9/11 (Issue #022)
Amongst Americans who were alive at the time, no other day evokes as visceral a reaction as “September 11th, 2001.” It was a day where the illusion of safety and security were shattered for many. Some opined that the attacks that Tuesday morning were America’s ‘imperial chickens, coming home to roost.’ Others argued that the attacks illustrated the real and present danger of asymmetric warfare and thus justified pre-emptive military actions. Others were slower to draw conclusions, and some simply had no idea what to think.
Geopolitically, the attacks of September 11th were an ominous start to the twenty-first century. A century that many of us as children naively hoped would usher in a prosperous technological utopia was marred by war from the outset. The attacks started a chain reaction that led to seven major military interventions [Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, and Syria – OSI:DI.] In addition to the 2,996 who died the day of the attack, more than 7,000 US service members have died (and tens of thousands more have been seriously injured) during the ensuing military operations.
Domestically, the public experienced dramatic increases in the size of US surveillance state such as the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the federalization of airport security via the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the passing of the “USA PATRIOT Act” legislation, which dramatically increased the ability of the Federal Government to surveil its own citizens. Many civil libertarians point to the PATRIOT Act as the beginning of our descent down a slippery slope into tyranny.
Because of the historical significance of the attacks, it is in the public interest to have an accurate portrayal of the events. The Federal Government published the 585 page 9/11 Commission Report which constitutes the official government narrative (9/11 Commission Report.) However, many Americans had a certain amount of suspicion or discomfort with the official narratives emanating from the media, even before the 9/11 Commission Report was published. Many felt that there were one-too-many loose ends that needed to be addressed before the case could be closed. Who was the first public figure to cast doubt on the official version of events? Why, none other than current President, Donald J. Trump:
“It wasn’t architectural defect, you know the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building. Don’t forget, that took a big bomb in the basement. Now the basement is the most vulnerable place because that’s your foundation and it withstood that. And I got to see that area about 3 or 4 days after it took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building and I said ‘I can’t believe it!’ the building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out. So, this was an unbelievably powerful building. If you know anything about structure, it was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside… I happen to think that they had not only a plane but bombs that exploded almost simultaneously…” - Donald J. Trump on September 11, 2001 - UPN9 News (video link)
Yes that’s correct. Donald Trump, a builder in Manhattan, who toured the World Trade Center after the first attack in 1993, who, at the time, employed the engineers who designed and built the World Trade Center, concluded within hours of the attacks that planes alone could not be responsible for bringing down the Twin Towers. After researching the attacks for well over 1,000 hours, entertaining each proposed explanation, listening to the FAA/NORAD recordings, and examining all available video footage, OSI:DI concurs with Mr. Trump.
The plane impacts alone do not account for the collapse of either Tower 1 or Tower 2, let alone WTC Building 7, which was not struck by a plane at all, and yet still collapsed. So what did bring the Towers down? And why is it relevant? The attacks of September 11, 2001 are arguably the most important event of the millennium thus far. Understanding the causes, what took place, and the effects of 9/11 is absolutely essential if one wishes to understand past, present, and future geopolitical events with any degree of clarity.
OSI:DI recognizes the controversial nature of the following analysis. We face the uphill battle of trying to displace a massively ingrained official narrative which many people have neither the time, nor any reason to question. To make matters worse, the official narrative can contain errors and still remain the default narrative. An alternative narrative with one error, conversely, is easily labeled a ‘conspiracy theory’ and dismissed. Such casual dismissals, however, often amount to “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”
The analysis we put forth will be difficult to accept, but the research and evidence are on our side. For those of you who do not wish to have a significant wrench thrown into your world-view, or for those who only have a few minutes to glance at the rest of this issue, OSI:DI recommends putting this issue aside for the time being. But for those of our readers who have always had a skepticism in the back of their minds every time they see footage from that fateful day: read on…
“This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes” – Laurence Fishburne as Morpheus in The Matrix (1999)
PART ONE: UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS
We have received countless questions relating to September 11, 2001. Some of the most common questions are:
Was the Air Force really having a drill on September 11?
