack of perspective and apparently lack empathy for those that lost loved ones in the tragedy.

          • suckadickbent

            Lets make this simple for ur brain to comprehend, u deuce stain. someone being happy there son survived, doesnt mean u need to make them feel bad about it by throwing “BUT WHAT BOUT THE ONES THAT DIED!!!!” ur logic is the same, just less focussed on the first amendent i suppose, but i understand….being raised without proper moral fiber can cause one to retain angst. Sissy, and here’s a real eye opener…im an ex neo nazi…im still not fond of the jewish people, and even I can still pay this man his right to and open opinion, rather it be ignorant or not…its his to have. But ive now gather its urs to shit on. Congrats. BTW i put my full name up…for a reason, look me up bent, if not best hope u never have the misfortune of meeting me in real life.

    • White Phosphorus

      When the 5 dancing Israeli’s (a Mossad surveillance team) were picked up for filming the WTC destruction because of reports by witnesses they were celebrating and acting inappropriately, they said “We are not your enemy, the Palestinians are our enemy and now they are yours too”. They were quietly released to Israel after 71 days and appeared on Israeli TV in November stating that they were simply there to record “the event”. Would that constitute foreknowledge of the event in your opinion? Or perhaps the IM warnings given to two employees in the WTC from the Israeli instant messenger service Odigo – a full two hours before “the event”. Would that qualify?

    • GaryTruth

      What a comment! Someone within Odigo text messaging service sent out a text message to all Hebrew speaking people in New York to warn them of this event and you say God warned them?

      Anti-semetic my ass. Someone with inside knowledge was protecting their own.

  • HappyGuy

    Ben, if you read these comments, know that you’re doing a great job. You’re giving journalism a good name for the first time in many years. THIS is journalism. Which side you’re on doesn’t shine through in this video but stating the facts really lays out a groundwork for understanding and seeing that things are more than they seem. My donation was money well spent.

    • William

      I can’t agree with you, this video doesn’t show both sides, and having the father is a major appeal to emotion. There are plenty of sources outside the official investigation that do not support the arguments made in the video and they were not included.

      http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

      • Ray

        The video speaks primarily of the call for a new investigation. I too would like to see a news piece on both sides and contrast and compare the evidence. But this piece wasn’t that, it was bringing awareness to the fact that there are many who want a new investigation.

      • TheGod

        Hopefully they don’t assassinate u

      • brentwilliams2

        You are exactly right, William.

  • Alex Masters

    Great show Ben!

  • Jeff Nabers

    I wonder how many of the negative comments are employees of the governments’ known online propaganda campaigns?

    • GaryTruth

      Strategic Communications Consultants in the UK is hired by governments to do things like that.

  • Jason

    Some actually think that reinvestigating Building 7 is UNpatriotic?!? That might just be one of the most truly patriotic things we can do, when it comes to 9/11! It will honor the victims, and could lead to more information regarding their real murderers.

    • ameliak

      Exactly! We question because we want our beloved America back!

      • T.H.R.E.E.

        Excellent Ben!!!

        Just posted this:

        The 9/11 Operation – Whistleblower Containment – The Numerous 9/11 Whistleblower’s@ http://bit.ly/1eeaBkm

        (((3)))

    • Jay Holm

      Not pursuing the truth is unpatriotic!

    • GaryTruth

      They’ll wheel out “you’re hurting the families” again.

  • Ron Paul

    The weak point of many consperacy theorists is that they offer explanations that involve “control” and “manipulation of others” via control of intermediaries (crisis actors, shills, agents and “scum.”) True, more or less permanent control can be achieved from 1) putting a gun to your head; 2) blackmailing you; 3) you share the same ideas as your hanglers. Money cannot produce permanent control. A rich man cannot control his children, wife, neighbors or collegues. Even ideas cannot control that much – Ron Paul cannot control other libertarians, nor his son.

    • Ray

      There is no conspiracy theory here. That may be uncovered as the data and evidence is examined. And this is the point of those who seek the truth. I’m not concerned FIRST with the conclusion, I’m concerned first with the evidence. And the evidence STRONGLY suggests different than what we’ve been told. Therefore, a new explanation is needed, whatever that explanation might be remains to be determined.

      • 111757793

        Seems you don’t understand the meaning of “conspiracy theory” unless you are suggesting that ONE, lone person, all by himself, did everything on 9/11.

  • Howard

    I wish nothing but the best for all those impacted by the events of 9/11. However, I am not sure what the guy is trying to insinuate by this speech. Two planes hit the towers, then some radicals ran in the building and set explosives all over the place to finish it off? The US government set off explosives to further their desire for less freedoms and more control by using 9/11 as an example? Crazy talk if you ask me. A terrible event in human history occurred, our freedoms have indeed been impacted, but trying to blame the government for covering up the cause is juvenile.

    • Binkster

      It takes week to rig a building. Maybe watch “Cutter Charges in the North Tower” and then get back to us.

    • Vajoyna

      You need to research more. To think that “our” government isn’t capable of murding its own citizens to further an agenda is far more juvenile than people trying to find someone to answer their questions about this event.
      research Operation Northwinds, Gulf Of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, the examples are damn near endless.

      • GaryTruth

        I would add Sandy Hook, Boston Bombing, and yes, Aurora. In each one, many, many questions are left unanswered.

    • 111757793

      No one EVER said, suggested, or implied that someone ran into the building and set of bombs. Either you haven’t got a clue and no research at all or you are a shill and trying to make yourself look foolish.

  • Reaper351

    You should have shown the video of Silverstein admitting they pulled building 7 (pull it). How did they pull a building without prior knowledge to plant the explosives to pull it?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPzAakHPpk

    • Binkster

      (You’re not supposed to remember that – get with the program. Silverstein gets what billions? – down the memory hole)

  • wozza

    About time, Some real questions that need answers. HOW CAN ASKING QUESTIONS BE WRONG??? we need to see this piece of proper journalism on the mainstream media. Remember when journalists used to ask questions? well now we have to look at the internet to get unbiased views. Thanks Ben for having the balls to do it.

  • Jason

    Thank you for this. I believed the media narrative until about 2011 when there was a 10 year anniversary and it got me doing a lot of research. I now just say, I don’t know. I’ve researched 50+ hours, but I have no idea. Thank you for bringing this to light.

    • Kevin Merck

      The only thing you need to understand is that kerosene cannot melt steel.
      When I found out there was molten steel discovered in the pile and in the dust samples, that’s all it took, and that’s all it should take anyone who claims to know what they’re talking about.

      It really is that simple. You have to reach about 2700 degrees to melt steel. The kerosene and ensuing office fires fall about 1500 degrees short of being able to do that.

      • Idunno

        IF you can trust your sources. How do we really know that there was molten steel other than a few people on youtube vids saying so?

        I will say that since the scene was totally closed off and all evidence quickly removed, then we may have no way of verifying that molten steel was ever there, and if so, that in itself is very suspicious, and likely even criminal.

  • Palmer Eldrich

    That was Bens Baptism of entry into this new world of information , I in future will support people supporting Ben and this site for its great journalism, cryptocurrency should be a part of that . I hope he gets much support in the future .

  • Coulter

    Love it Ben!!! Keep asking those questions mate. Truth in Media. God Bless You.

  • Palmer Eldrich

    The reason the information feedback polls % are so shifted when the question is changed to specifically Building 7 , is because this is a fight, number one against ignorance.
    Those that know Building 7 exists, then educate themselves , then come to a decision, Ben has helped in the important part here .

    its sad , and a small comment on where we have been as humans that still many don’t know of Building Seven’s existence.

    • GaryTruth

      The media will not show it. Remember Steven Jones, PhD on the Tucker Carlson Show? He almost begged Tucker to show the clip he provided but Tucker would not budge.

      • Palmer Eldrich

        I know Gary, i’m not blaming the people – information has been controlled at a single root for a generation. essentially the time before TV and Radio. we might realize soon we have been living in the dark ages, an information dark ages if you like.

  • birfle

    If 911 was an “inside job” so to speak, it just may already be too late for our nation.

    • Binkster

      Never – we’ll win.

      • Binkster

        Well ok – it may be too late for the USA – but don’t worry – Internationally – we can figure things out. Enjoy your burgers USA. Etc.

        • Binkster

          “Just go Shopping” ..Yikes !!

  • Allan Elliott

    Motive, means and opportunity. I read this book about 9/11 and it should be more appropriately called something along the lines of Government Corruption.

    http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Rubicon-Decline-American-Empire/dp/0865715408

  • Allan Elliott

    Don’t forget about all the insider trading.

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NC21Dj05.html

  • Allan Elliott
    • Binkster

      No one reads the long ones.

      Looks like your link could use some editing….
      Inside job ?

      • Binkster

        Allan.once again … Inside Job?

  • ameliak

    I’m not sure if this has already been mentioned in the comments, but have you all seen the clip of the BBC reporter that reported that Building #7 (aka Salomon) had fallen, 20 minutes BEFORE it had actually fallen. In fact you can see the building in live shot in the window behind her. Google it if you haven’t.

  • Kodo

    Yhank you for doing this. Much Love

    • Binkster

      We shouldn’t really be thanking the fifth estate ‘too strongly’ for perhaps showing up…
      Ben – Inside Job ? Don’t answer if you don’t want. You showed up. And you have my respect.

  • TraderJoesSecrets

    You lost me at ‘progressional’. I guess that like racists and religious fanatics, conspiracy theorists can’t spell.

    • Binkster

      How about this ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg

      So….U ‘Merican ?….

    • Binkster

      Trader Joe – You seem like a real intellectual; What’s with the “Urban Moving System” boys ? But – to be honest – they are not the only problem. Demand more….

    • Binkster

      Trader Joe – Where’d you go ?
      Inside Job ?

    • Steven

      That would’ve been a lot more clever if “progressional” weren’t listed as a word in the Oxford US English Dictionary.

      http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/progression?q=progression

      But I won’t let a little thing like “facts” stop you from picking apart semantics instead of the argument.

  • Steve

    Anyone know what a “progressional” architect and engineer is??

  • Covington13

    Obvious Mossad/CIA false flag. Enemies of Israel/Neocons must be destroyed regardless of the number of innocents killed.

    • GaryTruth

      Truthful comment. The question – did it originate in Israel or is this entirely dual U.S. citizens?

      • Binkster

        Both. Who took took care of the “Urban Moving System” boys – and gave them safe passage back to Israel ?
        What a sad , pathetic country the USA has become. Let this be a warning to the international community….

        • Binkster

          What’s on TV ?

      • FauxScienceSlayer

        The current axis of evil is Israel, Saudi Arabia and the US shadow government. It was saudis on the plane, with US help. The Army Intelligence “Able Danger” Unit had tracked four hijackers of six months, ORDERED TO STAND DOWN, July 2001. Four FBI field offices reported arab flight school anomalies, ORDERED TO STAND DOWN. The 20th hijacker was question at flight school, then held for immigration violations for three weeks prior, but ORDERED NOT TO BE INVESTIGATED.

        • GaryTruth

          Excellent comment. Israel somehow seems to stand out as the primary culprit and nothing is said about the Saudis and Bandar Bush and Tim Osman.

          • Binkster

            Urban Moving Systems Gary ? And which country has really benefited from 9/11.?
            Oh – and by the way …..Inside Job ?

        • Binkster

          Who took care of the “Urban Moving System ” boys ? Jesuits ? What do you think Faux ?
          Inside Job ?

          • FauxScienceSlayer

            Excellent….hadn’t seen that before, but totally consistent,
            for others, see wiki/
            September_11_attacks_knowledge_conspiracy_theories

            Until the public was shocked into the FACT that the government lies about everything, mention of anything was tin foil hat territory…finally we can place and connect all the dots without ridicule.

    • Binkster

      The sad thing is the MSM. Oh – “we don’t cover conspiracy theory ” was the best I got a year or two ago. from a reporter I knew . They don’t really have – as Michael Vick would say – ” a dog in the fight “- and they completely bail…. The Fifth Estate has left the building.

  • FauxScienceSlayer

    I am a Professional Engineer, trained in structural design and attended the
    A & E 911 Truth premier with Alex Jones, in Austin, May 2009. I will explain this controlled demolition with Ben for a post. Until then visit FauxScienceSlayer and read the official LIES exposed under the “History” tab. The reason for the LIES is the monetary system, see “Fractional Reserve Banking Begat Faux Reality”.

    • GaryTruth

      Make your point and don’t send us anywhere.

      The people behind the FED, the private central bankers, the people who control the currency, the banks – “Let me control a nation’s currency and I care not who make their laws.” Rothschild quote. That sort of thing?

      • FauxScienceSlayer

        I reviewed copies of the NYC stamped approved plans for all of theses buildings and wrote a lengthy comment which refused to post. There is far more info than the comment section can hold, so will wait for a Ben interview. But the level of deceit in science, history and current events is staggering.

        “A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves”
        ~ Edward R Murrow

        • Binkster

          Inside Job ?

          • FauxScienceSlayer

            ABSOLUTELY….read the other comments at this post, the A& E site, the BBC-WTC-7 video and visit the Pilots for 911 Truth site.

            The wiki page on Urban Moving Systems, excellent !

          • Binkster

            Oh. Ok. (I’m usually censored.) Let’s roll !!.

          • Binkster

            (I’ve got to get inside more..etc)
            But – i must admit – don’t patronize me – But I knew little or nothing about this Bremer guy before. (I guess I’m just a messenger)

          • Binkster

            I’m more of just an -’up and down type’ guy rather than who controlled the impact floors….Yikes !

            Scary what the good ol’ USA has become…

          • Passing by

            I would suggest reading Another Nineteen. Examining Legitimate 9/11 Suspect by Kevin Ryan. Disconnecting the Dots by Kevin Fenton. This will help you put names and faces behind the crimes. Peace everyone.

          • Binkster

            You’re right. I was completely ignorant on the Bremer file. I didn’t even know this info.. I plead ignorance…I’ll get the book.(I apologize Kev – Ryan or Fenton – I’ll buy your book.)

      • Binkster

        That sort of sums it up i think Gary. Money created out of nothing by central banks – controlled by the Rothschild ‘s. BIS in Switzerland. Etc…The Swiss always neutral in any war ( because we’re the bank fiddling etc) Watch the movie – The International for even more info

        • Binkster

          The banks make money from war. Most banks are Rothschild controlled. Check out – ‘The ‘Money Masters’ with Bill Still.

    • passing by

      Are you one of the 2000+ A&E petition signers FSS? So you don’t construe it another way, I am just curious, not trying to be derogatory. TY

      • FauxScienceSlayer

        I had been researching and writing about ‘global warming’ for a year. That FAKE DEBATE was between Clima-clowns and ‘Deniers’….but this was in fact a THREE SIDED DEBATE. The Darth Big Warmers, the Luke Little Warmers and the Obie NO Warmers. In a three sided debate, two sides are WRONG. But, until you can convince the masses that the government could lie about anything, you can’t convince them that the government LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING. I did attend the Austin & Houston premiers of the A&E two hour videos and spoke with founder Richard Gage, AIA at both.

        I have sixty articles in archive at Canada Free Press, under my name Joseph A Olson and another sixty at my FSS website. I am co-founder and peer reviewer for Prinicpia-Scientific International, where there are hundreds of articles and research papers. I am co-author of “Slaying the Sky Dragon” science text. My work has been on Carbon climate forcing, ‘sustainable’ energy, ‘peak’ oil and big bang. I do support the A&E evidence and analysis and have vigorously defended them at local civic meetings and on blog sites, thanks.

    • edthegrocer
  • Jack Conner

    I knew it was a controlled demolition the minute the first building collapsed.

    I was working at Verizon, in Madison, NJ. The place looked like a NASA center with big screen tv’s monitoring everything.

    A friend of mine who sat two rows up and mouthed the words, “False flag? Martial Law?” while shrugging his shoulders. He and I were on the same page and well, my past had taught me better before this (don’t worry about my past).

    Happy people are waking up to the truth… I’m sick and tired of the stupid sheople, and worse, the asleeples, who have no clue.

    • GaryTruth

      It’s the disinformation agents that make me the maddest. the CTCOLES, the Merlin5by5, the Weasels, the RKOWens. They’ll be showing up here soon.

      Two of them have turned out to be compromised pedophiles who are forced to write their garbage. How sick has this country got?

    • Kevin Merck

      That’s interesting. I’ve met a lot of people since then who knew right away. I guess I didn’t want to think our government was capable of that. I knew they were capable of a lot, but it didn’t sink in that they could stoop that low.

      I found out in 2006 when I learned there was molten steel under all three towers and in the dust samples. That should convince anyone with any knowledge whatsoever about what it takes to melt steel.

      Professional engineers are silent because they don’t want to face ridicule and lose their jobs. That may work in the short term, but long term they are committing suicide.

  • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

    Very interesting, I hadn’t heard that angle before – thanks Ben. I want to know the truth.

    • Kevin Merck

      That’s a great attitude and all that sane people are asking for.
      If you really want to know the truth you won’t have any trouble finding it.
      Go to A&E for 9/11 truth to learn all the facts.

      • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

        Yep, working on it … :)

  • PCmediaHost

    Thank-You Ben, for another great story!

  • Palmer Eldrich

    You might call me an information analyst, I discussed this story that Ben would run before he ran it , as it had to be done because of the , lets call it a “fork in reality” existing between the two states of information.

    Politically I also said that Ron Paul is out of “Politics” now , he has his own show, that also exists in this “Fork” now pressure builds for a clarification of his stance on the subject.

    I of course by writing this have changed reality, but I do so only because my comment is negligible, at this time.

    I myself haven’t been a lot to Ron Paul’s Site but instead of the natural occurring system i think it would be better if Ben Swan got that clarification. – also a large story.

    Now i may have significantly change reality.

    usually this information goes in different channels .

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    To say WTC1, 2, and 7 were collapsed by controlled demolition is an understatement. The demolitions were so controlled, that they had to be. If it happened any other way, then there would have been even more catastrophic results than were witnessed on 9/11/01.

    This cannot be explained in a soundbite. It can’t be explained in a paragraph. It cannot even be fully explained in a short or long essay. It is going to take about five hours of your precious time to comprehend. Remember this name — Dimitri Khalezov:

    http://youtu.be/kPcUrbOhghM

    Now for motive. This goes back to Nanking and the Japanese Imperial Family:

    http://mydd.com/users/indepenergy/posts/golden-lily-how-the-cia-funded-its-dirty-empire

    People, this mystery for most must be solved and resolved. The future of this nation and the free world at large depends on it. We must move heaven and earth if necessary to resolve this. Otherwise, heaven and earth may well be moved for us. Against our wishes, and it will not be pretty.

    • Binkster

      Sounds like crap – sorry .
      How about those ‘Urban Moving System’ Boys ? (seen below)
      So…U’ Merican ?

    • Binkster

      I’m busy – and you’re a shhhhillll Let’s cut to the chase. – Inside Job ?

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    Some here ask is our govt capable of such treachery? You must look into Operation Northwoods. Consider the following quote:

    “As many critics have pointed, out, terrorism is not an enemy. It is a
    tactic. Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting
    terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.”
    – William Eldridge Odom, Lt. Gen. (USA), Director, National Security Agency (1985–1988)

    It is time for this American hegemony and empire to end.

  • Re-thought

    I certainly do not trust the official story of 9/11. But, every time I hear a theory of controlled demolition. I never hear about how anyone would be able to pull off a controlled demolition without any evidence left behind or more telling, any eye witnesses of a setup prior. If you’ve ever watched a behind the scenes of a controlled demo, they show how beams need to be pre-cut, so they fall the way that is needed, how hundreds if not thousands of charges need to be placed, wired, and timed to go off and the precise time needed. Plus I have not seen any videos that look like there are charges being detonated as the building fell.

    The ONLY thing that seems to me to seem like a controlled demo is the even fall the building takes. I agree that it’s very improbable and we don’t know the full story. And I would certainly agree that the Government has taken full advantage of this tragedy for it’s own agenda. But I have not been shown anything to sway me to think that an entire crew of people spent days if not weeks prepping this to happen without anyone noticing. Too many people involved, including civilians to not have come forward by now.

    • Binkster

      So – you’re actually saying – no charges were needed – and the building suddenly went into free fall ?…
      So – just a guessin’ ….U’Merican ?

    • Binkster
      • Binkster

        Well – Ok.I’m still in an NFL pool. But – Yikes. I grew up with Davy
        Crockett, Bart Starr, Daniel Boone, and the American Sportsman. What a pathetic pool
        of crap the USA has become. (No offense) So you Yanks – Inside Job ? (From a Canadian friend..) (We’re on your side) (Etc…)

    • Dude

      People recall hearing explosions. If there is nothing to hide, why doesn’t the us govt declassify all documents. Obama is saying no more investigations…

      Senator was interrupted while talking about “The Phoenix Memo” and “Zacarious Moussauoi”
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=novsn0xlioI

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    Inside job? Most don’t comprehend what “inside” means in the proper context. Some say Jesuits? Consider the following, and let it sink in:

    “From this room, Your Grace, I govern not only Paris, but China; not only
    China, but the whole world –and all without anyone knowing how
    it is done.”
    – Society of Jesus Superior General Tambourini to the Duke de Brissac, Constitutions of the Jesuits, edited by Paulin, Paris (1843)

    Look into F. Tupper Saussy, and see what he says about Jews and Jesuits. It is not as much him, but him quoting Otto von Bismark (quoting Kaiser Wilhelm I).

    Others here mention Tim Osman. Yes, that was OBL’s CIA codename. His handler is still alive, after repeated assassination attempts. His name is Lee Wanta. He knows an awful lot about the events of 9/11. Another person is Roi Tov. A former IDF officer with nuclear clearance. He has been targeted for assassination by MOSSAD numerous times. He survives to this day, but losing his speech. Strangulation has permanently damaged his vocal cords. He knows a thing or two about the Jews. Himself, being one, but now a Christian in Bolivian exile.

    Ben want some exclusives? Give it a go with Lee Wanta and Roi Tov. These two are a whistle-blower’s whistle-blower.

    • Binkster

      Ben ? – Want some exclusives ? Take an eighth grade physics course. (And just wait for some magic)

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    Here is a reality check for everyone. Please think here. I don’t care what you think you saw on TV. Unless you were an eye-witness at the scene. Most eye-witnesses confirm this:

    THERE WERE NO PLANES!

    Watch the videos. Now think here. Especially the WTC towers. An aircraft that size does NOT pass through a building of that size and construction like a hot knife through butter. That simply defies physics. It can’t be done. Nose sections telescope upon impact. Wings separate and fall to the ground. Tail sections separate and fall to the ground. Jet fuel does not create a lava pool at the base of the building. What kind of explosion gives off radio isotopes?

    For further amplification, see my previous on Dimitri Khalezov. I’ve done enough here. Time for me to move one, and let others learn for themselves.

    • Binkster
    • Binkster

      How about those “Urban Moving System” boys ? Comments ?

    • Steve

      Take a look at the Charlie Rose interview: ‘Charlie Rose no planes’

    • edthegrocer

      Have you watched Dr Judy Wood?

    • Mathew Polaschek

      There are millions of witnesses who saw the planes hit the towers. You can see them on youtube. Please don’t believe such drivel.

      If you want to know how the planes hit their targets perhaps you should look at ‘Global Hawk’, which was the remote hijacking technology on the planes, or ‘Operation Northwoods’ where they had planes to substitute commercial planes with military drones.

  • Binkster

    Klaatu – personally I’m having a few problems with the ‘Urban moving system’ boys, the dancing Israelis as described in the FBI files,, this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg
    Etc. How about you ?

    Inside Job ?

  • Stick

    all 3 buildings fell at “free fall” speed
    through the path of most resistance, the building itself.
    110 & 47 stories fall within their own footprint?
    That is basically impossible without demolition.
    If WTC 7 was a demolition,
    then so were the twin towers.
    Silverstein gets insurance $ for terrorism !!??
    The FBI found 2 of the “hijackers” passports that day ?
    Molten iron at 1400 degrees for weeks?
    Nano themrmite residue ? Military Grade?

    No,,
    Never happened…

  • I Love America

    This is why I love America. This is why Liberty will always prevail.
    Even when Americans fall asleep at the wheel, eventually their brains
    catch up to reality. Alex is not right about everything, but alternative
    news just slowed the beating war drums in Syria.

    Now lets address 9/11, NSA, and Benghazi.

    How
    do steel buildings fall like that? O yeah, it is called controlled
    demolition. Dick Cheney, George Bush, you better pray your hands weren’t
    involved. Because if they are, even Obama’s pardon will not save you.

    • Binkster

      Q: “This is why I love America. This is why Liberty will always prevail.
      Even when Americans fall asleep at the wheel, eventually their brains
      catch up to reality.”
      Q&A: Explain how your “Love In” with America has changed anything 12 years later and why Americans are no longer asleep at the wheel. (Show Work)

  • Hope

    Does anyone watch PBS? The owner of The World Trade Center Complex stated that they decided to pull tower #7. I’m sure you can find the story on their web site.

  • revsader

    I feel like throwing up after watching this. It makes me sick to my stomach that our government would go to such great lengths to act in their own interest and lie to their people. I shudder to do more in depth research, because I know I will not like what I find.

    • Binkster

      Well you could always give the ‘Urban Moving System” boys a quick google.

      Now that you haven’t mentioned it – I’m having a few problems with ‘free-fall collapse speed” Hummm… try this

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

      No …?

      Try this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg

      • revsader

        I’ve found the hour long documentary put together by the AE911truth group.

    • edthegrocer

      Watch ‘What Happened to the Towers”. Before you ask ‘Who did it’ determine ‘What Happened?’ It will also explain the clean hole in the Pentagon with virtually no debris. It won’t make you sick and fearful. It will make you stronger.

    • GaryTruth

      Yeah. You’re not going to like what you find. My research led me to be convinced this is 100 percent Israeli firsters.

  • edthegrocer

    Ben. Have you discussed Dr Judy Wood and directed energy equipment? Her vids are at “What happened to the Towers?”

    • Mathew Polaschek

      Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth discredit Judy Woods theory on their website. If you would like to read what they have to say please read this http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/505-faq-3.html

      • edthegrocer

        Thanks. I will stick with the first statement that it wasn’t a plane and there should be a reopening. I didn’t read everything yet but most of the explanations are just as speculative or roughly explained away by known science. That’s OK. More to come.

  • Neville

    Building 7 This isn’t a mystery. Go watch the documentary In Plane Site.

    The guy who owns the building (building 7) said they discussed with the authority whether to “pull it” a colloquial term for detonating it. He said ok to it. He is on video saying it. Just go watch it.

    He admitted it was a controlled demolition.

    • Jon Brown

      The Fire Department Commander made the decision to “pull” all firefighters and rescue operations from the area of Building 7 several hours before it fell. When parts from falling WTC 1 hit Building 7 leaving deep gashes of about 20 stories in a 50 story building, fires started that couldn’t be fought (no water pressure), that building was doomed, and abandoned.

      • GaryTruth

        Intentional lie.

        Silverstein said pull it.

        Good bye Shillo.

    • GaryTruth

      Zionist Larry Silverstein who bought the lease less then ten weeks prior.

      Suspect number one – they were loaded with asbestos and would have cost billions to remove.

  • Iz Henthorn

    Hey Mainstream, this is what real reporting looks like. Good Job Ben!

  • LydiaB

    What about the gold that was buried under the World Trade Center that was never recovered? http://youtu.be/BkPRskciqVM

  • Thomas Larsen

    When buildings collapse, the resistance from the structure never goes to 0.
    it is impossible without explosives.

    The steel is encased in concrete and fireproofing, so it would take more than 24 hours encased in full flame to even weaken a skyscraber, Mandarin Oriental Hotel was still standing after 18 hours in raging fire, even though the building was under contruction when it happened.

    • Tony Z

      Another clueless truther. Instead of spewing ignorant garbage Tom, why don’t you educate yourself on first the construction of the WTC complex? Then you may be able to understand how and why the towers fell. Your claims in this above post are not accurate.

      • edthegrocer

        Wasn’t there some serious fireproofing done after the first blast in the basement? Wasn’t it an asbestos mix which made the building very expensive to upgrade? Maybe check.

      • GaryTruth

        Yeah, just because Building 7 looks identical to a controlled demolition, even synchronizes perfectly with a split screen comparison, don’t even think for one minute it’s a controlled demolition.

        We’re hoping you don’t drive Tony. You might see a stop sign and think, well, just because that looks like a stop sign…

        Tool.

      • justapeasent

        Welcome aboard Tony Z I take it you would support a new investigation
        it is the only thing which will stop the truth movement.

  • Thomas Larsen

    If the collapses are not obvious enough, the warnings they had prior to the attacks is also a smoking gun.
    The august 6 PDB memo was made public, but that is only one, they had 100s of foreign and domestic warnings.
    wikileaks has just published more warnings.

  • Mo Raf

    Thanks for the professional presentation Ben.

  • Thomas Larsen

    please retweet this to share this video with the trending hashtag
    https://twitter.com/Lonegunmaan/status/377710491168026624

  • Jon Brown

    So sorry to see you have fallen for the Truther’s conspiracy theories on Building 7. With gashes of about 20 stories on the building’s South side caused when WTC 1 Fell, with fires raging for around 6 hours not being fought because they couldn’t be, the building’s demise was inevitable. The fire department knew for hours that building would not survive, “pulled” their people from the building, and evacuated the area. Before the evacuation, creaking. cracking, groaning and other noises indicating severe internal instability were heard by firefighters in the building. Around the same time, a bulge was observed on one of outside walls. Standpipes were broken. There was virtually no water pressure because of the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. No plane hit Building 7. Sections of WTC 1 falling did. Building 7 was doomed.

    • mastermind119

      Even if metal would have melted which is impossible by an office fire.
      The tower would never turn to dust, you would see partial collapse… Get your facts straight!

      • scumbuster

        GO FU CK URSELF

    • scumbuster

      U R AN IDIOT. TAKE UR DROP DEAD PILL.

    • GaryTruth

      No one uses the term “conspiracy theory” when commenting on a Ben Swann report.

      So, who are you and what’s your real agenda?

      Let me help – government shill.

      • edthegrocer

        He thinks he has a room on the boat. Sad. All the shills will be killed. They will have served.

    • justapeasant

      I take it you would be in favour of an investigation all it
      can do is prove you right and the truth movement wrong.

    • ax123man

      Sure, all you have to do is produce ONE another example of a building that burned, then fell, demolition style. Good luck.

      • GaryTruth

        Succinct yet powerful comment.

        Never in human history has a steel framed building collapsed due to fire and on that day three steel framed buildings collapsed and fell into their own footprints.

        The people who did this believe they are superior minds and the rest of us are stupid goyim.

        • nitemare2

          And your engineering degree is from what school?

          • GaryTruth

            2,000 architects and engineers, people much more intelligent than myself, a person who graduated with honors from Cornell, stake their reputation on this.

            Again, you’re on drugs, right?

      • Darth_Azrael

        How many other buildings, with an architecture anything like building 7 have had pieces of 110 story collapsing buildings impact it and burn out of control for many hours from fires probably starting at multiple points? Find me ONE other example similar to that.

        • ax123man

          Your argument holds no water. The fact that the fires were started from falling debris from the towers is irrelevant, unless you are claiming that debris knocked wtc 7 down, an absurd proposition. So we are left with fire, a fire that could not have been hot enough to melt steal beams. Not only that, but melted all 50 steal beams so they all collapsed at exactly the same time.

          That explains why no other steal framed building has done this. Why should I list examples here when it is so easy to find the examples with a simple google search. The fact that you require a scenario exactly like 9/11 simply shows how far you are willing to stick your head in the sand.

          • Darth_Azrael

            The fire doesn’t have to be hot enough to melt the steel beams, just to weaken them. You don’t have to have a scenario exactly like 9/11 but you do need conditions reasonably close to make a valid comparison. Impact damage, fires starting probably at multiple points and burning out of control for many hours with no water being put on it.

          • ax123man

            Common sense says the odds of 50 steel beams all collapsing in free fall at exactly the same time because they are “weakened” is zero. Have you ever seen a demolition where the timing was off by a tiny amount and the building visibly collapsed in a non-uniform manner?

          • Darth_Azrael

            Generally that is caused when some of the explosives don’t go off at all or are not sufficient to destroy the support in question. I am not a demolitions expert and my guess is neither are you. But your theory is really that the building was intentionally, secretly destroyed and they couldn’t do it in a manner that would look “more natural”?

            Parts of the building were visually sagging and bulging before the final collapse. Witnesses also reported loud snapping and groaning sounds. It DIDN’T collapse all at once though the bulk of the collapse did. My guess is the supports probably did weaken over time at pretty much the same rate so once a critical number failed the rest failed pretty much immediately since they all would have been immediately placed under significant additional stress. It doesn’t really seem illogical to me. I’m willing to entertain any theory with sufficient evidence but all this 9/11 nonsense seems based on conjecture, assumptions and beliefs based on previous example of which there are none like this. It all basically comes down to the collapses didn’t look like you expected. That’s not proof or even evidence of anything.

            The whole logic doesn’t make sense to me either. I mean why? Even if there was a sinister reason to bring down the WTC or building 7 in particular, why fly a plane into the Pentagon? What did this accomplish? Why fly a plane into the capital building (or wherever the one in Pennsylvania was going)? What was the secret goal and what did it all really accomplish and how was it really worth it to anybody? If it is about money or covering up secrets there are far easier and less risky ways to go about it.

          • ax123man

            I understand your position. To be honest, I’m on the fence. I just think the question should not be buried, so I try not to let it be. When you add to this the other discussion points, such as the lack of forensics, investigation, etc, it makes one heck of a conspiracy story. It will likely go on for many decades. The telling point will be the information that comes out over the next 20-30 years (as it always does with this kind of stuff).

          • Mark Dandeneau

            Do you think that the beams were talking to each other and came a concensus to all give up at the same time? This of course seems irrational to me, but for some one like you out there in lala land it probably makes perfect sense, am I right?

          • Mark Dandeneau

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash

            maybe you think they made things better in the old days

        • GaryTruth

          This is not an example of rational thinking.

          You need to try harder.

          Steel buildings do not collapse due to fires.

          Only three in human history have ever collapsed – all within less than 12 hours of each other on 9/11.

          • Darth_Azrael

            Fully fueled jetliners also do not crash into steel buildings but they did on 9/11. We are not talking about average office fires here.

          • GaryTruth

            That’s exactly what we’re talking about – average office fires in WTC 7 burning 6 hours and bringing a steel skyscraper down. And 2000 experts concluding “impossible.”

          • Darth_Azrael

            This fire did not start or spread like an average office fire. Average office fires also do not burn for 6 or 7 hours before being brought under control. This one didn’t even have significant water put on it. This also ignores the impact damage (not sure how much effect this had but it isn’t unreasonable to think it had some effect with regards to structural damage).

          • GaryTruth

            Thanks. I’ll stick with the government on this one. “Our explanation has a low probability of occurrence.”

            Convincing also are 2,000 architectural and engineering experts who are on the record saying that your story is impossible.

          • Darth_Azrael

            But you conveniently ignore all the experts that say otherwise. I mean there have been whole doumentaries on this stuff. It’s not like this is every expert known to man against some guy in the government.

          • Mark Dandeneau
        • Mark Dandeneau
  • jgibsosman

    Thanks for this excellent presentation.

  • Metropolis

    so was it bombed? Imploded?

    • TimeForTruth

      It was a combo of things that took down the buildings. Nano thermite &
      directed energy weapons were the main culprits. Take a look at the cars and buildings that were burnt blocks & blocks away from the Twin Towers…… Also learn what Dr Judy Wood knows…….

      https://www.google.com/search?q=burnt+cars+on+9/11&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=flAwUvafAo2y9gTqtYDQBg&ved=0CCkQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=461

      http://www.drjudywood.com/new.html

      • Ray

        This energy weapon stuff is a distraction. It seems to me it’s meant to provide fodder for those intent on keeping the truth hidden from those who have yet to do any digging. It gives them the legitimacy to say “here’s what those 9/11 Truther Conspiracy Theorists are saying happened to the towers, some uber-secret sci-fi technology that you read about in your favorite sci-fi novel…”, then the audience proceeds to laugh and shake their heads in sympathy for those poor “truth-seekers”, content that they are perfectly justified in believing the lies.

  • Bob Archor

    What has always bothered me was I read that we spent 10 times more money investigating president Clinton’s affair with the intern than we did investigating 9/11.

    • GaryTruth

      You’re right. Start pulling one thread that doesn’t add up and it leads to several others

  • OUTLANDER1968

    9/11 Truth: What Happened to Building 7
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4

    9/11 Pentagon Attack – Behind the Smoke Curtain – Barbara Honegger
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fvJ8nFa5Qk

  • Kevin Merck

    Ben did in on his first Reality Check, of the Rethink 9/11 Campaign, what the MSM has refused to do for over 10 years, which is show building seven coming down. The MSM has been banned from showing that practically ever since the day it happened.

    Ben also showed it coming down right next to a commercial, controlled demolition, so that people can see the comparison which is something the MSM would never do in a million years. The side by side comparison by itself should make people understand that this was **in fact** a controlled demolition.

    Arguing about the details of what exactly was used to bring the buildings down without a thorough, professional and ***independent investigation*** with subpoena power, is not going to solve anything.

    Don’t pretend to care about your family if you’re not willing to face the reality of 9/11. Your children don’t have a future any sane person would want, living in a totalitarian police state, because their parents were cowards who couldn’t face the facts about 9/11.

    • GaryTruth

      Okay Kevin. We’re with you of course.

      Other than commenting on 9/11 videos, what actions do you suggest?

      • Kevin Merck

        There’s a lot of stuff you can do. I talk to people every chance I get about 9/11. I pass out the evidence flyers available through A&E for 9/11 truth. I’ve made financial contributions and have signed the petitions for a legitimate investigation.

        **Everyone needs to go to A&E9/11truth and sign the petitions!**

  • Jackie

    I haven’t heard the reason why building 7 was destroyed.

    • Kevin Merck

      We’ll find that out when we put the perpetrators on the witness stand under oath.
      Immunity to prosecution will only be given to those who testify to what really happened.

    • Tim

      Building 7 was home to an alphabet soup of government agencies: CIA, DoD, IRS, SEC and NY City’s Office of Emergency Management. The latter was where Mayor Rudy Giuliani was supposed to go in a city emergency, but he steered clear of Building 7 that day.

      The Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) was investigating Wall Street corporate fraud cases at the time, and all the incriminating evidence was in Building 7. It is likely that the 9/11 operation was being conducted from Building 7, in my opinion. Destroying it covers up evidence.

      • GaryTruth

        You are truly informed. Great respect.

        • Tim

          I’ve been studying this since 2004, and it’s good to see so many more people catching on since then. It’s getting harder for the shills to continue supporting The Big Lie.

          This debate is really about faith in government versus the laws of physics. I’ll side with physics every time.

          • GaryTruth

            How can any educated person watch “Explosive Evidence” and not be convinced we were lied to?

          • Tim

            Probably because it boils down to this: If you accept the real 9/11 evidence, the next step is to realize that your government is willing to murder you to gain more political power. Such power allows for an aggressive foreign policy using the military; a policy that, under ordinary circumstances, the American people would strongly oppose.

            Most Americans can’t accept that, so with the help of consolidated corporate media they buy into the official story. You can identify these people when they pass around patriotic e-mails saying “God Bless/Support our troops!” and such… later they go shopping while our Iraq/Afghanistan veterans commit suicide on a daily basis.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            It gets worse Tim. I know someone who believes the official story is a myth. But this person not only regularly posts the support our troops stuff, but also stuff about how George Bush was such a great president and if only we could get Obama out and good ol’ George back in America would be saved. I myself am not a troop basher, many of these guys believe that they are fighting to keep America free. So their intention is good, it’s just their understanding that is flawed. But how can someone who knows the official story is a myth, idolize GW? It’s beyond me.

          • Ray

            I’ve said this for a while now, but 9/11 is primarily a psychological battle. To come to grips with the implications of 9/11 is the difficult part, the easy part is looking at the evidence…I mean come on, all you have to do is watch WTC 7 come down..

      • Darth_Azrael

        Why is it suspicious that Giuliani steered clear of building 7 that day? I mean it was on fire and evacuated after all…

        • Kevin Merck

          Focus on the physical evidence for controlled demolition.
          Steel melts at 2700 degrees. The kerosene and subsequent office fires fell 1500 degrees short of being able to produce the iron microspheres discovered in the dust samples.
          Any speculation as to what Giuliani knew or didn’t know is circumstantial.

          • nitemare2

            It was not kerosene it was JP-4 which has a burn temperature of 6,670 °F. So you and this article are just more of the same conspiracy theory nuts want to believe because of what you don’t believe in terrorists attacking the US, only a govt. secret movement would do this, Sorry I did believe Ben as being credible but now I find that is not so in theory.

          • GaryTruth

            Fuel that burns hot enough to melt its own engine?

            Are you smoking crack or doing heroin this morning?

          • nitemare2

            Gary are you an engineer? Do you know anything about jet engines? I do I worked on them for years in the Air Force. you like many others here are repeating “facts” which aren’t, from people who aren’t experts.There is a wide range of possible temperatures depending on a lot of variables like gas density, mixture, flows, etc. The exhaust temperatures of the jets that I worked on ranged from some 400c in min power to 1080C The afterburner flame can melt most metals as it reach’s 1800C but is only used for a short time. the 6,670 is a max burn temp that can be reached, everything is hinged on oxygen, time and density and any surrounding fuels. 1.) the planes that struck the WTC had fuel on board; approximately 10,000 U.S. gallons each. 2.) the fuel was dispersed in and on the WTC; 3.) fuel will burn until it is consumed or extinguished; 4.) the fuel contained on board would have been disbursed at the point of impact, i.e. left wing tank at 78th floor; 5.) fuel will pool or flow downward, not upward, due to the effects of gravity.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            “the afterburner flame can melt most metals”. So you’re saying that there was an afterburner flame produced for a sustained period (enough time to melt tons of steel). Since airplanes are obviously made as light as possible how is it even remotely possible to envision tons of steel being melted by dumping this fuel in the building. Isn’t the afterburner temperature reached because there is a high amount of oxygen fed into the engine to increase temps?

          • nitemare2

            Mark bite me you will never believe anything other then the conspiracy theory you want to believe. No facts will ever convince you of anything else. Even 2000 scientists who believe the opposite of your 2000, you are a total extremist.

          • Kevin Merck

            Another “Wikipedia Wizard”.
            If That’s a true statement, it would only be when it’s in a ‘controlled burn’.
            In the open air it burns no differently than kerosene, which for the most part is exactly what it is.

          • nitemare2

            Kevin that’s not true. And this was not “in the open” air as you have up drafts and down drafts created by the crashes and building characteristics’ . Ask any aircraft fighter fighter how long and how hot it will burn and they will tell you it depends on winds and place of crash and other conditions. The crash at San Francisco just recently burned how fast? And the one in Birmingham destroyed most of the 747 in minutes, both in the open air, kerosene is a slow burn that’s why it’s used in heaters. try using jet fuel in space heater!!! Try using jet fuel in a diesel engine or car and see how fast it melts the pistons!!!

          • Kevin Merck

            You have no idea what a controlled burn is based on the comment you just made.
            You are arguing from a position of ignorance.
            Learn the facts. Go to A&E for 9/11 truth and do some reading.

          • nitemare2

            A controlled burn in the area we are talking about is what all fire training schools use. It is considered controlled because they control the amount and type of fuel and area to be covered. Much the same as the training yesterday at Logan Airport in Boston. If it is done to test effects on certain articles that is another aspect of it being controlled as they would also control many other things to try to recreate a situation as close as possible to original.

            You seem to be such an expert why should I have to watch or read a conspiracy driven documentary that is written with the specific intent to show their point and have no opposing facts? As I said before I bet I can find 2000 experts in A&E who say these 2000 are wrong. Global warming is another good example you have scientists who sat in the same classes graduated from the same college looked at the same “facts” and have completely different beliefs. You seem to want the 9/11 attacks to be done by our Govt. and will never believe otherwise. So really anyone that presents a opposing view is wrong, ignorant, a shill or working for the Govt. So Kevin get your aluminum foil helmet, and believe everything is caused by Bush the Govt. the left, the right or some frigging secret society, because you are the expert on everything.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            If you watch the film there will be opposing facts…yours…then you can come here and debunk specific points with your “facts”, or just ask your NIST supervisor to help you out.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            You’re right it was not open air it was in an enclosed area and obviously an oxygen starved fire as attested by the copious amounts of smoke and small fires.

          • g.johnon

            indeed, that is the maximum burning temp of jp-4 (50% kero-50% gas) which was widely replaced with jp-8 in 1996.
            in order to achieve max burn temp forced air supercharged atomization is required. (full thrust burn).
            its benign burning temp is around 12-1300 degrees f.
            so unless you are claiming that the jet engines continued to run at full thrust for quite some time after the planes struck the buildings (which still would not lend support to the nature of how the towers fell) you have just posted a total nonsequitor.

          • generalgoldstein

            To Ben’s credit, he didn’t accuse anyone of anything or say this is fact. He’s only asking questions. He’s leaving it up to the viewer.

          • jbo5112

            I thought JP-4 was used by the government (now replaced with JP-8) and commercial airliners use Jet A or Jet A-1. Both of those have open air burning temperatures of 500-600 °F according to Wikipedia (couldn’t find maximum burn temps). I tried fact-checking it, but produced no quick answers, except some corroboration on military and commercial fuel names. If such facts are wrong, maybe you should help by updating Wikipedia.

            Either way, I thought the blame was on office fires started by the burning fuel, not the jet fuel continuing to burn.

          • nitemare2

            Than your theory would be the fuel quit burning? Or that none went down air ducts, elevator shafts etc.
            lets use some common sense if you flood a upper floor with water does it all stay on that floor? If you have a fire on any upper floor what happens? So say only 9000 gallons of fuel burned you want me to believe it stayed on the same floor.
            That is the theory being used by the theorist in this article.

          • jbo5112

            FEMA’s theory is:
            “The time to consume the jet fuel can be reasonably computed. At the upper bound, if one assumes that all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor, it would form a pool that would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes (SFPE 1995) provided sufficient air for combustion was available. In reality, the jet fuel would have been distributed over multiple floors, and some would have been transported to other locations. Some would have been absorbed by carpeting or other furnishings, consumed in the flash fire in the aerosol, expelled and consumed externally in the fireballs, or flowed away from the fire floors. Accounting for these factors, it is believed that almost all of the jet fuel that remained on the impact floors was consumed in the first few minutes of the fire.

            “As the jet fuel burned, the resulting heat ignited office contents throughout a major portion of several of the impact floors, as well as combustible material within the aircraft itself.”

            You can read more: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch2.pdf

          • Mark Dandeneau

            No the official NIST theory is that there was NO jet fuel in building 7…the building collapse was caused by burning office furniture.

          • Tim

            Let’s assume you are correct, and that it was JP-4 and it burned at 6,670 degrees Fahrenheit. That is still not enough energy to bring down one of the towers. The fuel source is limited and burns off quickly.

            And since the internal steel beams transfer heat away from the heat source to cooler attached beams (i.e, the “heat wick” effect), even that temperature is unlikely to do much damage.

          • nitemare2

            How long did the fires burn and what kind of pool did the fuel make at the base of the towers where was the major heat point? Wick effect will only go so far and last for so long if there is a central point of heat. Fuel will only burn off quickly if spread in a thin layer, 10000 gallons needs a very large area to be considered a layer to burn off quickly. A truck load of jet fuel and use any grade you want, or lets use gasoline it evaporates faster and burns cooler then any jet fuel, hits a bridge and it can burn for hours and destroy the beams in the bridge and that would be considered an open burn. It has happened many times check the news or were they caused by Bush also?

          • Mark Dandeneau

            So you know of a high rise that has been brought down by fire? Please give us the source. I searched long and hard but was only able to find high rises that were burning hotter than the twin towers, but none of them fell or even buckled. Empire state building was hit by a B52 bomber that was lost in fog. Oh you said bridges, many bridges…give us the sources what bridges where and where can we find the stories.

        • Tim

          You said it was suspicious, not me. I was just stating a fact about the NY City’s Office of Emergency Management.

      • dddienst

        Dont forget the Trillion+ the pentagon “lost” and then the records were destroyed in this attack.

        • Tim

          And Donald Rumsfeld confessed to the public on 9/10/2001 that the Trillions were lost. Great timing if you want people to forget about it, considering what happened the next day.

    • Thomas Larsen

      Explosives took down Building 7. Barry Jennings and Michael Hess were trapped on 8th floor BY EXPLOSION long before the Towers came down.

      You can see Michael Hess yelling for help in a video, and you can hear their testimonies in videos

  • Joe

    You have lost considerable credibility with this story. Be honest and discuss the enormous amount of rubbish that is easily debunked if you want to get down to what is actually credible.

  • GaryTruth

    Well, it’s past 9:00 am when government workers are reading this and having their cup of morning coffee.

    Expect many comments with “truther” and “conspiracy theorists” in them.

    • nitemare2

      You mean like all you who support the THEORY of it being a Govt. act? Or the fact that only you have the right to say what the facts are? Whose facts are right? Those who are looking at a video and saying oh it couldn’t happen that way or those who have investigated the complete facts. To use a quote “You can’t handle the truth!”. because it might show you what you really are.

      • GaryTruth

        Could you please comment again, next time with coherency? Thanks.

        • nitemare2

          You made a statement that anyone who doesn’t follow your views must be “Govt. workers.” Others use the term shills etc. So I believe that means you are the only ones who can be right! Clear enough?

  • Kevin Merck

    “Government shills” sell both sides of the story. Some pretend to be “truthers” but they always try to dominate a message board. They use words like “Zionist, Israelis, Mossad” etc., anything to give the MSM talking heads a reason to paint everyone who wants the truth about 9/11 as anti-Semitic.

    Support a legitimate investigation by signing the petitions.

    Most of these so called “truthers” commenting here, if they are legit, have probably not even taken the time to sign the petitions.

  • Kevin Merck

    If we all focus on the physical evidence and the rule of law there is no sane reason not to support a legitimate, independent investigation, with subpoena power.

    End of argument.

    Get off your backside, talk to your neighbors, friends and co-workers about signing the petitions for a real investigation.

    • nitemare2

      How about this reason, who is going to pay for it? The ones who do will make sure it supports their interest the same as the ones here and Ben are saying the Govt. report is false. Global warming facts support both sides real, not real, man made, natural, able to reverse not able to do anything. So which do you believe? If they say it was a govt act who’s facts are real. Ben always says you can’t change the facts, but he is now trying to support just that. Change them to support what he wants.

      • Kevin Merck

        That’s like saying we shouldn’t investigate a murder because someone would have to pay for it.
        Epic fail

        • nitemare2

          No that’s like saying you pay enough money the “facts” will be whatever you want. You don’t trust the Govt to investigate, and that is who investigates murders and other criminal offenses. So who do you trust? I can’t say I would trust anyone selected by you to do a “honest” investigation.

          • Kevin Merck

            “No that’s like saying you pay enough money the “facts” will be whatever you want.”

            No, Bush already paid for that investigation.

          • nitemare2

            Kevin you just made my point, and whose money will pay to prove your point? And how can I be certain if your “proof” is real or not? And again it must be a lie as Bush did it right. Like that is any kind of proof other then in your biased mind.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            Why don’t they start with the people who tampered with evidence. There was never any real investigation…all of the evidence was hauled away as quickly as possible.

  • Skeptic

    Hmm intrigued/bemused, HOW someone/gang of people managed to RIG ALL 3 towers with explosives and NO one NOTICED them? :)
    Re How EASY would that be to do and would security cameras and someONE have shown/noticed this? :(

    • greg gaskill

      So, just because you can not figure how it was accomplished, does not explain how this impossible event occurred. Can you explain nuclear fission? We can not just rewrite physics, or other scientific laws because they conflict with our governments story. Just how do you suggest that thousands of tons of reinforced high strength concrete and steel went missing? I am saddened that some people have taken your approach, and instead of looking at the scenario and asking – does this make sense, they do the knee-jerk of “it just couldn’t be true” so therefore I’m gonna label this as conspiracy theory nutcase. The investigation by NIST was a farce, it doesn’t take much effort to see, but you do have to open your eyes.

    • driereyes

      There were people who survived and said that there were lots of maintenance crews in the buildings in the weeks before 9/11

      • cindereller

        There are also many who “mysteriously” died after giving eye witness accounts of seeing suspicious activity of crews, in the middle of the night, doing extensive work in all 3 buildings. All of this info can be found on You Tube.

        • Shavano51

          Who died? Where’s the evidence of these folks who mysteriously died? Pls provide sources

          • cindereller

            WHO KNEW TOO MUCH?

            LIST SO FAR

            Barry Jennings (Eyewitness to explosions and bodies inside WTC7) — Undisclosed causes

            Kenneth Johannemann (Eyewitness to explosions inside WTC, Saw no
            airplanes hit but just saw “floors blow up”) — Gunshot to the head,
            ruled a suicide

            Beverly Eckert (Wife of 9/11 WTC Victim, Earwitness to WTC Explosion, Refused hush money) — Airplane crash

            Prasanna Kalahasthi (Wife of 9/11 “Flight 11 Passenger”) — Suicide by hanging

            David Graham (Dentist who saw three of the 9/11 Hijackers with Pakistani
            businessman in Shreveport, Louisiana) — Murdered (Poisoned with
            anti-freeze)

            Paul Smith (Pilot of WABC7′s 9/11 “International Shot” Chopper) — Car accident

            Michael H. Doran (9/11 Victims Lawyer) — Airplane crash

            Bertha Champagne (Longtime babysitter for 911 Perp Marvin Bush’s family) — Crushed by a car

            Christopher Landis (Former Operations Manager for Safety Service Patrol
            for the Virginia Department of Transportation, Interviewed by makers of
            “The Pentacon”, Gave makers of “The Pentacon” a photo collection,
            Involved in the response to the Pentagon attack) — Suicide

            John P. O’Neill (FBI Counter-terrorism expert, Obsessed with catching
            Osama Bin Laden, Suspected Clinton/Bush/FBI complicity in the cover-up
            and protection of Bin Laden) — Died in the WTC on 9/11

            Deborah Palfrey (Ran an escort service that had 911 Perps on it’s list) — Suicide by hanging

            David Wherley (US General who ordered fighter jets to scramble on 9/11) — Train crash

            Un-named Ticket Agent (Boston Logan Ticket Agent who checked Atta and Alomari) — Suicide

            Suzanne Jovin (Yale Student who had a thesis about Osama Bin Laden, Her
            thesis adviser was an intelligence operative) — Murdered (Killer
            unknown)

            Perry Kucinich (Brother of Congressman who advocated new 9/11 investigation) — Fell down

            Salvatore Princiotta (9/11 FDNY Firefighter from Ladder 9) — Murdered

            Ezra Harel (Chairman of the Israeli Company That Handled Security For All 9/11 Airports) — Heart attack

            Bruce Ivins (Patsy in the 9/11-linked “Anthrax” Case) — Drug overdose

          • cindereller

            9/11 Family Victims Advocate, Beverly Eckert.

            Beverly met with Obama in 2009 at the White House asking him to open
            an new 9/11 investigation, Obama shook her hand on TV, then sent her on a
            ‘complimentary’ flight to Buffalo
            to celebrate her late husband’s (who was killed in the North Tower)
            58th Birthday. Her airplane crashed just 6 days after meeting with Obama
            and Beverly Eckert was silenced forever.

            Beverly Eckert — 9/11 Widow, Earwitness to an explosion in the Towers, Refused hush money

            The crash of Continental Express flight 3407 has brought tragedy to
            the friends and family of all 50 victims. But for one family, grief has
            struck for a second time.

            Relatives of Beverly Eckert, whose husband died in the Sept. 11
            terrorist attacks, say she was aboard the Buffalo, N.Y.-bound flight
            when it crashed in Clarence Center, N.Y.

            Eckert was a WTC explosion earwitness:

            “I heard him say, ‘I love you,’ then I heard a terrible explosion and
            a roaring sound,” Eckert told The Stamford Advocate. “It sounded like
            Niagara Falls. I knew without seeing that he was gone.” [...]

            The plane was flying with no troubles at one point, but then it
            suddenly started pitching wildly. The slick media ‘experts’ claimed it
            was due to ice, yet the plane had powerful de-icing systems.

            Also, why the FBI presence at the crash scene? The FBI is only
            supposed to look into cases where there is a chance of foul play
            involved. They said that foul play was ruled out, yet their presence
            proves otherwise.

            This suggests that they knew there was foul play and that their only
            purpose at the scene was to cover up said foul play. The foreniscs
            recovery efforts were led by the same man who led the forensics recovery efforts for Flight 93 in Shanksville.

            This man was a FEMA operative who had worked with the UN on cases
            like the crash of Egyptian Airlines 990 (Another black-op). Was he
            considered a “safe pair of hands” for dealing with something like this?

            There are many problems with the Flight 3407 Crash.

            Eckert had met Obama the week before the crash. Did she start asking the wrong questions?

            List of mysterious deaths of witnesses:

            WHO KNEW TOO MUCH? Video – https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fqqVD4aFWZ4

            LIST SO FAR

            Barry Jennings (Eyewitness to explosions and bodies inside WTC7) — Undisclosed causes

            Kenneth Johannemann (Eyewitness to explosions inside WTC, Saw no
            airplanes hit but just saw “floors blow up”) — Gunshot to the head,
            ruled a suicide

            Beverly Eckert (Wife of 9/11 WTC Victim, Earwitness to WTC Explosion, Refused hush money) — Airplane crash

            Prasanna Kalahasthi (Wife of 9/11 “Flight 11 Passenger”) — Suicide by hanging

            David Graham (Dentist who saw three of the 9/11 Hijackers with Pakistani businessman in Shreveport, Louisiana) — Murdered (Poisoned with anti-freeze)

            Paul Smith (Pilot of WABC7′s 9/11 “International Shot” Chopper) — Car accident

            Michael H. Doran (9/11 Victims Lawyer) — Airplane crash

            Bertha Champagne (Longtime babysitter for 911 Perp Marvin Bush’s family) — Crushed by a car

            Christopher Landis (Former Operations Manager for Safety Service
            Patrol for the Virginia Department of Transportation, Interviewed by
            makers of “The Pentacon”, Gave makers of “The Pentacon” a photo
            collection, Involved in the response to the Pentagon attack) — Suicide

            John P. O’Neill (FBI Counter-terrorism expert, Obsessed with catching
            Osama Bin Laden, Suspected Clinton/Bush/FBI complicity in the cover-up
            and protection of Bin Laden) — Died in the WTC on 9/11

            Deborah Palfrey (Ran an escort service that had 911 Perps on it’s list) — Suicide by hanging

            David Wherley (US General who ordered fighter jets to scramble on 9/11) — Train crash

            Un-named Ticket Agent (Boston Logan Ticket Agent who checked Atta and Alomari) — Suicide

            Suzanne Jovin (Yale Student who had a thesis about Osama Bin Laden,
            Her thesis adviser was an intelligence operative) — Murdered (Killer
            unknown)

            Perry Kucinich (Brother of Congressman who advocated new 9/11 investigation) — Fell down

            Salvatore Princiotta (9/11 FDNY Firefighter from Ladder 9) — Murdered

            Ezra Harel (Chairman of the Israeli Company That Handled Security For All 9/11 Airports) — Heart attack

            Bruce Ivins (Patsy in the 9/11-linked “Anthrax” Case) — Drug overdose

            http://www.american-buddha.com/911.deadwitnesses.htm

            Read her full statement entitled “MY SILENCE CANNOT BE BOUGHT”

  • Mark Mathews

    Many times I watched in real time, as events unfolded (before they could be edited), interviews of people on the street in New York, running from the collapse of the first tower who proclaimed they heard a series of charges go off in the building just prior to its collapse. Those interviews were available for all Americans to watch on the internet for several weeks after the disaster, but were eventually blocked. I guess I’ll need to get my memory erased too if I’m ever going to swallow the official explanation of what happened that day. Yes, the terrorist won, but they never were form the Middle East. My condolences to the soldiers who fought for liberty, but killed the wrong people.

    • greg gaskill

      And condolences to the thousands of innocent civilians within Iraq and Afghanistan. We forget a life is someone’s son, daughter, father, mother and has real meaning, with real sorrow and grief as a result of their passing. Not to mention the potential for life changing hardship as a result. We must stop the standing army which our “leaders” have put in place in the name of freedom. Our freedom has been severely compromised, and we have given many terrorists lots of good reason to respond in kind.

  • Skeptic

    And when “in position”, would anyone in the buildings NOTICE the
    explosives? :)

    Is it “REALLY”, that EASY to Hide a DEMOLITION in 3 packed towers
    of workers, cleaners, security, maintenance etc? :)

    Did they have SECURITY in the towers? :)

    Re how LONG and how MANY people do ya think I would take to RIG 3 towers
    those sizes, under normal/non secretive mode?

    Anyone any idea? :)

    • Alice

      1. Core beams were not visible to residents, but could be accessed by maintenance crews.
      2. Security was run by a company owned by Marvin Bush, GW’s brother.
      3. It is likely this was done over a period of weeks, though a proper independent investigation could uncover this if it happened. NIST did not even look for any evidence of explosives.

      • nitemare2

        And again it’s all Bush’s fault.

        • Kevin Merck

          Fail

        • GaryTruth

          Go away. You’re adding nothing to the conversation.

          “Are you an engineer? What engineering school do you have a degree from?”

          Yeah, those are the real questions asswipe. You have to be an engineer to know what a controlled demolition looks like.

          I hope they’re paying you good for this bullshit. Either that, or they’re using you because they caught you with kiddie porn.

          • Kevin Merck

            No, it doesn’t take an engineer to know what a controlled demolition looks like.
            No offence intended Mr. Truth, but why don’t you take a break.

          • GaryTruth

            You’re obviously an intelligent man who doesn’t like the insinuation that Israel and NeoCons had anything to do with 9/11.

            This from your past comments that, God forbid, some “Truther” might be called an anti-semite because everything points to our Zionist friends on this one.

            Sorry Kev, save your politically correct nonsense for Kenneth Frazier. Here we want the truth and if we see a shill on this board, call him out and stop acting like a corporate pussy.

            Offense taken.

          • Kevin Merck

            There’s little doubt in my mind that you are one of the shills on this board.
            I’ve been doing this for seven years now, Mr. Truth.
            I know you won’t go away, but it’s okay to wish you would.

          • GaryTruth

            You’d be completely wrong Mr. Vaccines.

            Ben Swann gave up his comfortable and successful career at Fox 19 and took a gigantic risk to tell the truth in videos like these.

            Politeness and signing petitions and tolerating obvious Cass Sunstein disinformation agents like Skeptic isn’t getting us anywhere.

            I’ve come to one conclusion and it’s not pretty. This is a false flag event and forced my country to go to war against Israel’s enemies.

          • Kevin Merck

            I could be wrong, it wouldn’t be the first time :-)
            Sooner or later, (if you are legit) you’ll learn that what you are doing is the wrong approach.
            My feeling, from many of your comments, is that you are not legit and a waste of everyone’s time.
            You’re doing nothing but feeding stooges. Stooges feeding stooges is about all the deniers have left. They have lost all the real arguments.

          • GaryTruth

            Okay, I’m willing to listen on how to more effective.

            The most convincing aspects of 9/11 research, to me anyways, was eye witness testimony of Barry Jennings and William Rodriguez, along with Danny Jowenenko’s reaction to seeing Building 7 come down for the first time.

            But to do all this research, and be convinced that it was an intentional and orchestrated event, and not comment on who did it? C’mon! Unless you’re an academic, it just doesn’t work that way. Normal people want to keep digging until they get an answer that they can substantiate.

          • Kevin Merck

            Comment all you want, but stick to the facts. Directly address the stooges as little as possible by refusing to argue with people who have no interest in the truth.
            That’s what works best for me. People will read your comments and see it for the truth if that’s what they’re interested in.
            Leave Israel out of it for now. No sense in giving the talking-heads ammunition. That’s not political correctness, it’s using your head. Don’t give your enemies ammunition to use against you.

          • GaryTruth

            Last comment to you, promise.

            And where has all my research led me?

            Using Ben Swann’s Socratic questioning method?

            On the morning of 9/11, who was on ABC News telling us it was Osama Bin Laden?

            Who was on NBC News telling us the same? On BBC? On CBS? On CNN?

            Okay. Now, what common connection do these five men have in their backgrounds?

            Popular Mechanics ran their famous “Debunking 9/11″ issue. Who wrote it? What is his connection with the five men already identified?

            Who were the only people arrested on 9/11? When they were released, where were they sent?

            Fox News Carl Cameron and Britt Hume report – why is it now censored?

            Good luck on here with NightMare and Skeptic. There’s your waste of time Mr. Merck.

          • Kevin Merck

            “Good luck on here with NightMare and Skeptic. There’s your waste of time Mr. Merck.”

            No doubt.

            As for the rest of your comment, it’s always been my inclination to stick to the physical evidence for controlled demolition.
            We can sort out all the nasty little details after we get some indictments based on the forensic evidence.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            Why do some people want to keep saying you’re not an engineer, when there are over 2000 architects and engineers who are saying the governments story does not pan out.

    • greg gaskill

      Your ego is doing the talking, instead of actually being skeptical. YOU can’t figure out how they did it, so therefore it didn’t happen. However if you Were skeptical, you might try wondering instead how this building fell the way we are told by NIST (the only building to have done so – if you don’t count towers 1 and 2). There is an awful lot riding on this, and lots of real experts – you know, they guys who build these things are stating emphatically – it just doesn’t work that way. I’m gonna have to call NIST out on this. Do a search on who benefited from 911, and follow the money. Motive is a major component to investigative work.

    • Flash

      Seek and ye shall find, Skeptic. You don’t seem like you are interested in the truth though. You seem to only be interested in perpetuating the lies or government wants us to believe. The first 2 mins of this video will answer your questions above. Watch the whole video and stop being a skeptic.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnbMjAN7Bws

    • GaryTruth

      No need for expensive controlled demolition companies anymore.

      Just start fires in the right place, let them burn for six hours, and they fall perfectly symmetrical into their own footprints.

    • Tim

      Yes, they had security in the towers. It was provided by a company called “Securacom”. President George W. Bush’s younger brother, Marvin P. Bush, was a principal (high-up official) in Securacom.

      Securacom pulled bomb-sniffing dogs from the towers on September 6, 2001 after two weeks of heightened security, supposedly because of phone threats.

    • Tim

      On the weekend before 9/11, the power was cut for 36 hours in tower 2. From the 50th floor up, there were no security cameras or security locks on doors. And “engineers” were entering and leaving the building during this time. Supposedly it was for some sort of communications upgrade to the building.

    • Mark Dandeneau

      Of course this was all addressed in Loose Change and I am sure in many of the other videos that are available.If you really want to know the truth watch something that has at least a two hour length. All of the comments here cannot come close to what you will learn. Then try to either come up with a logical counter argument to each point yourself or try and find someone who can explain it logically.

  • Kevin Merck

    Don’t let the fact that it was ‘jet fuel’ lead you astray.

    Jet fuel is kerosene that burns cold in the open atmosphere.

    How cold? Look it up!

    Steel melts at 2700 degrees. Kerosene in the open air burns at least 1500 degrees colder than that.

    http://rethink911.org/petition/

  • Kevin Merck

    For those who don’t have any experience in the way these “stooges” work. They gang up on a message board playing both sides, arguing and name calling until everyone is disgusted and goes away.

    Go to A&E for 9/11 truth if you want to learn the facts.

    http://rethink911.org/petition/

  • Uncle_Meat

    It’s really amazing to see how so many still cling to the official narrative. They will believe in the new physics being promoted by the official story. They will believe that 2+2=5. They are found in so called alternative political parties such as the ‘Tea Party’ not only in the mainstream. This is because these souls are too frightened to believe otherwise. It’s a severe case of cowardice and is truly pathetic to behold.

    • Kevin Merck

      I agree that most of it is cowardice but much of it is out of pure evil.
      Some people don’t want to know the truth. They relish every minute of their willful ignorance and actually get off on it.

    • Mark Dandeneau

      Cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing. I recently had an unpleasant conversation with someone close to me who could not accept this. I would not characterize this person as a coward or evil. Just someone who is well off financially. This information appears as a threat to that stability. Remember every one is different. I also presented this information to a couple of other people several years ago who initially rejected it, but have since came to terms and have accepted it. The important thing is to present it to them and eventually I think most people will accept it. Of course some of the deniers are NIST employees or others who have direct involvement…they know the truth, but are trying to extend the lie as long as possible.

  • Michelle

    Great job Ben! :D

  • Kevin Merck

    Several tons of molten iron – Rapid oxidation and intergranular melting

    Microspheres of molten iron – 1400 victims blown into tiny fragments

    Total building destruction – Complete dismemberment of steel frame

    Temperatures well above what is possible under alleged conditions

    Expanding pyroclastic dust clouds – Positive ID of Nano Thermite

    Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking

    Destruction through path of greatest resistance at near free-fall

    Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes

    Muti-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 60 mph

    Sounds of explosions – Imploded into its own footprint

    Evidence of foreknowledge – Expert corroboration

    Rapid onset of collapse – Symmetrical collapse

    Visible squib 40+ stories below sequence

    The last fire burned out on 12/19/2001

    Sum of Evidence = Controlled Demolition.

    These are facts to be dealt with; not opinions to be debated.

    • Tim

      Yes Kevin. All of these mean it was not airplanes that brought the towers down. It’s just the way it is. Building-7 is what did it for me. I didn’t want to accept it until I looked into Building-7, then after that, all the other evidence was easier for me to digest to know even the twin towers couldn’t have come down like they did either. Building-7 changes everything once you understand it couldn’t have collapsed under the explanation given.

    • Tim

      Kevin,

      This is the “Tim” that was posting earlier today. Someone has recently decided to use “Tim” as a guest posting name as well. I won’t be posting again, so the next “Tim” you see won’t be me.

  • O’Leary

    Ben, I’ve been a big fan of yours for awhile now. I consider myself a libertarian and I really love the reporting you do. But please don’t have these few spelling and grammatical mistakes, though, that you had in this article. This really undermines your credibility. Also, for a complicated subject like this, there has to be way more research done to be certain of anything. Talking with one mechanical engineer does not provide enough support. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.

    You should also look into the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I have heard that list has been stacked with a BUNCH of people who can’t even be classified as architects and engineers. Please Ben for the sake of your credibility do more research into this before you report on such claims, because these are very ballsy and groundbreaking claims. I love your reporting Ben and I want to see you do well, but I’m not sold on the truth movement behind 9/11.

    • Jonathan Schreiber

      If you still have questions you haven’t done enough of your own research. We The People should not be completely reliant on fellows like Ben to just do all the work and find the answers for us. As citizens of the United States, it is our patriotic duty to question and search for answers related to events like this ourselves. Not just wait for all the evidence to be spoon fed to us.

      • O’Leary

        I can almost guarantee you don’t have enough evidence and research to conclusively beyond a doubt say that 9/11 was an inside job. In a case like this, with such an extraordinary claim being made you need irrefutable evidence. I have done research, and my own research. I used to be a conspiracy junkie for months on end. I don’t just wait for evidence to be spoonfed to me either. You need to check yourself before you go making a bunch of false assumptions. You’re giving the liberty movement a bad name. We’re all on the same team here.

        • Jonathan Schreiber

          I don’t know what I said to give the liberty movement a bad name. Also, while you may be right that there is not enough physical/conclusive evidence, (anymore anyways because much of it was disposed of as quickly as possible) to prove it was an inside job, there is still enough evidence out there, video, expert analysis, witness testimony such as firefighters and police officers who were on the scene, to be able to make a fairly solid case that there was thermite in those buildings and they did not collapse solely from burning jet fuel or in the case of building 7 office fires. Also when you look back through out history to the several other occasions the US has either coerced, fabricated, or ignored eminent threats they knew about and let them happen in order to justify going to war with other countries it doesn’t take much more than common sense to realize that the official story that was told to the American public was a bunch of poppycock :P

        • Mark Dandeneau

          So what have you researched. Have you seen Loose Change, or maybe another video…I heard there is now one that is 5 hours long. Just the fact of the NIST report which is obviously false and a coverup is pretty conclusive to me. Why would the government lie and cover up what happened if they were not involved?

    • Jonathan Schreiber

      Ben is obviously on a budget, to do a real program with all the evidence you are asking for it would take a several hour documentary, this piece isn’t meant to provide all the evidence necessary to prove the official narrative of that day as a lie. It is meant to get people thinking and talking about it again, providing enough real facts and expert opinion to get the wheels turning in peoples minds.

      • O’Leary

        I didn’t ask him to provide ALL the evidence to disprove the whole story. I just suggested to do a little more research about certain things, but thank you for putting words into my mouth.

        • Jonathan Schreiber

          I apologize if I misunderstood you, it just seemed like you were really unhappy with this piece overall, I thought he did a great job with 13 min. :P

  • Allen Piercy

    What was his answer at 6:03? I replied it over and over and I can’t understand what he said.

    • simba

      then you’d have a partial collapse

      • Allen Piercy

        Thank you…I replay that like 10 times and I just was not clicking to me.

  • Jonathan Schreiber

    Great reporting Ben, my faith in you as an honest journalist and human being has been reinforced by this awesome interview. As wonderful as it is to see that many more people are starting to question the official narrative of what happened on that fateful day, I am still not particularly hopeful that our government will ever do the right thing and do a real investigation. At least not in any kind of time frame that will actually hold anyone accountable with arrests or convictions. The complete truth will most likely come to light after those responsible are dead or to old for incarceration to matter. I for one hope that I am wrong.

    • Kevin Merck

      That makes two of us.

      Just think if the Founding Fathers thought the way you do. There wouldn’t be a USA.

      http://rethink911.org/petition/

      • Jonathan Schreiber

        I will gladly sign the petition, what did you mean exactly about your comment on the founding fathers? I just believe that many politicians with in our government are very corrupt and most likely wont let a new and meaningful investigation take place.

        • Jonathan Schreiber

          That doesn’t mean I don’t think we should do our part and try to make it happen.

        • Kevin Merck

          “I just believe that many politicians with in our government are very corrupt and most likely wont let a new and meaningful investigation take place.”
          How do you think the Founding Fathers would deal with these criminals?
          If you want to act like a sheep, you’ll be treated like one.

