Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ;  (less...)
Add to My Group
January 26, 2008 at 20:24:31

View Ratings | Rate It

How I Came To Distrust the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

FACEBOOK
submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg
Tell A Friend

By Stephen Demetriou (about the author)     Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

For OpEdNews: Stephen Demetriou - Writer

 From 2001 through most of 2007, I didn't think much about this subject. I had casually wondered if the fires could actually be responsible for bringing the towers down, thinking about the heat and thermodynamics necessary to weaken the steel columns. I have an undergraduate degree in chemistry, and find thermodynamics very interesting. The idea that fires fueled by office materials and jet fuel (enhanced kerosene) could weaken steel beams, resulting in total failure of the entire structure seemed vaguely unlikely. After all, there have been other large steel-structured office building fires that had not resulted in complete, catastrophic collapse, but I didn’t dwell on my vague doubts.

I have since learned there have been no complete, catastrophic collapses of steel-framed buildings due to fire recorded, ever, like these. There have been partial collapses, involving a few floors, and considerable damage due to fire, but no complete collapses ever of steel-framed buildings. On 9/11, we are given to believe there were three.

            In September of last year I read an article on "conspiracy theories" about 9/11, and I learned of the website I wrote about this past October, www.patriotsquestion911.com. This site is nothing more than a compilation of names of people who have publicly questioned the official account, and their statements. It is not an organization, or membership association; the people on the list are not necessarily associated with one another in any way, except for having doubts about 9/11 and having made public statements to that effect. Names on the list include Louis Freeh, former FBI director, Wesley Clark, Ron Paul, Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Sec. Of the Treasury, Curt Weldon, Mary Shiavo, former Inspector General US Dept of Transportation, Col. Robert Bowman, Dennis Kucinich, Morgan Reynolds, former Chief Economist in the Bush Labor Department, with about one thousand other people who have doubts about the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks. A quick look at this list will give you a sense of the caliber and qualifications of those who have spoken out in one way or another about these events.

            Two other names on this list are men I have read extensively in the past four months: Dr. David Ray Griffin, and Dr. Steven E. Jones. Dr. Griffin is a PhD professor emeritus of religion and philosophy at Claremont College in Calif. Dr. Steven Jones is a PhD physicist formerly with Brigham Young. Both have long established academic careers, have published numerous books or articles, and are respected intellectuals in their fields.

            Dr. Jones has well established academic and research credentials for his work with metal-catalyzed fusion. His work has been reproduced and confirmed by independent labs in a couple of countries. Overcoming initial controversy to his findings, his fusion results are now considered the basis for further work. Examining evidence taken from the World Trade Center site he employs the accepted forensic techniques of analysis arson investigators use. He has confirmed a “eutectic” of sulfur in once-molten steel, which a FEMA analysis also found but did not explain, and confirmed the presence of once-molten iron spheres the USGS discovered in dust samples. These samples contain evidence suggestive of explosives: sulfur, aluminum, barium, manganese, with other compounds, in unusually high concentrations.

            Dr. Griffin has exhaustively examined the 9/11 Commission report. Comparing known reports gathered from the news media, from authors, academics, government documents, Dr. Griffin has written extensively on the evidence the Commission focused on in great detail, and the evidence it inexplicably omits. And the devil really is in those details. Many people hold the Commission report in high regard as the most complete investigation of the events of 9/11. Dr. Griffin’s books convincingly show that the evidence in support of the official conspiracy theory received special treatment, while witnesses who brought contrary testimony, along with those who came forward but were ignored, are inexcusably rejected or marginalized, their evidence unreported.

Scant mention is made in the Commission report of the documented meetings of the chief of Pakistani intelligence at the time, General Mahmoud Ahmad, with CIA director Tenet, officials from the Pentagon, the State Department, and National Security Agency from Sept 4 through Sept. 13, 2001. The report completely denies what the Times of India discovered, and which the Wall Street Journal editorialized, “…US authorities sought [Ahmad’s] removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen. Mahmoud…” Instead the Commission report states, “…we have seen no evidence that any foreign government – or foreign government official – supplied any funding.”

The back-stories of halted FBI investigations, credible whistleblowers silenced by federal gag orders, FBI field agents’ reports of suspicious behavior ignored, or requests for warrants altered or denied, all make compelling arguments for foreknowledge and complicity by some in the administration. But all these are difficult to prove to the satisfaction of a court of law.