Is the change of ownership of the WTC site earlier in 2001 relevant?
Was Marvin Bush really head of security at the WTC site?
Did anyone have foreknowledge of the attacks?
How did WTC Building 7 collapse if it wasn’t struck by a plane, and was the collapse announced before it occurred?
What Happened to Flight 93? Why was the airplane wreckage in Shanksville, PA spread over such a large area? What about the Pentagon?
Did WTC 1 and 2 collapse solely from the plane impacts, or were there explosives involved?
And finally, who was responsible, and why did we go into Afghanistan/Iraq?
All of these are legitimate questions, and it is important to approach these points objectively, based on available data and then use logical deduction in order to determine the most likely scenario. In the following section we will answer each question in a way that does not conflict with any known information.
PART TWO: LEADING UP TO THE ATTACKS
“Was the Air Force really having a drill on September 11?”
There were six separate military/terror drills of note during the September 11, 2001 time frame: 1) Operation Amalgam Virgo – A military exercise being developed prior to 9/11 simulating the hijacking of two planes simultaneously
2) Operation Timely Alert II – A “Force Protection Exercise” scheduled for September 11, 2001 3) Operation Northern Vigilance – A counter-Russian air-superiority drill near Alaska and Canada, which was underway on September 11, 2001 causing an abnormal distribution of Air Force assets 4) Exercise Tripod II – A Bio-warfare drill to be conducted on Pier 29 in Manhattan, scheduled for September 12, 2001 5) Operation Vigilant Guardian – Another Air Force drill occurring on September 11. The drill involved hijacked airplanes, and was perhaps the most relevant because during this event, Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, a NORAD control and warning officer, took the call from the Boston Center warning that it was tracking a hijacked airliner. Her first words were, ‘‘It must be part of the exercise’’ (The Military Drills on 9-11, Bizzare Coincidence or Something Else?) 6) Operation Northern Guardian – A third Air Force drill which took place in late August 2001, which involved relocating 12 fighter jets and 185 personnel to Iceland and Turkey
These drills are important to note, because if 9/11 was conducted with the assistance of domestic intelligence assets/foreign governments, the air force drills would have prevented the hijacked planes from being intercepted by Air Force fighters. The ‘bio-warfare’ drills in New York provided cover for bringing in recovery/cleanup assets so that the situation could be contained quickly on the ground. The ‘bio-warfare’ specific units would come in very handy; more on that later.
“Is the change in ownership of the WTC Site Relevant?”
9/11 researchers place an emphasis on the fact that Larry Silverstein, a real estate mogul in New York, purchased the World Trade Center complex in July of 2001, and he quickly purchased insurance coverage for terrorist attacks. While Silverstein probably had some foreknowledge of the event, the evidence suggests he turned a blind eye rather than actively coordinated in the plot.
“Was Marvin Bush really head of security at the WTC site?”
Many have repeated the claim that George W. Bush’s brother, Marvin Bush. was the “head of security” for the World Trade Center complex. While it is inaccurate to say Marvin Bush was the head of security for the complex, he served on the board of directors for “Securacom,” a security company that was handled the security for the Trade Center. Securacom became Stratesec in June of 2000, and it is unclear if Bush’s specific role changed with the company name.
“Did anyone have foreknowledge of the attacks?”
Various individuals/institutions have been alleged to have foreknowledge of the attacks. Among the most verifiable are that shares of American Airlines stock were heavily short-sold by various investors/groups/governments on Monday, September 10. Other entities, if the remainder of our analysis is accurate, would most certainly have had foreknowledge of the attacks. The point becomes somewhat moot when viewed from the perspective that there were more than just the 19 hijackers involved.
PART THREE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2001
“I’ve never seen so much real world stuff happening during an exercise…” – Call Sign Foxy, 8:42:59, September 11, 2001 (NORAD Recording)
“How did WTC Building 7 collapse if it wasn’t struck by a plane, and was the collapse announced before it occurred?”
Yes, the collapse of World Trade Center 7 was announced at 5:00 pm eastern time, when in fact the building itself did not collapse until 5:20 pm eastern time. The BBC reported the building had collapsed live on-air, while the building was still visible in the background of the shot (video link.) World Trade Center 7 collapsed in a manner that is identical to what would be expected from a controlled demolition, which is the most likely scenario. The National Institute for Standards and Technology have recently conceded that WTC7 fell at free-fall speed, something that would not happen if the building collapsed from fire. In fact, if the building collapsed only from fire, that would be a first, since there were no other recorded instances of a steel building collapsing from fire alone as of 2001 (9/11 Third Tower Mystery Solved – BBC, July 4, 2008.) OSI:DI recommends perusing the research done by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on the collapse of WTC7.
Important to note about WTC7 is that it housed the Securities and Exchange Commission’s offices. The destruction of the building put a halt to many large investigations targeting many of Wall Street’s largest firms, including Salomon Smith Barney, which occupied 64% of the floor space of WTC7.
Also notable is the fact that the CIA had its station headquarters for the New York region in WTC7. (Report: CIA Lost Office in WTC – CBS News, November 5, 2001.) Why was the demolition of WTC7 handled so poorly? Could it be connected to…
“What happened to Flight 93? Why was the airplane wreckage in Shanksville, PA spread over such a large area? What about the Pentagon”
Flight 93 supposedly crashed over Shanksville, Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to retake control of the airplane from the hijackers. Unfortunately, the truth might be more tragic. The most likely scenario is that Flight 93 was intended to strike World Trade Center Building 7, but was shot down by the Air Force before it could reach the target. This simultaneously explains the miles-long debris field left by Flight 93 and the demolition/collapse of WTC7, which was supposed to be blamed on a plane impact.
As for the Pentagon, the most certain thing we know is that whatever happened, it was not struck by an Airliner, and most certainly not American Airlines flight 77 as the official narrative claims. The Pentagon was struck either by a missile, by an A-3 Skywarrior, both, or either in conjunction with a bomb set off in the interior of the building. Many others have done excellent research on Flight 93 and the Pentagon, and we will leave it to others to dissect these portions of the 9/11 story.
“Did WTC 1 and 2 collapse solely from the plane impacts, or were there explosives involved?”
Quite simply, this is the most important question anyone can ask about 9/11. If the answer is “no,” then we can happily go on about our lives, content with the official version of events: some radicalized jihadists took us by surprise and inflicted a lot of damage, but the War on Terror and the PATRIOT Act are justified etc. etc. If the answer is “yes,” then we have some serious questions to confront. And unfortunately, it looks as though plane impacts alone were not capable of felling the Twin Towers. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth do an excellent job of debunking the official NIST explanation of the collapse. Many others have concurred with this analysis.
Logically, the next step is to hypothesize that the Twin Towers were taken down by a controlled demolition, and indeed Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth makes a convincing case for this claim. The picture below (on the top) is often cited as evidence of demolition charges (called squibs.) The official explanation for these explosive jets is that they are the result of the floors compressing onto one another (a piston effect.) This explanation is physically impossible and OSI:DI is in agreement with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on this point. However, no alternative explanation is provided by this group.
[TOP: Explosive lateral eruptions during collapse BOTTOM: Molten aluminum pouring off of floor 80]
Steel (alloy of iron and carbon) has a melting point of 2800°F. Burning jet fuel (even with oxygenation from updraft) only burns at 1500°F. The picture (above, on bottom) is often cited as evidence of an exothermic reduction oxidation caused by thermite, ostensibly affixed to the support columns in the towers. OSI:DI dismisses this claim as well. The melting point of aluminum is 1,220.58°F. What is seen in the picture above is the melted fuselage of United Airlines Flight 175 (a Boeing 767) pouring out of the side of the building.The aluminum had pooled on the 80th floor, and when the floor trusses began giving way, the molten material flowed downhill and out the side of the tower. This is further evidenced by video footage showing the falling material cooling into the silvery white color we would expect from pure aluminum (video link) [Begin video at 0:40 – OSI:DI.]
So if there were no demolition squibs, and if there was no thermite on the support columns, and if the planes and their fuel did not cause enough damage to bring the towers down, how did they fall? Brace yourselves…
“9/11 was a nuclear event”
Yes, you read that correctly. “Ground Zero,” in the case of 9/11 literally means “Ground Zero.” To quote Sherlock Holmes; “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Our conclusion draws heavily from the work of former Soviet ‘nuclear intelligence’ officer Dimitri Khalelzov (video link) and German Nuclear Physicist Heinz Pommer (video link.) Both the Khalelzov interview and the Pommer presentation are lengthy and in-depth, so allow us to make the case here as concisely as possible:
Manhattan Island is one of the best places on earth to build skyscrapers. The bedrock is very close to the surface and is comprised of ‘Manhattan schist;’ an extremely strong geologic formation
The core of each tower was a rectangular area 87 by 135 feet (27 by 41 m) and contained 47 steel columns running from the bedrock to the top of the tower
The tower cores would have easily withstood an airliner impact, and the cores would have remained standing even if the rest of the towers collapsed
Standard demolition munitions [Or even the 1,310 pound fertilizer bomb that destroyed four basement floors in 1993 – OSI:DI] would have been insufficient to collapse the towers
Most of the material of the building was turned to dust/vaporized. The official explanation (“pulverization”) is a physical impossibility
The perpetrators of the attack placed small nuclear munitions (likely similar to the RA-115 or RA-116 ‘suitcase nukes’ developed in the Soviet Union) below the foundations. This was likely done by boring a small vertical shaft from the fifth basement of each tower.
Shortly after the planes struck the towers, the nuclear munitions were detonated. The initial seismic shock is restrained by the schist, but a spherical cavity of bedrock immediately sublimates into plasma. Because the explosions are contained at first, the devices create what is essentially a star; a fission powered ball of plasma
Eventually the plasma channelized upwards through the bed-rock and foundation creating a needle-shaped soliton. Without the plane impacts piercing the building at the upper floors, this energy would have instead burst out of the side of the building near ground level. Because the upper floors were opened to the outside, the soliton and neutron bombardment were funneled upwards through the concrete and steel core vaporizing the steel and concrete as it went
Once the towers began to collapse, the “vent” created by the plane impacts was sealed and the energy directed upwards was halted and forced out of the collapsing towers horizontally, causing the explosions in the picture above that many theorists mistook for demolition squibs
During the North Tower collapse, the vaporization of the steel was caught on film. A spire of the perimeter columns survived the initial collapse, but as it bent inwards (over the neutron flux emanating from the ground) the steel is seen being turned into dust (video link)
Also visible in the above video is evidence of a force in opposition to gravity, vaporized material ejecting upward and outward (“mushrooming”)
[Image of the North Tower “spire” and the pyroclastic flow of vaporized concrete, bedrock, and steel]
The unforgettable debris cloud that emanated from the collapse site was not smoke or a cloud. Rather, it was a pyroclastic flow. Pyroclastic flows are known to be caused by two things; volcanic eruptions, and nuclear explosions
[ABOVE: Visual comparison of underground nuclear test “Nancy” in 1953 to WTC1, note the mushrooming of the tower’s ash cloud which would not be present unless a countervailing (upward) force was present during collapse. BELOW: Visual comparison of the WTC pyroclastic flow with a volcanic pyroclasm]
The oral testimony of many eyewitnesses (including fireman John Schroeder and WTC janitor William Rodriguez) point to subterranean explosions, and severe burns to individuals in the lobby, basements, and core of the towers near ground level (video link)
There are multiple corroborating pieces of evidence that specifically point to the use of nuclear munitions as the cause of the collapses. The following examples are a partial sampling