  • zeestan

    we are all guilty of letting the 9-11 coup take place, Especially those of us with a brain who weren’t out in the streets screaming for bush/cheney’s hanging. myself included I’m actually ashamed of myself for not doing more than donating to the sites fighting the good fight

  • Joshua Wright

    As always, great job Ben. Love your tenacity. Lest we forget that the owner of The World Trade Center, Larry Silverstein, had recently renewed his insurance policy on the buildings prior to the “attacks” and is also quoted in previous interviews as saying that he loved taking his breakfast atop the Trade Center and coincidently or not, his wife “insisted’ that he go see his dermatologist that very morning and then, after the attacks, tried to get double the insurance claim of $3.5 billion to $7.1 billion by stating the two separate buildings were separate events. Makes one wonder the level of deceit involved with this tragic day.

  • sinic77

    Let’s say, 9/11 was an inside job. You need people, money, project planning etc etc. Let’s say it was indeed controlled demolition, it’s not like you leave a briefcase in the building and it blows up. You need to drill holes and place explosives. And you need to rig the wires and stuff. In essence, it’s hard to hide this exercise. And if people are involved in setting up 9/11, there is always someone willing to talk for money/fame. No one in the last 12 years has come forward. The president can’t say a word without the opposition blowing it out of proportion. You think Bush would have held office for 7 years after 9/11 if he were involved? Don’t you think the Democrats would have found everything in their power to bring him down? Look at the leaked documents from WikiLeaks or Edward Snowden. There is nothing that says that it was an inside job.

    Come on guys. They threatened, we thought they couldn’t do it, they did, they killed 2996, we killed 224,475. Let’s move on.

    • Tim

      “And you need to rig the wires and stuff. In essence, it’s hard to hide this exercise. “

      • sinic77

        In one of my comments in this thread, I have acknowledged that it is really easy to perform activities in secret. I think we still do. And it’s true for Citigroup Center as well. However, if the building had collapsed, there would certainly be someone who would have interests in finding out what happened. For instance, a competing Architect, will have enough motivation and funds to interview and pay for testimony that outline what was done. Not contracting facts. Actual outline of the work carried out by him/her.

        • Tim

          The FACTS still remain unshakable that WTC-7 could NOT have fallen due to the fires shown on various videos from that day. The time of the free-fall implosion of that building, the strongest/hottest part of the fire had PASSED, and it was COOLING. A Structure wouldn’t collapse while cooling my friend. The fire was not the cause of the collapse. The timed and systematic removal of all the support from the columns SIMULTANEOUSLY was what caused that collapse and it doesn’t take an engineer to see that.

          It also doesn’t take an engineer to know that buildings don’t ‘collapse’ like that naturally from asymmetrical damage. If that building truly had ‘collapsed’, it would have fallen in a totally different fashion. Not INWARD in it’s own footprint down to the bottom floors in a nice pile of pick-up-sticks.

    • Ray

      This post has no bearing on the evidence…it is merely conjecture and personal opinions.

      “And if people are involved in setting up 9/11, there is always someone willing to talk for money/fame. No one in the last 12 years has come forward.”

      Patently not true, people have come forward, these being from among those who knew about the incident before it happened. Also, official testimonies have been made that present clear contradictions to the official narrative. Read David Ray Griffin’s “9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press”, he documents the pertinent facts quite well in this regard. Also, some who would have been able to testify to the truth were killed that day, one John O’Neill comes to mind especially.

      Furthermore, it is not inconceivable that nobody would have spoken out from among those who perpetrated something like a demolition. They would obviously have every reason to keep it a secret…and would probably still have every reason to keep working to make sure the truth doesn’t come out.

      As far as your claim about Democrats would have been jumping at the opportunity to take Bush down, well they did make an awful lot of attempts, but never based on anything to do with a controlled demolition, only superficial stuff really. Why that could have been the case I think one needs to be honest about the actual dynamic that exists between the supposed “opposing” sides. When you view the rhetoric, sure they sound diametrically opposed. But, when you look at the changes that both sides have made towards the same general goals, those goals being socialist/collectivist policies (and this is a fact as clear as day), then you aren’t left with such a difficult time believing that they are so hostile towards each other when push comes to shove.

      To top it off, it was EXTREMELY difficult to discuss these issues seriously, as the corporate media had set the stage for anyone questioning the narrative to be immediately labelled a “conspiracy theorist”. This fact alone points to how comprehensive the actual conspiracy seems to have been.

      There is much more to mention in these regards, but I think that’s a good start.

      • sinic77

        If you have worked on any major project, of any kind, you know one thing for sure. It is impossible to write a report which no one is going to find contradicting evidence on. I go as far as telling you that I wrote a report on a system I designed from scratch and after 6 months of revision on the wordings, I still get emails that I am contradicting myself in the report. The report has been reviewed by 6 other other teams, 4 of which really get paid to find flaws in my report. I don’t see the 9-11 report as any different.

        I agree that there are forces beyond we know. I don’t know if those forces are people or situations. Regardless of what those forces are, there is always a martyr who wants to come forward. Look at Julian Assange. He has enough tools dig out the secrets. Hackers have infiltrated FBI. It is not hard to pay someone to dig the secrets out. If the secrets don’t come out, it simply means, there is no secret. I don’t intend to say that no one should question. I mean to say that we have asked / questioned /hacked and debated enough. If there was anything that was concrete, it should be out by now.

        • Tim

          “It is impossible to write a report which no one is going to find contradicting evidence on.”

          Yeah, but the premise of the NIST report was found flawed. Not mere pieces of it.

          • yLordy

            I bet if we dig deeper we will find it was the Martians that did it

          • Palmer Eldrich

            the reason people are generally ignoring you is because you outed yourself as a shill too early , you need to go make a new user name now and try to ease into it next time… agree with some points then start to try to bring doubt in , the way you are doing it is very 90′s style now.

          • yLordy

            I have no idea what you are talking about, what is a shill, and I don’t really care if people don’t comment, it is not an argument I am looking for I am putting forward my perspective on it. If people agree or disagree matters none to me.

          • GaryTruth

            He’s right. I’m no longer reading anything you’re writing because I somehow don’t believe you’re authentic.

            Change your username and try again. Thanks.

          • yLordy

            Why should I, I’m not authentic, WTF is that supposed to mean and whats the point changing my name I will still say the same things, idiots!!!

          • Mark Dandeneau

            LOL, at least you’re good for a laugh or two.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            And your opinion is based on what? Have you watched even one video that presents evidence or is Mars too far away to beam that information up?

          • Palmer Eldrich

            i respect that – then why don’t you try to address some of the issues. – comment on the actual building , how do you feel about it , do you feel comfortable when you see a video of it , can you rest easy knowing it just , woops fell down , would anyone feel comfortable entering a steel framed building again if we believe that a grid of steal can just ..wooops free fall to earth? that’s right a grid of steel basically . how does this work ?

          • yLordy

            I have worked in the construction industry for 40 years and have seen some shambolic architects and I have seen some high classed ones, it is what you know at the time. Since 9/11 or 11/9 as it is here, the US laws will have been tightened to ensure floor “hangers” are not pressure mounted but will be fixed so as to avoid this type of incident from happening. You have to realise though that skyscrapers have to be able to move, if they are too rigid they are susceptible to stresses that can rip them apart. That is why cranes sway in the wind, it is not the flimsy construction, it is meant to move to counter the forces of wind against the structure.

        • Ray

          “It is impossible to write a report which no one is going to find contradicting evidence on.”

          The issue is not contradicting evidence itself, the issue is the conclusions you draw based on that contradicting evidence. The conclusion has to match the evidence…the official story simply does not take all the evidence into account. The conclusion is what directly contradicts the evidence.

          “If the secrets don’t come out, it simply means, there is no secret.”

          This is an area I shy away from, because it’s all conjecture. The lack of investigation that’s been done up to this point doesn’t allow us to reasonably and/or fully come to any conclusions as to who was involved and exactly how they did it. And this is the main point: we need a new investigation because we clearly don’t have the proper answers to the questions which the evidence causes to arise.

    • KissesandNoise

      If it was an “inside job” the extent of the conspiracy would be the CIA helping to train the hijackers – not necessarily for this exact mission, but fostering them the same way the FBI has fostered other terrorists in recent years. The next level of the conspiracy would be the chatter of an imminent attack being ignored the same way we ignored the intelligence on Pearl Harbor, essentially allowing something to happen in order to get widespread support for war. If that is the case, this goes far beyond daily politics and republicans vs. democrats. This is rogue elements within the military-industrial complex. These people don’t come forward. Notice how Bush, Romney, Obama, whatever, doesn’t really matter? Even with a “liberal” as president we still have fast and furious, Syria, Libya, NDAA, drones, NSA/Prism, expansion of the TSA, etc? That’s because there are decision makers above the legislative and executive branches.

      I feel you are right about the extreme level of conspiracy that includes wiring the buildings for demolition. There are just too many variables to pull that off in one of the most famous business buildings in the world. So I think the conspiracy is: They threatened. We knew they could do something (maybe not quite this big) and it would be perfect for the neocons to leverage us into war. They did. If so, we can’t move on.

      • sinic77

        Agreed. There is no such thing as Republicans/Democrats in the end. There are forces that are far beyond what we know. Like you said, I only disagree with extreme level of conspiracy. I firmly believe that we retaliated with a hammer when someone thew a paper ball at us. No that I think 9/11 was right, but about about 250K lives for 3K lives? I don’t know how killing more people solves 9/11. Truly a sad fact. It is also true that, given a opportunity, anyone will milk an opportunity to the last drop. Which is what I think the US Government did. There was no need to pump in 5 Trillion and use excessive force.

        • KissesandNoise

          Indeed. There really is no reason except to line the pockets of a very select and elite few at the expense of so many.

      • KissesandNoise

        I’m curious as to why more people would vote down than up on my comment above. I’m supporting a conspiracy without going overboard. Making sense is the best way to get exposure for something like this. So is it that there is not enough conspiracy in the comment or too much?

        • sinic77

          I don’t understand up vote or down vote. Why down vote if you can’t back your conviction. Beats me!

    • MountainMike

      If you do not understand nano-thermitics, you shouldn’t assume that the demolition had to be done the way you think it should have been done.

      Watch the A&E 911 full video, especially the section about Lawrence Livermore Lab’s development of “Nano-thermitics”. The Sol-Gel Thermate probably could have been “painted” on! Nobody would suspect they were “painting” on a nano-thermitic compound, not even the painters!

      If you somehow doubt that areas of “our government” can keep a secret, remember the Manhattan project and the current NSA secrecy scandal.

      • sinic77

        Both the Manhattan Project and NSA Secrecy Scandal have been leaked by competing agencies. USSR gathered the information for the Manhattan Project almost immediately, including the blue prints. And a few folks have already blown the whistle on NSA. I am not saying that you can’t conduct a secret operation. It is however, impossible to conceal it in the long run. There are always people who talk. Always.

        • Michael Hamann

          I don’t know where you get your information, but it is slightly incorrect.

          Russia
          “tried” to get the nuclear info, but was pretty much delayed by several
          years – it was NOT “immediate”, as you stated. That’s why they lagged
          the U.S.A. by about five (5) years in achieving a nuclear bomb. Of
          course, they also had a problem with a good uranium source, unlike the
          U.S.A.

          The NSA has only recently had some of its covers pulled by
          Edward Snowden, so who are the “few folks” you are referring?? And who
          are these “competing agencies” you are referring to regarding the NSA??

          While
          the Manhattan Project was going on, NO ordinary U.S. Citizens knew
          about it for a decade, maybe more. Yes, EVENTUALLY, (sometimes) the
          truth is uncovered, but NOT always.

          • http://archive.org/details/antifederalist_0707_librivox The Federal Farmer

            This is correct. I live downwind from ORNL within biking distance, and while I wasn’t yet in existence during those times, the story of The Secret City is well documented and well discussed here abouts. People in the surrounding communities simply knew nothing about what was actually happening in Oak Ridge.

          • sinic77

            1) Russia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project#Soviet_intelligence_management_in_Manhattan_Project

            “In 1945, the Soviet intelligence obtained rough “blueprints” of the first U.S. atomic device.[citation needed] Alexei Kojevnikov has estimated, based on newly released Soviet documents, that the primary way in which the espionage may have sped up the Soviet project was that it allowed Khariton to avoid dangerous tests to determine the size of the critical mass: “tickling the dragon’s tail”, as it was called in the U.S., consumed a good deal of time and claimed at least two lives; see Harry K. Daghlian, Jr. and Louis Slotin”

            2) Any country with a decent intelligent agency, over 12 years, can surely find evidence of wrong doing in 9/11. And why do you think they would do that? If someone can prove that 9/11 was an inside job, the IS government will go down a spiral and other countries can have much to gain if US were to fall. Let’s say Russia, UK. Hell, Iran will jump on the chance to get rid of the US government.

      • yLordy

        Did they have Nano-thermitic paint in 1987???

        • Mark Dandeneau

          I have heard that what we know about today is about 10 or 15 years behind what the military has. Of course the time frame is debatable, but there is no denying that the government and military have a lot of technology that is far ahead of what is available in the civilian world. A good example is that it has been speculated that the planes that hit the towers were remote controlled with no people on board. Now in 2001 there was room for debate as to whether there were in existence full size aircraft that could be remote controlled, but within 10 years you could no longer argue that point intelligently. One question…do you think that you could build a model with say twenty stilts holding up a platform? Use wood, steel, whatever material you want. Now can you apply uneven fire to those supports and have the platform fall straight down? I would bet that you would have a tough time making it fall straight down even if you made every effort to evenly burn all the supports. But in short comments it is impossible to present all the evidence….I saw on this post that there is a 5 hour video out. I myself watched Loose Change several years ago and it was around 2 hours long. There is a tremendous amount of evidence. Are you afraid to look at it. Look at it and then come here and post a logical counter argument to it. I was tore up when I found out the truth about this. I scoured the internet for anyone who debunk the points that Loose Change made. I found only one person. I communicated with him back and forth, but he could not logically counter even one point that that video made.He could only talk in circles.

          • yLordy

            The best witness is the guy who was there watching, every video after it can be edited to say what you like and Americans love conspiracy, or am I just a conspiracy, perhaps there is a conspiracy to make me look like a conspiracy……..oh crap I am getting paranoid

      • Mark Dandeneau

        That’s true they even captured Japanese spies near a nuclear facility and thought for sure that they had a lead on it, but came to the conclusion that they knew nothing about it.

    • oldskoolsoldier

      “And if people are involved in setting up 9/11, there is always someone willing to talk for money/fame. No one in the last 12 years has come forward.”
      I’ve had this same problem with 9/11 being a governmental conspiracy. But at the same time, if you look at the JFK assassination, which almost 90% of people today do not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone due to the overwhelming evidence against the “official” explanation, we are just a couple of months short of the 50th anniversary and still no one has come forward about that situation.
      So I generally just try to stay away from conspiracy theories and focus on the science and facts.

      • sinic77

        “So I generally just try to stay away from conspiracy theories and focus on the science and facts.” – is the intent of my comment as well.

        • sinic77

          So to get this straight, if people stay away from conspiracy theories and focus on science and facts, you down vote them? Guess this is a place where theories are valued more than facts.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            2000 architects and engineers are talking about facts. They are questioning the governments “conspiracy theory”…oops did I miss something here…how could it be a theory if the government said it…it must be a fact…because….because….oh I give up you tell me sinic77 why is it that what the government said about 911 is a fact, even though there was no crime scene established, no evidence secured and protected.

          • sinic77

            FYI – I never said that things are facts if the government says it. I do believe that government has a reason to lie on the pretext of doing greater good. I am not sure I trust that. It’s like me giving you questionable financial advise claiming that it will do you good in the future. I may be right. But, you have no way of knowing if I am right. Which is dangerous. Now coming to 2000 people talking about facts, there are 2000 talking about facts that disagree with yours. Do I trust them? Possibly not. Do I trust the 2000 engineers you mentioned? Possibly not. But, what I do trust is that if the US government had anything do with it, other than standing down and not taking precautions, there are enough adversaries who are to gain something by exposing the government. For example, the moon landing. If the US faked it, trust me, Russia would jump on it. They lost a lot of national pride because of it. They would jump on it even today. Look at how US treats Russia? Don’t you think Russia will stick to the US if it finds anything juicy?

    • wrong sort

      Well the whole Osama situation seemed pretty askew to me as well and 90% of the people involved in that operation have since been killed or silenced. And they were Navy Seals with service records and families in this country. Anyone involved in rigging the towers would most likely have been immediately shipped back to some middle eastern rat hole to never be heard from again.

      • sinic77

        Osama situation seemed askew – valid point. Everything else – is just paranoia. I can assure you that even if all the facts were put out, you’d still have an uneasy feeling. 90% of the people have been killed or silenced is like me saying that 84% of people who looked at the evidence have proved that 9/11 was an act of terror. I just made 84% up based on my conviction. That does not add any value to the discussion as it a conviction, not a fact. Everything else you mentioned is just that “bad things” have happened. An article on the internet is not a valid source of information.

        • wrong sort

          Except… My 90% is based on math and facts:
          http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=13559.
          While your 84% is based on you making something up. And nobody has “proved” that 9/11 was an act of terror because people still don’t believe it. Also even if 84% of the people who looked at the evidence proved it was an act of terror that means 16% proved otherwise. Which means the 84% (which only exist in your imagination anyway) would not have “proved” anything.

          But forget that for a minute and explain to me how the hi-jacker’s passports were found intact and unscathed blocks away from the towers almost immediately after the crash. The “terrorists” must have had the passports on their persons, and were most likely in the cockpit of the plane. When the plane hit the tower did the passports then eject from the “terrorist’s” pockets, then the plane itself, then travel through the building, then end up blocks away without a mark even though the plane itself including everyone and everything else on board was disintegrated by the impact and ensuing explosion? And that is just one item on a very long list of things that don’t add up in this case.

    • yLordy

      I agree, if they put all this effort into helping America instead of talking bollocks it would be a happier place to live

      • sinic77

        Couldn’t have worded it better.

        • Mark Dandeneau

          Sure you could have….how about “ignorance is bliss”.

          • sinic77

            I would call it ignorance if no one ever tried to question the facts. All the facts have been questioned. I wouldn’t say we have ignored it.

    • http://archive.org/details/antifederalist_0707_librivox The Federal Farmer

      Assuming there’ an actual difference between the two factions of government, which there’s not. So tell us how your theory plays out if the “two sides” work in collaboration toward the same goal.