The science, though, is compelling. Pools of flowing molten iron were found under the rubble of the three World Trade Center buildings. They persisted for 100 days. Office material fires simply cannot produce heat to melt steel or iron. Both the National Institute of Standards and Technology and FEMA studies clearly state that fact in their reports, and neither study so much as attempted to answer the question of what caused those pools of molten metal. And then there is Building 7. Not hit by a plane, not substantially damaged by the other collapses, Building 7 fell straight down in the exact same manner as if by controlled demolition. To this day, no official explanation has been issued explaining how this happened.

I no longer have vague doubts. I have important questions. Nearly 3000 people were murdered on September 11, 2001, and even the accused perpetrators have not been brought to justice. I am one of many calling for a new, independent investigation into 9/11. The elaborate cover up we have now is an utter disgrace to this country, and the basis for what many scholars consider near tyranny.

 

Freelance photographer and writer living in Maine.

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Book Recommendations for "911 Truth"
The American Truth
by Nick Shelton

$14.99
Lowest New Price $13.39

Number of pages: 224
Publisher: Mill City Press

THE REAL 911: TRUTH and TESTIMONY
by Peter Revere

$19.95
Lowest New Price $12.41

Number of pages: 408
Publisher: AuthorHouse

911 Nine Eleven The Ultimate Truth

$83.50

Number of pages: 506
Publisher: Red Pill Press

Bill Clinton is Responsible for 9/11
by Joseph Lovett

$14.00

Number of pages: 114
Publisher: RoseDog Books

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
51 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

Very Interesting by Jeanette Doney on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 11:51:41 PM
Who Set Up The "Truth Movement" by CB Brooklyn on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 3:49:12 AM
Are you guys retarded? by Shallel on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 1:10:46 PM
Their is a uncovered aspect of 9-11 by Robert N Smith on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 1:38:50 PM
9/11 conspiracies by Ramon Puga on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 2:47:38 PM
wow, you just NOW have started to question it? by lev kabalkin on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 10:27:05 PM
Better late than never... by Stephen Demetriou on Monday, Jan 28, 2008 at 8:31:17 AM
I never believed it in the first place by Dave Kisor on Monday, Jan 28, 2008 at 1:34:50 AM
Jet engines are steel? by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:04:42 PM
One more question by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:09:33 PM
Prescott Sheldon Bush by Anton Grambihler on Monday, Jan 28, 2008 at 2:49:45 PM
Thanks, Stephen by Ingrid on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 11:59:07 AM
BTW, Stephan. . . by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:07:50 PM
Fire and steel by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:12:19 PM
But is he a strucutral engineer? by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:14:24 PM
Another expert . . . by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:17:49 PM
From the OP by Roark Howard on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 2:57:25 PM
Mr. Howard, your questions in order... by Stephen Demetriou on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2008 at 6:06:08 PM
Building 7 was not hit by a plane... by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 7:50:31 AM
forensic structural engineers by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:53:26 AM
No, in fact not. by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:05:51 PM
FDNY by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 7:58:38 AM
Fire and steel by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:05:25 AM
broken link by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:43:06 AM
cheap arguments, sir. by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:50:32 AM
Did you know? by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 6:19:21 PM
Link by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:03:49 PM
An answer for you by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:10:53 AM
Designed for strikes of that very nature by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:39:06 AM
back at you by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:49:21 PM
Nice attempt at dodging the question by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 1:37:25 PM
Nice attempt to move the goal posts. by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 6:09:42 PM
movable goal posts... by Stephen Demetriou on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 8:03:49 AM
loads by Roark Howard on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 1:18:31 PM
Loads by Stephen Demetriou on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 1:36:04 PM
Wow by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 6:28:17 PM
WTC 7 by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:58:39 AM
I did, You did. by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:02:17 PM
huh? by Stephen Demetriou on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:16:29 PM
Not my job by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:53:20 PM
Gordon Ross is an idiot by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 6:24:31 PM
Newton's Bit by Stephen Demetriou on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 8:22:39 AM
One more note about Dr. Steven Jones by Roark Howard on Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:43:14 PM
his high temperatures mean NOTHING! by Stephen Demetriou on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 8:35:17 AM
WRONG by Roark Howard on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:31:43 AM
no molten metal by Stephen Demetriou on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:07:30 PM
Except there wasn't by CB Brooklyn on Sunday, Feb 3, 2008 at 10:24:22 PM
many words signifying nothing... by Stephen Demetriou on Monday, Feb 4, 2008 at 7:00:25 AM
fireman's huddle by Stephen Demetriou on Monday, Feb 4, 2008 at 7:47:57 AM
Get with the program, man... by Stephen Demetriou on Monday, Feb 4, 2008 at 7:50:38 AM
Thanks, Roark by Stephen Demetriou on Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 7:37:53 AM

 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2010, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum