
Demolition of WTC Towers
I have received a number of Emails which I usually delete claiming
that the demolition of the WTC Trade Centres was an inside job. If
the following article is true then:
- The
terrorists would have had to be in cahoots with the alleged "government
terrorists"
- If
not then how did the "government
terrorists" know which buildings were to be targetted.
- They
would have to have known the date and the target buildings well before
hand in order to position the alleged demolition
explosives.
- Why
would the U.S. authorities do this anyway?
- I
find all this hard to believe.
AT LAST WHAT WE HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR 4 YEARS IS BEING CONFIRMED
IN THE USA!
Case For WTC
Tower Demolition Sealed
By Griffin
Theologian Says Controlled Demolition
is Now a Fact, Not a Theory
From Kevin Barrett
Coordinator MUJCA-NET
Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance For 911
10-21-5
In two speeches to overflow
crowds in New York last weekend,
notable theologian David Ray Griffin argued that recently revealed
evidence seals the case that the Twin Towers and WTC-7 were destroyed
by controlled demolition with explosives. Despite the many enduring
mysteries of the 9/11 attacks, Dr. Griffin concluded, "It is already
possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important
thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside
job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."
On
Oct. 15th and 16th, New Yorkers filled two venues to hear the prominent
theologian and author of two books on 9/11 give a presentation
entitled "The Destruction of the Trade Towers: A Christian
Theologian Speaks Out." Dr. Griffin has continued to blaze a trail of courage,
leading where most media and elected officials have feared to tread.
His presentation went straight to the core of one of the most powerful
indictments of the official story, the collapse of the towers and
WTC 7.
Dr. Griffin included excerpts from the firemen's tapes
which were recently released as a result of a prolonged court battle
led by victimís families represented by attorney Norman Siegel and
reported in the NY Times. He also included statements by many witnesses.
These sources gave ample testimony giving evidence of explosions
going off in the buildings. A 12 minute film was shown for the
audiences, who saw for themselves the undeniable evidence for controlled
demolition. Dr. Griffin listed ten characteristics of
the collapses
which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being
struck by planes or the ensuing fires. He explained the buildings
fell suddenly without any indication of collapse. They fell straight
into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually
no resistance as they fell -- a physical impossibility unless all
vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing
the core columns. The towers were built to withstand the
impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and nothing
about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication
of causing the kind of damage that would be necessary to trigger
even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding
of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall
speed. The massive core columns -- the most significant structural
feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the
official 9/11 Commission Report -- were severed into uniform 30 foot sections,
just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly
before a real investigation could transpire. There was
a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized,
and no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to
explain how so much of the buildings' concrete was rendered
into extremely fine dust. The debris was ejected horizontally
several hundred feet in huge fan shaped plumes stretching in
all directions, with telltale "squibs" following
the path of the explosives downward. These are all
facts that have been avoided by mainstream and even most of the
alternative media. Again, these are characteristics of the
kind of controlled demolitions that news people and firefighters
were describing on the morning of 9/11.
Those multiple first-person
descriptions of controlled demolition were hidden away for almost
four years by the City of New York until a lawsuit finally forced
the city to release them. Dr. Griffin's study of these accounts
has led him beyond his earlier questioning of the official story
of the collapses, to his above-quoted conclusion: The destruction
of the three WTC buildings with explosives by US government
terrorists is no longer a hypothesis, but a fact that has been
proved beyond a reasonable doubt. It's important
to note that Dr. Griffin is one of many prominent intellectuals
-- including the likes of Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn, Peter Dale
Scott, Richard Falk, Paul Craig Roberts, Morgan Reynolds and
Peter Phillips -- who have seen through the major discrepancies
of the official explanation of 9/11 and have risen to challenge
it. These brave individuals represent the tip of an ever-growing
iceberg of discreet 9/11 skeptics. Indeed, 9/11 skepticism appears
to be almost universal among intellectuals who have examined
the evidence, since there has not yet been a single serious attempt
to refute the case developed by Dr. Griffin and such like-minded
thinkers as Nafeez Ahmed and Mike Ruppert. As for the general
public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians (63%,
Toronto Star, May '04) and half of New Yorkers (Zogby, August 2004)
agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans
on 9/11/01. How, then, can the
mainstream US media continue to ignore the story of the century?
Perhaps the best answer was given by Dr. Griffin himself in the
conclusion of his talk, and is worth quoting at length: "The
evidence for this conclusion (that 9/11 was an inside job)
has thus far been largely ignored by the mainstream press, perhaps
under the guise of obeying President Bushís advice not to tolerate "outrageous
conspiracy theories."
We have seen, however, that it is the Bush
administration's conspiracy theory that is the outrageous
one, because it is violently contradicted by numerous facts,
including some basic laws of physics.
"There is, of course,
another reason why the mainstream press has not pointed out these
contradictions. As a recent letter to the Los Angeles Times said: "'The
number of contradictions in the official version of . . . 9/11
is so overwhelming that . . . it simply cannot be believed.
Yet . . . the official version cannot be abandoned because the
implication of rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are
subject to a government conspiracy of "X-Files" proportions and insidiousness.' "The
implications are indeed disturbing. Many people who know or at
least suspect the truth about 9/11 probably believe that revealing
it would be so disturbing to the American psyche, the American
form of government, and global stability that it is better to pretend
to believe the official version. I would suggest, however, that
any merit this argument may have had earlier has been overcome by more
recent events and realizations. Far more devastating to the American
psyche, the American form of government, and the world as a whole
will be the continued rule of those who brought us 9/11, because the
values reflected in that horrendous event have been reflected in the
Bush administration's lies to justify the attack on Iraq, its disregard
for environmental science and the Bill of Rights, its criminal
negligence both before and after Katrina, and now its apparent
plan not only to weaponize space but also to authorize the use
of nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike. "In light of
this situation and the facts discussed in this lecture -- as
well as dozens of more problems in the official account of
9/11 discussed elsewhere -- I call on the New York Times to take
the lead in finally exposing to the American people and the world the
truth about 9/11. Taking the lead on such a story will, of course, involve
enormous risks. But if there is any news organization with the power,
the prestige, and the credibility to break this story, it is the
Times. It performed yeoman service in getting the 9/11 oral histories
released. But now the welfare of our republic and perhaps even
the survival of our civilization depend on getting the truth about
9/11 exposed. I am calling on the Times to rise to the occasion. Dr.
Griffin's speech given at the University of Wisconsin
earlier this year, entitled "9/11 and the American Empire," was
broadcast twice on C-SPAN. In late September Dr. Griffin was asked to
give expert testimony at hearings sponsored by Cynthia McKinney and the
Congressional Black Caucus investigating the 9/11 Commission Report.
He is currently Professor Emeritus at Claremont College in California. This
weekend's events were sponsored by NY911truth.org, WBAI and
the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance for 9/11 Truth: Kevin
Barrett Coordinator, MUJCA-NET
Disclaimer
Email
This Article
MainPage Article Link

"I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And because
I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that
I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the
grace of God, I will do." - Edward Everett Hale
|