      • sinic77

        So, I get that no one here believes anything. Let me ask another way. We went to war with Iraq in 1990, Korea, Vietnam, Libya and almost Syria. None of that needed a grand scale panning like 9/11 to get public support. If you read the news, every time we have gone to war was for democracy. For human rights. For freedom. We have been serving democracy in the world one war at a time. So, why on earth would you do 9/11 to wage a war? You might say it’s because they want to instill fear here. You can do that with a few PR campaigns. You don’t need a 9/11 to do that. Alcohol is still advertised and sold even though it is the major cause of accidents. And no one fears alcohol. Reason? Good PR. Cigarettes are really bad for you and should be banned. Reason? Good PR. If you insist that the world is out there to get you, well, then it’s really had to convince you that it’s not. If you feel that the government is trying to do something bad based on a few loose facts, then, you are missing the point. There are enough scientists and nerds who get great satisfaction in proving that something is right or wrong. Includes me and you since we are trying to determine what really happened. In general, if something is wrong, over time, enough people get the facts and prove what happened. Ex. Cigarettes. It was not research paper that proved that research is bad. There were a few thousand papers. Why did it take so long when the answer is obvious? Because, like you, everyone who was smoking thought that someone is out there to prove them wrong. After being told by many folks over and over again that it’s bad, we did conclude that it’s bad. And that, my friend, how it’s done.

        • Guest

          So, skepticism and paranoia are the problem with the truthers – if we all trusted gov’t agencies and mainstream media more, then America could move on? Lmao! What you should do is support the new investigation so all those awful rumors can be put to rest, right…?

          • sinic77

            Skepticism is never an issue. Paranoia is. Skepticism has a come sort of reasoning behind it. Paranoia doesn’t. And just to make it clear, I never said that we should trust the government and/or believe the media. And FYI, this article is media as well. If you say that you don’t trust the government or mainstream media (neither do I), why do you believe the guy who wrote the article? I don;t trust him either. What is the guarantee that he doesn’t have ulterior motives? We don;t know.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            sinic77 have you watched any of the videos detailing the evidence? Why are there over 2000 professional architects and engineers saying that the government story is not true and calling for an independent investigation? Can you yourself explain any way that both twin towers fell pretty much at free fall speed. And there are hundreds or thousands of witnesses who are questioning what happened. They speak of explosions in the basement before the towers began to fall and lots more. Just because there is no one on the nightly news saying these things doesn’t mean that they do not exist. And by the way did you say that you work for NIST?

        • http://archive.org/details/antifederalist_0707_librivox The Federal Farmer

          The reason for 9/11 wasn’t to allow the government to go to war. It was to push through legislation that wouldn’t otherwise have seen the light of day. Like the AEDPA, the government could have never passed that bill that destroyed our right to habeas corpus (etc.) had they not staged the OKC bombing first. And there’s simply no way the “patriot” act could have been passed without 9/11.

          Speaking of PR, Americans no longer bat an eye when someone refers to the federal government as “we”. The idea that We [the People] are a government is not only ludicrous, it flies in the face of logic and history.

          The fight to enslave us is on-going and has never ceased! Some of the Founders attempted to prevent the federal constitution which created the federal government because they knew it would eventually take all our hard-won liberties. They were correct. Listen to: (link on my profile) Letters to the Republican by The Federal Farmer (3-20).

    • Guest

      My God, listen to yourself. They killed 3k, we killed 200k+, just move on? Because you think it would’ve been too hard to do?

      • sinic77

        Yes. We need to move on. Let’s say you are spot on and you end up exposing the truth you believe in, what happens? The US government is under fire and they will no longer have any supporters. Let’s even say we get rid of the government as well. What next? What is that we are trying to get out of your truth? What is the end goal? What is that you are trying to achieve?

        • Mark Dandeneau

          End goal truth. Are you afraid of truth?

          • sinic77

            Whether I am afraid of the truth or not doesn’t affect what is true. And for the record, I am not afraid of the truth. What ever it may be. Sure, I may be a little uncomfortable if the truth were the exact opposite of what I think it should be. You would agree with that, don’t you? Going forward, the end goal, after the truth. What’s that? After the truth is exposed. What comes after that?

  • KissesandNoise

    There should be an investigation – without a doubt. I will accept the odd implosion of the towers and even the one with building 7. These are strange, but I’m no structural engineer and this was extraordinary circumstances. Mick West has some very convincing evidence debunking the conspiracy from this perspective.

    What does concern me and strikes me as incredible are 1) There just happened to be a simulated war game happening at the exact same time with the exact same circumstance (hijacked planes targeting public buildings)? 2) Finding one of the hijackers passport’s completely intact and unscathed a block or two away from the collapse. Really? i was watching the news when this happened and this was part of the mounting “evidence” against the perpetrators . 3) At the exact moment of impact at the Pentagon, Rumsfeld was closing a meeting in which he was begging for billions of dollars for counter-terrorism forces.

    • yLordy

      They are always looking for more money to fuel their paranoia

    • Palmer Eldrich

      Mick West?? explains how all supports blow at the same time ? please link .. you know , I think most people don’t have to be a “structural engineer” to understand that . either the support columns gave out or they didn’t, its really simple.

    • Palmer Eldrich

      I just went over to M Wests forum over there , he’s running a tight little forum , where he is banning anyone that disagrees with him basically , not a good sign in its self , and then when he was demolished with the scientific evidence he closed the thread? the guy that posted the evidence got banned, of course. the only way the NIST report seems to stand up is by trying to control the information around it, but how do you do that ? not so easy anymore. . .

      • KissesandNoise

        Hmmm – very interesting. He is just a pretty good debunker and seems rooted in facts and science. I came across his site a while back and he seemed to make good points. I didn’t know he was so nazi about his opinion. He seemed open-minded. His chemtrail debunking is mostly right-on. Good to know though. Thanks.

    • GetReal

      Not to mention the day prior, 9/10, Rumsfeld was on TV telling the world that the Pentagram could not account for 2.3 TRILLION dollars!!! You don’t hear anyone talking about that “unaccounted” for money today do you?

      • KissesandNoise

        Whoa! Yeah. Haha, “Pentagram”

      • Mark Dandeneau

        No one knows about that money today. Unfortunately the plane that hit the pentagram just so happened to penetrate into the accounting department where they were investigating that money, so all the records were destroyed (how convenient is that).

        • GetReal

          Just another “coincidence” in what amounts to a statistically impossible string of coincidences

  • Kevin Merck

    I always get a kick out of people who think that miles of detonation cord would have to be put in place to wire the building for demolition. Where have these idiots been living, in a cave?
    All of the explosives on 9/11 were wireless. They were set off by remote control which explains the out of sequence squibs happening 40 to 50 stories below the demolition sequence.
    The anthrax attacks right after 9/11 sent a clear message to Congress and the Press that dissention would mean certain death.
    The Patriot act was voted in immediately to deal with any unexpected civil unrest that got out of hand.
    There is no sane argument for not exposing 9/11. Only mindless cowards and psychopathic freaks think we should let this get swept under the rug.

  • MountainMike

    Ben,
    Your written transcript is incorrect and does NOT follow your video interview.

    A real problem here!

  • Jon

    Thank you Ben! You a a true patriot.

  • JewsDid911

    jews/israel/mossad did 911!!! Google “jews did 911″ and look at the extensive research which is undeniable!!!

    • sinic77

      Yeah. Sure. Also see,
      “iran did 911″
      “god did 911″
      “mexico did 911″
      “russia did 911″

      • JewsDid911

        Google it, the only people who could have done it were insiders. Jews controlled israeli security at airports, a jew own the towers, ALL the people involved were jews down to who controlled the investigation!!

        • sinic77

          If you see my other comments, you’ll see that my consistent point is, an operation of this scale generally has big mouths. Before you get started on secret projects, see how soon it was leaked. 12 years and no one spoke. Because it was an operation carried out by Al-Qaeda.

          • Tim

            What happens to big mouths happened to Barry Jennings. Look him up online.

        • GaryTruth

          A court of law would call your evidence “circumstantial” and not forensic.

          When the circumstantial evidence keeps piling up, then you’ve made your case.

          We can easily list 50 pieces of circumstantial evidence that supports your hypothesis.

    • yLordy

      Dickhead

      • Mark Dandeneau

        ylordy we know you have been in construction for 40 years, so you should just go play with your tinker toys some more now.

        • yLordy

          Most people comment on stuff they have no clue about, that is why you get conspiracy theories because they speculate about how things are built with no actual evidence or knowledge of “How it’s Made”, perhaps if you watched more you could learn something.

    • GaryTruth

      Some feel that you have given the enemy an upper hand by saying what you did, that we will be marginalized as anti-semitic bigots, thus hurting the cause for a new investigation.

      From my personal experience, I kept seeing comments like yours over and over again. My initial reaction was NeoNazi garbage, anti-semitic bigotry, Jew hater, etc. In fact, there was a guy in Oakland, Ca commenting as Realty Check (ironic coincidence) and he kept writing about the Lavon Bombing Affair, the USS Liberty Bombing, the King David Hotel Bombing, all Israeli false flags.

      In fact, there’s a guy on this board that’s been researching this for seven years and will not assign blame.

      I like your approach much better – it’s politically incorrect as hell but honest. Yes, the Zionist NeoCons in power somehow pulled this off. The evidence is overwhelming.

  • OUTLANDER1968
  • Scotty

    Great job, Ben. You hit it right on the head!

  • Scotty

    Great job, Ben. You hit it right on the head!

  • Kevin Merck

    Of the nearly 3000 people who died in the attacks there were only 291 bodies found somewhat intact.

    There were 21,744 body parts found.

    There were 1717 families who got no remains at all.

    Truth deniers claim that this was a progressive collapse of the building by its own weight. A gravity induced collapse, if you will. Any sane and reasonable person can look at those numbers and see that there were massive amounts of explosives used to blast almost 2000 people into small fragments that they are still finding to this day.

    Show some respect for the dead. Demand a legitimate investigation.

    http://rethink911.org/petition/

    • yLordy

      Have you ever worked in the military and seen action, if so you will know how easily we come apart, when half a million tons of rubble fall with you in it the result is like putting everything in a blender, they were lucky to find what they did because the heat within the rubble pile would have incinerated any body parts still remaining.
      The biggest problem with all the speculation is just that, little proof and 99% speculation mostly by ignorant people.

      • Kevin Merck

        Thanks for making my point. We can always count on the ignorance of truth deniers like yourself to build our case for us.
        Explosives are used in combat. That’s what blows people apart.
        All of the “rubble” from the towers was blown into dust. There were 90,000 tons of concrete that was blown into a fine powder that covered all of lower Manhattan 6 inches deep. There was no “rubble” at ground zero, just a twisted pile of smoldering steel.
        Don’t bother to respond with more nonsense. You do not obstruct justice with impunity you mindless rat. You will be hunted down and prosecuted.

        • yLordy

          ” There was no “rubble” at ground zero, just a twisted pile of smoldering steel.”
          So you are calling the police officers who were trapped in stairwell B liars then???
          They stated they were trapped by concrete and steel and when they emerged from it they were on top of the “Heap” which stood about 6 storeys high, that is your “Rubble” pal!!!

          You obviously have no idea about building construction, you open your mouths and let your ignorant bellies rumble crap. Instead of listening to idiots go study engineering, building construction and fall dynamics before you talk crap. There was no need for explosives to be used in the twin towers, 1 million tonnes of concrete and steel is all that is needed to rip people apart and had you listened to the architect who designed the building, he told you that the floor beams were not anchored to the walls they were only sat on brackets. Had they been bolted together then the building MAY have had a chance but when you watch fire bend huge steel beams and crack walls 4 feet thick then you realise the powers involved.
          I have been in construction for 40 years and I also was a police officer and have attended fires so I have ACTUALLY seen the destruction that can be caused.

          • Mark Dandeneau

            You want Kevin Merck to listen to engineers? How about you listen to engineers (and architects). There are over 2000 of them that are calling for an independent investigation.

          • yLordy

            and when that investigation doesn’t come to the same conclusion you have made you’ll call for another until you get your conclusion then you discredit the 25 previous ones you didn’t agree with?

          • Mark Dandeneau

            You want Kevin Merck to listen to engineers? How about you listen to engineers (and architects). There are over 2000 of them that are calling for an independent investigation.

        • yLordy

          what do you do for a living just as a matter of interest….shitkicker perhaps?

      • Mark Dandeneau

        Good point “little proof”…actually there is a massive amount of proof in spite of the fact that all proof was intended to be erased. It is undeniable that the trade center was a “crime scene”. In ordinary police work a crime scene is scrupulously protected. Everything is photographed before anything is moved. Evidence is collected and securely stored. Additionally in ANY plane crash there is a tremendous effort to recover every single part of the plane. These pieces are taken to a hanger and reassembled for analysis. This happens even when the cause of the crash is pretty well known. However the dust had not even settled in this disaster before the bulldozers were brought in to remove the debris. This was true in the Oklahoma bombing too. Oops they missed some evidence…small bone fragments found on the roof of the Deutches Bank building across the street. Do you think they squished out of the blender and flew over there.

  • DavidG

    Google: Dr Judy Wood ” Where Did the Towers Go?”

    • GetReal

      A little too Star Trek for me.

  • Chris G

    What would happen if the investigation pulls through? What if they find evidence that it was not the planes that knocked down the towers and the 3rd building? I wonder how we will deal with the situation.

    • Kevin Merck

      I’m a pipefitter by trade, but I would love to help the carpenters build the scaffold to hang everyone involved.
      The hangings need to be televised to the entire world so that everyone will have scorched in their memory what happens to the scumbags who perpetrate crimes like this.

  • Ron Paul

    Ron Paul himself denied 9/11 conspiracy. But since RP movement was taken over by anarchists, populists, collectivist-environmentalists­, neo-Nazi, etc, obsession with minutia works as a coping mechanism to ease RP supporters personal anxiety. If we had free-market capitalism today, the same people would be whining against capitalists, bankers, Zionists and secret societies as they always do.

  • edwinalowes

    The one thing that i remember the most clearly over the
    past 40 years of my school days at Brandeis University in 1970′s are my
    student adviser’s words that when he was growing up that his grand
    parents and parents used the term “‘goyishe kup,’” meaning that the
    “Non-Jews are Stupid”
    Later in life I learned that the exact translation of “GOYISHE KUP” means that the “Cattle are STUPID”..
    I
    remember him recalling whatt his father told him when he was growing up
    in Eastern Europe. One of them being that when his father was in high
    school he and a group of friends would skip school early on Fridays and
    go over to his friend’s father’s butcher shop. That they would buy at
    cost any cows , that had not been butchered by the end of the day on
    Friday before the start of shabat . They would take the cow home and
    wash it and then the boys would procede to “beat the udders of the cows
    so that they would swell up and turn pink” so as to sell them to the
    “GOYISHE KUP” as milk producing cows.
    The part that I remember
    him asking me if the East Europeans are so naive, so gullible and so
    stupid to buy old “non milk producing cows” from a bunch of young Jewish
    Boys.
    So thinking of it now I agree with the Jewish saying that
    the “GOYISHE KUP” are indeed” Stupid” as they believe that a Bunch of
    Arab Moslem Kids who were not able to Fly a Cessna Airplane took it upon
    themselves to FLY a Jumbo 747 and outwitted the US Militaryand Civilian
    authorities. The “Jewish Lightning Insurance Scam” of the 1960′s is
    still alive and well has been put to good use by Larry Silverstein in
    putting 15 million down and comming out with 7 billion dollars for
    buidings that no one wanted to buy because it would have cost a billion
    dollars to remove the asbestos from. Then on top of that the people in
    America actually believe that they actually decide who is elected
    President or for that that actual VOTE is really counted and makes a
    difference in deciding who represents them in the White House and
    congress.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dfc5F2pQeg

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVTXbARGXso
    http://www.911missinglinks.com/
    bollyn.com , rense.com
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rzlb4Zwl74&feature=related
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU&feature=related
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vAR-AaEroA&feature=player_embedded
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxnpujfanUM
    http://www.dailypaul.com/253111/new-9-11-truth-documentary-among-most-watched-on-pbs-this-week
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI&feature=youtu.be

    whatreallyhappened.com
    http://www.brasschecktv.com
    http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth

    Yeh I agree that the AmericanNon-Jews are indeed American “GOYISHE KUP” or “STUPID CATTLE”!

    • GaryTruth

      Cheating someone is initially easy.

      History tells us, 109 times in fact, that people eventually can no longer tolerate the evil you describe and simply say, “leave my country.”

    • cindereller

      I’d like to say not all of them, but even I was fooled initially. I’m not proud of that fact, and am exasperated at the difficulty of convincing my loved ones of the horror we are now facing. This country is bought and paid for by the Rothchilds, Rockefellers, and elitists who definitely think of us as cattle, which is why we’ve been dumbed down in multiple ways for some time now.

  • jhon

    Can you imagine a Ben Swann commercial being seen by the 100 million
    people tuned into the Super Bowl? What do you imagine it looking like?
    Please vote to help make it happen here – Then tell me what you’d want it to look like?we can vote once a day from now till the 22nd!If Ben gets the most votes Intuit would pay for a commercial for him: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?427079-Ben-Swann-Super-Bowl-Commercial-Vote-today!&p=5215893#post5215893

  • Chelsea

    I love this article but I’m sorry, Ben, you should let me be your editor.

  • Shane McHan

    “Fire induced progressive collapse” – really now?

  • yLordy

    WTC7 fell 7 hours after the other two tower had collapsed, I defy ANY demolition contractor to prepare a building for CD in that time, amidst falling buildings and the devastation that was in that area.
    There was media everywhere but NO-ONE saw any people going into the building with any explosives. Construction workers and rescuers NEVER mentioned to anyone that they saw anything to do with CD.
    For those that say it had been built with everything in place to have a CD, would you have worked in a building for 15 years knowing the building was packed with explosives? Explosives used in CD are fresh, they are not stored as it is dangerous and their effectiveness reduces with age so for WTC7 to be demolished the explosives installed would have to be fresh to ensure such a clean collapse, plus the damage sustained by 1 million tonnes of concrete and steel collapsing would have damaged the detonation control lines and if not they would all have to be double checked before the building was collapsed. For demolition workers to wander around an already damaged building with fires raging with boxes of explosives is nonsense
    American hysterical paranoia at it’s best here!!!

    • Tim

      “American hysterical paranoia at it’s best here!!!”

      It’s not paranoia to go where the evidence leads you.

    • Mark

      So you don’t think that the explosives could have been placed a few weeks or even months prior to 9/11 simply because nobody you know reported it? Did you know that the CIA had an operational command center in the building? Hmmm…do you think maybe they could have had some elevator service front company gain access throughout the buildings for “repairs and maintenance” purposes? This is just one possibility, there are many. And your silly rant ignores that the official story is impossible.

    • GetReal

      The charges weren’t set the day of the demo. Duh!

  • Robert Zraick

    I am sorry that the truth will be painful to everyone, so painful that people would rather believe official lies, than the truth that our own government was involved in the collapse.

    Those war mongers in charge actually wanted an excuse to get the support of the American people for all the wars which have followed.

    Until we get to the truth about this, we will never heal.