Dr. Mark Heath was present and filming during the collapse. He captures two things of note; the sound of the first responder’s radiation alarms going off and proof that the pyroclastic flow contained unburnt paper. What vaporizes steel and concrete, but leaves paper unscathed? Gamma radiation (video link)
Scintillation visible in video footage taken that day. Scintillation is the effect on a camera lens caused by charged particles (radiation) striking and ionizing a camera aperture
The underground fires burned for months after the collapse. Jet fuel and office furniture do not provide enough fuel for this to have occurred
“They were standing on top of a cauldron. They were standing on top of fires, 2,000 degrees that raged for 100 days,” – Mayor Rudy Giuliani, 2002
Huge incidences of cancer in 9/11 first responders. Official story points to asbestos and smoke inhalation as the primary causes, however, there are a large number of cases of Thyroid cancer, which is rare and has only one confirmed environmental risk factor: radiation
Geologic evidence attributable to a nuclear blast:
[TOP: Igneous (melted and reformed) rocks found at ground zero. BOTTOM: Edge of original blast cavity]
Radiation remediation: Water sprayers were deployed to cool down metal debris being removed from the site, which was then brought to Fresh Kills Landfill in Staten Island. The Landfill was closed and buried after the 9/11 cleanup was complete
Those covered in dust who were leaving Manhattan were sprayed down with water by various authorities [Perhaps by participants in the “bio-warfare drill” scheduled for the 9/12 on Pier 29? – OSI:DI]
Regular decontamination of site-workers by men in full protective suits
Presence of radioactive uranium and thorium confirmed in WTC dust by the United States Geological Survey (link) as well as many other organizations
As was done after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the blast area was ‘entombed’ in concrete:
[Image showing the blast site covered in concrete to shield from continuing radiation]
Two final pieces of evidence: If there was residual nuclear fission at Ground Zero, we would expect to see evidence of Chernekov radiation. It should have appeared as a faint blue glow visible upwards from the WTC site until the remaining fissionable material was entombed. How was this issue addressed? By surrounding the clean-up site with searchlights:
[LEFT: WTC “Tribute in Light” RIGHT: Chernekov radiation in a nuclear reactor]
How did the clean-up crew leave the sites in the end? How did they ensure a solid barrier between the radioactive blast zone and the millions of people milling about in lower Manhattan? They covered each tower footprint with a highly efficient concrete-and-water radiation shield and decontamination facility… and they called it a memorial:
[Image and diagram of the WTC memorial]
PART FOUR: AFTERMATH AND CONCLUSION
Thousands of initial casualties, thousands still dying of various cancers linked to 9/11, tens-of-thousands US service personnel killed or wounded in military actions since, and millions killed or displaced in the ensuing chaos in the middle east. September 11, 2001 was the worst disaster to befall the United States, and the world still lives with the ramifications today. Perhaps the greatest tragedy is that the planners of the attack are likely still alive today. Having successfully pinned the blame on a CIA-trained warlord Osama Bin Laden, the world was dragged into war by the shadowy perpetrators of 9/11.
Bin Laden has repeatedly denied responsibility for the attacks. Call us cynical, but this would make Bin Laden the only radical islamist to deny responsibility for a successful attack. Much more likely is that a ‘cabal’ of intelligence operatives and private citizens from Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States executed the attack for multiple aligned purposes; destroying records, increasing the power of the Military-Industrial Complex, engaging in regime changes throughout the middle east. Indeed a portion of the remaining pages of the 9/11 report was released, implicating two individuals known by the FBI to be Saudi Intelligence officers (Saudi Government Funded Extremism in US Mosques and Charities – The Washington Times, July 19, 2016)
Will we ever learn the truth? One man seems determined to get to the bottom of the 9/11 story:
“You will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center,” – Donald J. Trump, February 2016