  • Angie Miesner Blake

    TSA is an excellent example of the govt using 9/11 to take our freedoms, human rights and Constitutional rights from us.

    In fact, I have a story I am trying to get out… I work at DFW International airport- at a restaurant inside the airport. Everyday I have to go through TSA. I have worked at the airport for many years and I am very well-liked by my restaurant, other restaurants there and by certain TSA agents who know me. Lately, TSA has incorporated “random searches”. When people walk through the scanner one is chosen “randomly” every so often… this includes people who work at the airport.

    Last week, I had a verbal altercation with TSA because they “chose” me to “randomly” search- called it an “Administrative Search”. I objected on the grounds they were violating my Constitutional Rights to travel freely unmolested, to provide a living for my family- life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and search and seizure. I carry a “Freeman’s Writ of Right to Travel” with me all the time. I also carry an “Affidavit of Reservation of Rights”, which clearly STATES anyone who violates my rights will be charged a violation fee of my liberty in the amount of $250,000 per incident. I showed that to them, and the TSA manager, Greg, said he didn’t have to read my “paper”. I also told them verbally I reserved all of my rights under UCC 1-308 and I did not enter into any verbal, imaginary, assumed, or silent contract with them, and that they could be sued under that law. It did not matter. The TSA refused to let me into the airport to work and are trying to have my badge revoked, which means I will have my job taken from me without reason. I have also further discovered that they are investigating me for being a “Terrorist”, since I spoke about the Constitution and about UCC. YES, yes! Because those who actually KNOW their rights and have the audacity to VOCALIZE them are definitely “terrorizing” this government!

    I am in the process of filing a “Notice of Injury” and “Violation of Human Rights”.

    I am also in the process of sending each individual involved (as I wrote down names and titles) a Commercial Affidavit and a Notice and Demand that they have violated my Constitutional Rights under UCC law, since I have been studying this area of the law, in particular for quite some time now.

    And, BTW, can ANYONE tell me exactly how many bombs the TSA has actually found and STOPPED from going into the airport??? ZERO… And they did NOT keep me from going to work because they felt I was a terrorist. They did NOT keep me from going to work because they felt threatened or they suspected anything at all. It was simply a gross misuse and abuse of
    authority.

    • Kevin Merck

      Good for you!
      Press your case. This is what everyone needs to do who is accosted by TSA criminals in this manner.
      Contact Infowars.com about your case. Alex Jones hates the TSA with a passion, as a lot of us do, but he’s in a position to help you.
      Good luck.

      • Angie Miesner Blake

        Thank you for your support, Kevin. I have and will continue to post/tell my story everywhere to anyone who will listen. The scariest thing is some of the comments I get from such uniformed sheeple. I guess that’s why we are where we are in this mess. :(

    • Tim

      You should use the forum to keep us posted on the cases you’re filing.

      • Angie Miesner Blake

        I will, Tim! Thank you!

    • dissappointedone

      Unfortunately because of 911 they have succeeded in their plans for a new world order. even though every ounce of it is criminal acts of treason, murder, war crimes, and everything else under the sun. but here is the evidence people “Federal Rules of Civil Procedures”. all because idiots couldn’t grasp the simple laws of physics, and corrupt government! as such we are now the “Organization of American States”(OAS). and they have now implemented “Agenda 21″ through “executive order-Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change”. welcome to the world of communism people!.

  • Kevin Merck

    The following are facts about 9/11 that we all need to deal with. These are not opinions to be debated. These are cold hard facts that cannot be discredited by the moronic arguments of mindless criminals and truth deniers.

    Microspheres of molten iron – 1700 victims blown into tiny fragments

    Total building destruction – Complete dismemberment of steel frame

    Temperatures well above what is possible under alleged conditions

    Expanding pyroclastic dust clouds – Positive ID of Nano Thermite

    Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking

    Destruction through path of greatest resistance at near free-fall

    Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes

    Muti-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 60 mph

    Sounds of explosions – Imploded into its own footprint

    Evidence of foreknowledge – Expert corroboration

    Rapid onset of collapse – Symmetrical collapse

    Visible squib 40+ stories below sequence

    The last fire burned out on 12/19/2001

    Sum of Evidence = Controlled Demolition.

    • GetReal

      Great post. How can you deny the use of explosives if you never even bother to look for them? NIST = FAIL

  • Insomniac in CA

    Are we looking for WHO brought down the twin towers? Muslim extremists who hijacked airplanes and also attacked the Pentagon and almost the U.S Capitol building.

    Are we looking for who purposefully brought down WTC 7 on 9/11/01? Perhaps Muslims or Jews or stupid architects and/or engineers or even not too careful demolition crews. Compare a very recent implosion here in Bakersfield. Or no one. Sinkholes and earthquakes can do it. Vibrations from towers collapse could set off an aftershock.

    Does it matter WHAT destroyed 3 buildings? Not really.

    WHEN? See aftershock theory above.

    WHERE? Not in Dubai or elsewhere in the oil rich Near East.

    WHY the twin towers? Symbols of the Greatness of the U S of A.

    Why WTC 7? See Who above. Not enough evidence.

    HOW? The previous commenters have surely answered that already.

    Have a nice day.

    • Kevin Merck

      Take two valium and call me in the morning.
      No … on second thought … take the whole bottle and wash it down with some vodka, that should take care of your insomnia.

    • GetReal

      Stupid much?

    • Tim

      Does it matter what someone did behind that curtain? Just pay attention to this here magic trick…

  • OUTLANDER1968

    9/11 Citizens’ Commission – 10. Michael Springman VISAs for Terrorists
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSebMjd50u0&list=PL9KEZbB2BoJVSywxuC8JU_yF2kB7wzWe5&index=3

  • ChrisN2012

    Why do people believe that people who went to college are highly educated? When was the last time you have wonder what the new A- Bomb will be like. Take induction stoves. Take fluctuating magnetic fields. Are you sure it was controlled demo and not a device that can fluctuate a magnetic field to weaken the steel.

    • GetReal

      In my opinion it could have been a combination of both. There is a famous picture of the twin tower rubble that shows a beam girder that has clearly been cut using a cutter charge. Explosive domolition charges were most definitely used. Hundreds of witnesses heard them. Plus the fact that the so called investigation didn’t even bother to check is a dead giveaway.

  • ChrisN2012

    http://science.discovery.com/tv-shows/the-unexplained-files/the-unexplained-files-videos/freaky-fires.htm
    Loo at this episode and pay attention to electrical current cut off and 15 Giga Watts

  • ChrisN2012
  • Kevin Merck

    Here’s an interview on coast to coast am from last night that people who have questions about 9/11 should listen to.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVzEHRTt_Eg

  • What’s the frequency, Kenneth?

    Someone on a message system I frequent said it best:

    “We already have an Alex Jones. We need a Ben Swann.”

    Please don’t be Alex Jones.

    • GetReal

      I can’t picture Ben Swann doing a guest spot on some show screaming this piece at the top of his lungs.

      • What’s the frequency, Kenneth?

        Still makes him look like a kook.

    • Kevin Merck

      You don’t have to be Alex Jones to know that 9/11 was a false flag.
      All you really need is about three or four properly functioning brain cells.

      • What’s the frequency, Kenneth?

        You see this is why nobody wants to hear any of your crap. You’re condescending and you think you know the whole truth and you make libertarians look like kooks. I don’t need a 911 conspiracy to know the government’s evil. Just read the effing newspaper.

  • Kevin Merck

    The “9/11 debunkers” have been handed their ass numerous times on every argument they get involved in. The only people who don’t realize that are the people who watch “Popular Mechanics” on the *Hitler Channel*.

    There’s a new documentary on YT that runs for about five hours (I’m about half way through it) that is doing a very good job of exposing these idiots in explicit detail. It’s very well done and is a must see for anyone who wants to know the unadulterated truth.

    It’s called “September 11 – The New Pearl Harbor”.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1GCeuSr3Mk

  • marjnap

    Maybe you could get an interview with Marvin Bush? He was in the security company, Securacom that was contracted with the World Trade Center than went to Houston Casualty Company, that insured the World Trade Center. He knew how to clean up in this mess.

  • Becky Scott

    This is very poorly written with a number of incomplete sentences that make accurate interpretation of what they’re trying to say impossible. Give me a clear explanation of the argument and I might listen but right now all I’m reading is gibberish.

    • KissesandNoise

      Just watch the video. It’s a transcript of the video and obviously somebody transcribed it quickly without editorial oversight.

    • Truth

      Then go back to sleep and stay ignorant. “ignorance is bliss”

      “spell it out for me, I’m too dumb to think for myself”

      “math is hard”

  • Devin De St Germain

    Glad this made it around the interwebs so much . We all need to listen up and watch whats going on in this world (and I dont mean listen to the news)..

  • avaindiana

    the only doctor of engineering to investigate and to publish on 911 was Doctor Judy Woods before you decide what happen you need to read her book, where did the towers go ?

    • Kevin Merck

      As long as you understand that something besides the airplanes and gravity brought the buildings down you’re doing pretty good.

      Judy Wood supporters seem obsessed with proving her right at the expense of a legitimate investigation and the process involved in bringing these criminals to justice.

      Have you signed the petition?

      http://rethink911.org/petition/

    • MountainMike

      I have a problem with Judy Wood. She puts forth an explanation that to me, has no basis in everyday reality. A mind game, at best.

      AE911Truth.com is a LOT of engineer-types that are backing up their “theories” with references and close examination of the images, which is all we mostly have left, since all the structural steel has been shipped to China for recycling.

      AE911 types have stayed away, for the most part, from accusing “Bush and Cheney”, “the Zionists”, and other unlikable groups of perpetrating this disaster and focused on showing the impossibility of aircraft fires and gravityto have caused the building collapse.

      My two cents worth!

    • Kevin Clark

      Don’t let the PhD fool you. All that means is they have more college loans to pay off. I have worked with engineers with everything from bachelors to PhDs, I myself was in a position of a non-degreed engineer. And if anything there is an inverse relationship with certified engineers. The higher the level the more likely to deal with more theoretical and less real life and hands on.

  • Christopher DiIorio

    Ben, Popular Mechanics explained why the two main towers collapsed they way they did. It has a lot to do with how the Twin Towers were built. Building 7 is an interesting topic but you lost me when you talked about deceleration without considering the intensive research done that proves why it fell they way it did.

    • Truth

      Nice try but people are waking up to “your” BS Give it up already. Building “can’t” fall symmetrically, straight down through the path of “most” resistance “at” ( building – 7 ) or “near” free- fall speed………
      PERIOD! STFU with your BS and go away!

    • Kevin Merck

      Watch the new documentary on YT called “September 11 – The new Pearl harbor”.

      Popular Mechanics, and the so-called “debunkers” they have working for them, are exposed for the mindless criminals they are in this very well done and unbiased film.

      It’s a must see for anyone who remotely cares about the truth.

  • Dcdobbs

    No. 7 falls down even though the plane that was supposed to take it down crashed in Pennsylvania. Who said that plane was heading to the White House?

  • Kevin Merck

    For those who think they don’t have the time to watch a five hour documentary about the events of 9/11, please take two minutes to watch this video between 0:38:00 and 0:40:15 to see irrefutable evidence, which in and of itself, proves controlled demolition beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the evidence I saw in 2006 that made an irreversible impact on every aspect of my life.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DegLpgJmFL8

    • Glorious_Cause

      No

  • RussT

    Having worked with engineers for 30 plus years and having to make their plans work, I still say the last good engineer died when Casey Jones left the tracks. I have seen the effects of heat changing physical properties as well as metallurgical properties during flashover fires. Burn a piece of plastic on metal to check for heat transference. Better yet see how many engineers you can get to hold a piece of burning plastic. They are trying to keep their jobs and respect…

  • RussT

    As alluded to in the video – The real problem is the federal government taking away freedoms not given to them by consent of those governed as a result of 911

    • Kevin Merck

      How is that the “real problem”?

      The real problem is the inability of people to grasp reality when something like this happens. If you don’t understand that 9/11 was a controlled demolition and a staged event, by elements of the US government, then you are completely out of touch with reality.

      That’s the real problem.

      If people don’t understand that 9/11 was staged to take our freedoms, then they are not going to understand the full significance of the Patriot Act and NDAA. That legislation was never intended to protect us from an outside terrorist attack. It is aimed at the American people. We are the “terrorists” they are trying to disarm and imprison.

      • Patrick Smith

        Yea, people that don’t believe in a conspiracy theory “are out of touch with reality.” What an assinine statement.

        • Never Forget 9/11

          No, the word asinine is used to describe people like you.
          If you don’t understand that 9/11 was an inside job you are plumb crazy and an asinine idiot.

  • Zyzz

    Watch out Ben, You might be a potential terrorist according to the FBI…

    http://digitaljournal.com/article/358624

  • What’s the frequency, Kenneth?

    The messages here demonstrate why 911 conspiracy kooks make libertarians look bad (and before you attack me on it, I don’t believe the government story–I just don’t care, because it’s plainly obvious the government is evil.) I’ve yet to hear an intelligent explanation of what you hope to accomplish after “everybody knows the truth.”

    • Tony

      I get your point…
      Many people think: “America bombs other country kills 100.000 people, mostly innocent. HELL YEAH, America.”
      Same people think: “America sacrifices 3000 Americans in false flag op to get them into a war? They’re evil.”

      If you need to prove 9/11 was an insider job in order to prove the government is evil and immoral, then your ideas of evil and immorality are nationalist, not rationalist.

      Having said that, anything that will help show how morally bankrupt the government is to the most amount of people will be welcome.

    • Thomas Rippolon

      What I would hope to accomplish is to have SO much more of the populace understand that it’s high time people take control of their government, instead of continuing the passive belief of all the bs we’re fed so as to be controllable….and continue to think the system as we know it, has our best interest in mind.

  • Kevin Merck

    We need to know the truth about 9/11 if we ever want to fully turn this country around. People need to understand that the Patriot Act and NDAA are there to use against the American people, not a terrorist attack.

    Terrorists attacking us is largely a fiction. The 1993 WTC bombing was carried out by essentially the same people who carried out Oklahoma City and 9/11.

    Didn’t know OK City was a false flag? Research it! Start by seeing “A Noble Lie”.

    • Lars Mårten Rikard Nilsson

      no you don’t you just need to get your shit together.

  • Kevin Merck

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DegLpgJmFL8

    0:38:00 — 0:40:15

    Watch this two minute video clip to remove any doubt in your mind about controlled demolition.

  • jbanana

    Waterboard Bush and cheney for the info. they have. Bush has been convicted of war crimes, that alone proves he’s a criminal. Harboring war criminals is like aiding terrorists.

    • darthangel

      Most likely Bush doesn’t know anything about it. He was a puppet.

      • jbanana

        So, waterboard him anyway.

  • rff10

    One additional thought might be: In knowing the towers were a prime target for attack, would it be reasonable to install charges to self-implode them under certain circumstances to prevent the buildings from tipping and destroying more buildings around them? Not that I can imagine anyone wanting to work in such a building if they knew that, or that it would even be justifiable. Just a thought.

    • darthangel

      Its a good thought, but if it were true, somebody in the industry would know of this practice.

      • David Mowers

        Referring to the hunt for the terrorist mastermind in 2007, Mr. Romney said, “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” -NYTimes

  • stephen simmons

    The gentleman mentioned he could prove that the planes had nothing to do with his son’s death in a ‘court of law’. I’d like to know where he plans to find this ‘court of law’ since no judge would allow any of his evidence to be presented to a jury that is hand selected to hear his case.

    • Freedom

      Just because a judge won’t hear it doesn’t mean he doesn’t have the necessary proof.

  • xexorz

    Ok let’s get this moving!

    Please go to netflix.com and open a chat window (this is where you would
    suggest new content for the streaming platform of Netflix)

    Tell the operator you would like to see Ben Swann on Netflix.

    Reference http://benswann.com

    More voices = get-er-done

    That is all :)

    • Glorious_Cause

      No.

      • Freedom

        Why “no”? Aren’t you up for some discussion and new knowledge?

        • Lars Mårten Rikard Nilsson

          more like wasting their time with stupidity.

  • Chris Doemer

    Can’t believe people are still on this. Even if you somehow manage to prove the government was beyond it, which you haven’t been able to do, Then what? Why is no one storming the white house?

    • Thomas Rippolon

      many surely want to, but you forget who has all the guns

      • darthangel

        Also violence never solves anything. The imperialist agenda is crumbling under the weight of its own contradictions. Better to shine light on the cockroaches and watch them scatter.

    • Nneal

      The reason we are “still on this” is because everything which has transpired in government since that day is a result of this. Take the Patriot Act, NSA snooping, endless wars for example. The list goes on and on with the common denominator of no money left for the country’s infrastructure.

  • Muzzammil hoque

    More Americans Are Rethinking 9/11 but I was
    thinking from the moment I saw the buildings
    were collapsing. I did not believe then and I don’t believe now that it was not
    a controlled demolitions. It was the cruelest conspiracy any human has ever
    seen or anybody can discover from the human history. Now the single question is
    that who did it and why? It is the moral duty and responsibility not only for
    the people of America but for the every conscious civilized human being to find
    the true facts behind these killings and find the conspirator/ conspirator’s sooner
    than later.

  • Lethalmiko

    Conspiracy theorists live in an alternate universe where pigs fly and aliens live among us. What is the probability that GWB and his crew hatched a plot to kill thousands of innocent Americans but somehow, twelve years later, not one of them has leaked it? Meaning that there is not even one person among the entire plotters who has a conscience or wants to make money selling the story, and all of them have defied human nature?

    Has any of you conspiracy theorists even spent three seconds thinking about the impossibility of planting huge quantities of explosives along the columns in three skyscrapers over several months without any of the THOUSANDS of building workers noticing? Do you even know the first thing about how buildings are demolished and what kind of preparations are required? And what about the fact that over EIGHT months of clearing the debris, not one worker noticed signs of explosives. Oh I forgot, they were all in on the plot. Even the Law of Unintended Consequences somehow was defied in this case. Do me a favour guys. Stop smoking weed and do some real research. Start by reading about Occam’s Razor.

    • Fafnirswill

      There were no explosives left behind, only molten steel still superheated beneath the rubble… and jet fuel fires do not create molten steel… or “molten aluminum” for that matter.

      Please explain WTC7 without citing office fires. Fires of normal accelerants do not down buildings, they make the girders bend a little… but it is not enough to cause freefall.

      • Patrick Smith

        Why is it With truthers that somehow the burden of proof is always on smeone else that disagrees with a conspiracy? Okay, fine, believe in what you want…but the burden of proof is on you as the easiest explanation is the one that you refuse to believe. If you want to have your day and prove that someone wired the building, than prove it. Call the NYFD and see what they tell you. Most of them are volunteers and have no interest in govt conspiracies…ask them about the bombs in wtc7. I am sure you will get a pleasant answer. Please read and understanding Occam’s Razor. It will help you deal with stuff like this.

        • Mario

          There is none so blind as those who will not see.

          • Lars Mårten Rikard Nilsson

            you’re the blind one when all you do is spout random proverbs…

        • darthangel

          NO. The burden of proof is one those who make the first claim to know who did it, and those who first call for vengeance and for expansion of government “emergency” powers.

          Civilized society is based on the premise that accusations are backed up by proof, not by appeal to Occam’s Razor.

          See above comments for why Occam’s razor is meaningless in a case like this.

    • Nneal

      Lethalmiko, why are you so adamant on supporting the government’s version of events that day? Have you not heard of the Kennedy assassination and the fact that after almost fifty years no one has talked? By your own admission saying “Do you even know the first thing about how buildings are demolished and what kind of preparations are required?” you prove WTC7 was prepared in advance as no steel framed office buildings have ever come down by meager “office fires”. See: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html for proof of this. I have no idea of your credentials, but I have a lot of confidence in the over two thousand Architects and Engineers who have placed their reputations on the line and who have the experience for analyzing an event such as this.

    • darthangel

      Uhh..can you find a single 9/11 questioner who believes pigs fly and aliens live among us????
      Nope – you have to rely on lies from the get go don’t you?

      GWB clearly did not know what was going on at the time, so you also show that your are criticizing something you haven’t even bothered trying to look into. Nobody thinks GWB masterminded this. Another form of dishonesty.

      WTC 7 went down for no good reason in the clear pattern of a controlled demolition. If it looks like a controlled demolition, it is a controlled demolition unless evidence shows otherwise. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, its a duck. You shouldn’t be lecturing anybody on Occam’s razor. Which is simpler: WTC was wired to be demolished or WTC7 just happened to collapse on the exact same day two planes hit the twin towers, because of a minor fire inside and fell in a neat, quick way that looks exactly like a controlled demolition????

      Chirp, chirp, chirp….

  • Kevin Merck

    All of the idiotic, (in some cases criminal) debunkers have been thoroughly debunked on 9/11.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DegLpgJmFL8

    0:38:00 — 0:40:15

    Proof positive of controlled demolition has been there since day one and is why the Bush people pushed so hard to stop an investigation. They used anthrax on the media and members of Congress to quell any dissension.

    If you want to know the truth, watch this video. If you don’t want to know the truth, then God himself won’t help you.

  • charles

    But what was that building for?¿??!! who worked there???!! who was the architect??HELLOO??!!! arent these obvious questions not answered even in the rethink 9/11 web site..cant we get ahold of anyone beign there on 9/11 or before??

    • Mario

      Patriot Act won’t let that happen.

  • Emmanuel Goldstein

    Wake up sheeple. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Big Brother only has as much power as you grant him. Independent thought is powerful. After reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Charlie Pound of the U. K. produced the song WAKE UP THIS YOUR ALARM! Unless you enjoy being fleeced, leave the opinion herd and read Dr. Wood’s book too.

    http://www.youtube.com/v/E54TwifMzcg
    Music, Lyrics, & Vocals by Charlie Pound © 2012

    This download is the Foreword and book review of “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” by Eric Larsen, Professor Emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice 1971 – 2006 (35 years), plus the Author’s Preface.

    http://www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/Where%20Did%20The%20Towers%20Go%20-%20Dr%20Judy%20Wood.pdf

    Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book can give at least 10 reasons that rule out the theory by “AE911trutherd” that welding material destroyed the WTC. How many can you list ? Hint: the bottom of page 45, the top of page 171, the diagrams on page 81 and 84, the diagram at the bottom of page 11, and of course pages 122 to 127. The list is endless, actually.

    Better yet, go to any engineering professor or professional engineer and ask if the welding material, thermite, can turn a building into dust in mid air in 10 seconds – or if thermite can turn a building to powder in mid air. You might leave red-faced, but at least you will know you’ve been fleeced.

    By reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?, you know from the EVIDENCE that the Twin Towers turned to dust in mid-air never hitting the ground.

    >Bombs don’t do that.
    >Thermite does not do that.
    >Thermate does not do that.
    >Nano-enhanced thermite does not do that.
    >Nano-thermite does not do that.
    >New-and-improved super-duper mini-micro-nano thermite does not do that.
    >Firecrackers do not do that.
    >Fire does not do that.
    >Nukes do not do that.
    >Megga nukes do not do that.
    >Milli-nukes do not do that.
    >Mini-nukes do not do that.
    >Nano-nukes cannot do that.
    >A wrecking ball cannot do that.
    >A slingshot cannot do that.
    >Missiles cannot do that.

    We know this because we know those things above involve Kinetic Energy and we know that the “dustification” was done without Kinetic Energy. That is, “dustification” was not done with high heat nor with some other form of Kinetic Energy (wrecking ball, projectile, gravity collapse). The building was not cooked to death nor was it beaten to death. So Kinetic Energy Weapons (KEW) did not destroy the buildings. But we know that Energy was Directed somehow (and controlled within fairly precise boundaries) to cause the building to turn to dust in mid air. That is, some kind of (cold) Directed Energy Weapon (cDEW) had to have done this. Energy was directed and manipulated within the material such that it came apart without involving high heat and without having something fly through the air and hit it (bullets, missile, bombs, wrecking ball, a giant hammer, or many micro hammers…)

    If this technology can manipulate energy to do something like this, it can also be manipulated to provide us with “free energy” (i.e. “off the grid”). Simply by looking at the cover of Dr. Wood’s book you can realize there must be a technology that can do this. This is evidence that such technology does exist. This is evidence that a technology capable of providing “free energy” (“off the grid”) exists. The whole world witnessed this which means the whole world can know that “free-energy technology” exists. This realization will change the world. This is probably the biggest reason why there is so much effort spent misrepresenting, distorting, and suppressing Dr. Wood’s research.

    Those that choose to focus on hearsay, speculation, conspiracy theories, or unqualified opinions while ignoring irrefutable factual evidence by avoiding it is what keeps a cover-up in place. Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of “9/11 Truthers” verses “The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory” while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence. (Chanting “9/11 Was An Inside Job!” is equivalent to chanting “Yes To Fascism!”)

    Richard Gage is NOT a qualified forensic scientist. Dr. Judy Wood IS a qualified forensic scientist. AE911Truth wants a new investigation? They already have one. It’s contained in a book called “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” Why is AE911Truth suppressing it? AE911Truth cannot lobby Congress. They are a 501( c )3 and are prohibited from lobbying Congress. Why didn’t AE911Truth submit their so-called “thermite evidence” to NIST? – Oh, that’s right. It’s a federal crime to defraud the government. Why hasn’t AE911Truth filed a Federal qui tam case? Because they haven’t blown the whistle on anything and they have no evidence and it is past the statute of limitation. So, why didn’t they support Dr. Wood’s Federal qui tam case that was filed instead of banning members who mentioned it? * — I guess they really didn’t want such a case to go forward. So they want “respect and compassion for all people” except for those named “Dr. Judy Wood.”

    AE911truth first opened their website about 3.5 weeks AFTER Dr. Wood submitted her Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST. She was the first to submit an RFC that blew the whistle on the contractors for the NIST report. Can you say “damage control” ? Then she filed a federal qui tam case that could have blown this whole case wide open, including putting people under oath – if there were enough supporters. Guess what? It became a policy in AE911Truth to ban those who discussed the work of Dr. Wood in an honest manor. ** Since Richard Gage, founder & CEO of AE911truth, bought Dr. Wood’s book in the spring of 2011 and read it, he can no longer use “plausible deniability” as a defense. Mr. Gage is knowingly leading people away from the truth about 9/11 and using AE911Truth funds to accomplish this task. So leading people away from the truth must be the mission of AE911Truth. How else could he justify using AE911Truth funds to buy this book? Who funds AE911Truth? Donations through the donation drives on his site have dried up. However, donating creates a psychological hold on the donor and they are less likely to leave the organization or question Mr. Gage. Dr. Wood is a teacher and promotes independent thinking. Perhaps this is why she does not ask for donations on her website or conduct membership drives for a “truth club” to keep everyone in lockstep, where members are issued a list of talking points to focus on so that they don’t go looking for the truth. Dr. Wood is just one person. Richard Gage brags about having a large membership in lockstep with him. So why is he so concerned about just ONE person and radiates such anger at Dr. Wood? The truth is powerful and it emerges through independent thought.

    The scientific method, as it came into being during the Enlightenment period, is a method of thought known as empiricism or as the empirical method. Under the terms of empiricism, all conclusions are, must, and can be drawn from observable evidence and from observable evidence only. Evidence must precede any and every conclusion to be drawn from it. Then, if sound logic governs in the relationship between evidence and the conclusion drawn from it, that conclusion will be irrefutable

    Scientists, as all know or should know, proceed in their thinking not according to belief or desired outcome but according solely and only to what the empirical evidence they have gathered, studied, and observed allows them to conclude or makes it inevitable for them to conclude.

    This is why Dr. Wood’s work is irrefutable. She only presents evidence and an analysis of that evidence. There is no use for a theory in forensic science. Either you know something or you don’t. That is why those in charge of a cover up don’t want people to look at the evidence in Dr. Wood’s book. Dr. Wood does not ask you to believe her. She only wants you to believe yourself and think for yourself and look at the evidence yourself and not argue about opinions of theories of speculation of ideas… That is what keeps a cover up in place. Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book know this to be true.

  • Patrick Smith

    These types of stories will officially bury Ben Swann. I wish this whole truther stuff would just go away. Occam’s razor folks. A whole bunch of suspect evidence doesn’t make it anymore convincing.

    • Richard

      It ain’t going away, man. No matter how much you ignore what really happened that day.

    • Mario

      Man! Get your head out of the ostrich for crying out loud! The EVIDENCE is overwhelming! You are the living proof that there is none so blind then those who will not see!

      • Patrick Smith

        You see, I have looked at all of the evidence. What you guys are claiming is simply stupid. I seriously think truthers are ignoring the most obvious and easiest explanation, which is what happened is the buildings caught on fire and fell. The govt can’t do much of anything right. How on earth do you believe that our govt was able to pull off such an attack without anyone leaking info, getting caught, etc in 13 years? How? The issue is no matter whether you believe that explosives were in the building(this is so stupid BTW) or fires took them down…our govt is responsible. It is much more plausible to believe that yes, we have pissed off many people in the world and they want to hurt us than to believe that our own govt bombed a building(s) and no one noticed(ridiculous considering the amount of people, location, etc). You guys are insulting the families of the dead, hurting the liberty movement, and really wasting everyone’s time. Believing some quack job’s YouTube videos and wearing your tinfoil hat doesn’t help you or anyone that associates with you. I have seen this crap for to long and I am frustrated by it. Yes, I have watched the movies and videos…I know what your going to try and convince me of. I have heard it a 1000 times. There is still no evidence that would hold up anywhere with what you are saying. So, I would tell you to stop acting like an ostrich with YOUR head in the sand and do some critical thinking..

        • Mario

          There you go. You have convinced me! That was not so hard, was it?!! You are absolutely right, fires have always brought down sky scrapers before and after 9/11. Building 7 was a real blaze too, and that is why it fell! Ex CIA whistleblower Lindauer and more then 2000 architects and engineers are full of it. I know now that you are not blinded by a patriotism that would make you completely oblivious to whatever wrong your government does to you and I am sorry I ever doubted you. I’m really glad I took off my tinfoil hat to be saved by your voice. Thank you Patrick. God bless your soul!

        • Patrick Smith

          I am not trying to convince you of anything except that you are wasting your time. I don’t care what the 2000 architects have to say as there are millions that say otherwise. There are not any recorded incidents like what occurred so trying to compare this to some other building doesn’t work. As I mentioned before, why don’t you and other truthers contact the fire department and get their story? Why haven’t you or any of these other people done that? Oh yea that’s right. The volunteer fire department was in on it to… the SME ones that lost friends and family..

          • Mario

            Yeah! Reply to yourself, so people won’t understand that you are answering my post below and this way you will not look like you are out of arguments. Listen, I rest my case, and as I have already said: there is none so blind as those who will not see.

          • Patrick Smith

            What do you mean you rest your case? The burden of proof is on you! I agree, the govt is responsible….but not in the way that you describe. They can’t get anything done right…I highly doubt that they are competent enough to pull off such a scheme without anyone blowing the whistle or getting caught. Do I think they are to blame? Absolutely! They are to blame by being inept to stop the attack, also by meddling in others affairs. All of which I am in agreement with most libertarians. What I don’t believe is that there was some grandiose plan to wire buildings with explosives without tens of thousands of people noticing, a Fire Department on scene that didn’t expose it, as well as a million other reasons. All I am trying to say is that the simplest answer usually is the right answer. I understand that there is a desire to not believe that it could have happened…but it did and we have to understand why it happened not some cockamamie plan to murder innocent civilians by our govt. They don’t need to scheme to do that…

          • Mario

            Ok, enough of this. Just watch the video AE911truth (Architects and engineers for truth), it says it all! More then 2000 architects and engineers put their reputation on the line. Watch it and we’ll speak after that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcd6PQAKmj4 There are many movements for truth like this one, as Firemen for 9/11 truth, Pilots for 9/11 truth, Scientists for 9/11 truth, etc, etc. They are explaining it all!! What you are asking me to do has already been done by these people. Get your head out of the ostrich and open your eyes.

          • David

            It doesn’t look like Patrick will believe the reality of 9/11 even if it were staring him in the face, Mario.(which it should already be doing) Patrick is either a disinformation agent or happy being ignorant; no matter the case, he is not worth your time and energy.

    • darthangel

      I’ve always asked questions of both sides of this debate and I’ve had Occam’s razor cited as a reason for believing the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.

      Its easy to argue that if it looks like a controlled demolition, it must be a controlled demolition unless shown otherwise. The point is that the “simplest” explanation depends on your own perspective, thus citing Occam’s razor in this case is thoughtless and leads nowhere.

      The other problem with citing Occam, is that he really only says that the simplest explanation is USUALLY correct, certainly not always, as quantum physics has shown.

  • Charles Irving

    Don’t forget about the black boxes and how 9/11 is the only time in history before and after that the black boxes were unrecoverable, even from other planes that have hit buildings, those were recoverable.

    • Mario

      And don’t forget that passports and scarfs of the terrorists and box cutters WERE found! Now if that is not taking the american people for idiots…

      • Charles Irving

        Yup plane crash and jet fuel can take down two of the tallest buildings in the world… but some paper passports that were suppose to be in the planes just some how didn’t get destroyed… yeah… then there’s the thing about some of the hijackers still being a live.

        Jay Kolar, in Paul Zarembka’s “The Hidden History of 9-11-2001″ states definitively that “10 of those named by the FBI have since turned out to be alive, documented as such by authorities and interviews with those named”. And Nafeez Ahmed appears sufficiently convinced by Kolar and perhaps others to say that “It is now known that at least 10 of the 19 alleged hijackers are alive according to multiple, credible news accounts by the BBC, CNN, the Telegraph, the Independent, and other international media.”

        http://topinfopost.com/2013/05/06/911-fbis-blunder-the-hijackers-were-alive-and-well

  • Bert Trim

    No kidding Homer! Where have you been?

  • David

    Awesome reporting, Ben!

  • katsung47

    Where is mainstream media? This news is censored.

  • Michie TN

    The last sentence of the essay here says the most important thing. If you spend a few hundred hours looking at 9/11 related web references, as I have, it is absolutely obvious the government instigated the entire affair. Why waste time proving how the attacks were achieved? If you go directly at the perpetrators, looking closely at who had what jobs, where are they now, gain access to secret documents, start arresting people, etc., the whole sordid story will be revealed. We don’t need another 9/11 investigation, we need a 9/11 posse.

    • Glorious_Cause

      You are all complete morons. This is why no one takes libertarians seriously.

  • lainnj

    It’s interesting to see that more Americans are actually willing to face what has been obvious for a long time: the government lied about a major geo-political event. What a shocker! Who knew that something like that was possible? Alert the media.

    “How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don’t think.”

  • John

    I have NO faith in our government. I do believe they keep many, many things from us and lie more than they tell the truth. But this is Bullshit, they have been proven wrong over and over again. They keep focusing on building seven but it was meaningless. They have been schooled on the twin towers so much the only thing they have left to look at is building 7.

    • PappaSmurf

      Building 7 was “pulled” but for a good legitimate public safety concern.
      Here you go.
      Large buildings made back then had a explosive failsafe mechanism in them that activated when they reached a certain pitch and pressure on stress bearing columns. The reason being the fear of greater damage if the building were to topple over sideways. This is not in the plans that are available, nor is it public knowledge which of these buildings was outfitted in such a way. There are a few (as in three) articles in trade engineering, architecture, and building magazines that talked about this proposed system in theoretical development a number of years before the towers were built. The terrorists either got lucky or made an educated guess that such a system would have had to been agreed to back then to approve a structure of this magnitude. They never made this knowledge public for reasons that are now obvious.

  • Faye Farlow

    Are we supposed to fall for this hogwash? I do not believe this!!!!!!!!

  • Notruth

    Logic is something that escapes the majority of people but here is the magic. When a little common sense kicks in, that this was a worthwhile inside job then, you will find that everything you think you know is really a lie. All the reasons for all the wars fought were lies. Who killed JFK, all lies. No cure for cancer, all lies. Men landed on the moon, all lies. And the list is endless and it continues today. The perpetrators have survived by the lies and will be destroyed if people fine out the truth. The people need only try not to think but to know. Don’t believe or think you know anything. Pick anything that may be a line and build on what you know is a fact. Piece by piece you will find lies built up on lies, you will not find fact built up on fact. Unfortunately today’s court system intimidates jurors into putting innocent people in prison all the time. So why should anyone take the first step into leading a revolt when your own fellow country men and women will be the first to turn you in, not to mention how eager the police will be to fill you with lead. So who will take the first step?

  • for real

    Truth is truth. Lies are lies. What people think doesn’t change that.

    The same goes for all conspiracies, history, the intent and spirit of the of the Bill of Rights, and even the origin of the universe, life, and mankind.

    Suppression of truth in unrighteousness can deceive many people, but it doesn’t change the truth being suppressed.

  • PappaSmurf

    Large buildings made back then had a explosive failsafe mechanism in them that activated when they reached a certain pitch and pressure on stress bearing columns. The reason being the fear of greater damage if the building were to topple over sideways. This is not in the plans that are available, nor is it public knowledge which of these buildings was outfitted in such a way. There are a few (as in three) articles in trade engineering, architecture, and building magazines that talked about this proposed system in theoretical development a number of years before the towers were built. The terrorists either got lucky or made an educated guess that such a system would have had to been agreed to back then to approve a structure of this magnitude. They never made this knowledge public for reasons that are now obvious.