To 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkers”: I’m Calling You Out…Show Up or Shut Up!

This message is addressed to all the deniers and nay sayers who have spent almost six years swearing to the lies of the official story of 9/11. It is high time to throw down the gauntlet and dare you to confront the questions that have to be answered. Consider it done

You won’t let us speak to you in public and you won’t attend our events. So tell me, who exactly is running and hiding…and why? It sure as hell is not any of us in the 9/11 truth movement. We’ve been out there with the facts and evidence just waiting for you to respond and show us where we are wrong and you are right, face to face and in public! Not one of you has ever responded and we’re damn tired of waiting.

And so, there really is only one way to go right now: the 9/11 discussion either has to end immediately or it has to go public full force! I am personally calling out the people who continue to cling to the official story! Bring your experts, bring the 9/11 Commission, bring your debunkers and openly debate me and the team I put together. If you hear us out and answer our questions honestly in a public and open forum, we’ll go away! If not, we want mainstream televised coverage of the research we have done.

We are not interested in some intellectual exercise or publicity stunt. On the contrary, confronting the facts we have unearthed may very well be a matter of national security. It is very possible that the perpetrators of the events of 9/11may very well be members of our own government!

I am sending this challenge to a whole range of people who are trying so hard to ridicule and destroy the credibility of the 9/11 truth movement. The gamut runs from Michael Chertoff’s cousin who wrote the recent propaganda piece in Popular Mechanics to all the people involved in a coordinated effort to eliminate any 9/11 discussion at all. It also includes every one of the people working with coordinated venom to discredit the reputation of anyone who might influence Americans to actually look at the 9/11 evidence.

All of these people, along with their cohorts who regularly chime in and mock the 9/11 truth movement need to do one of two things: show up and discuss the evidence in public, recorded on video, with 9/11 experts CHOSEN BY ME, or shut the hell up!

I’m tired of it. I’m tired of watching how unqualified and uninformed lemmings pick off a few raindrops in the storm of 9/11 evidence and claim that there are no clouds hanging over the official story. Once in a while you people claim to have found some holy grail to back up your argument. But you don’t seem to realize that about 10 minutes after your mythical security blanket articles are published, we in the 9/11 reality community are counting the deceptions, omissions and outright falsehoods it contains. I am tired of arguing with Joe Shmo on Espn.com’s forums or on other forums around the Internet. Get away from me kids, you bother me. Take me to your leaders. I want to speak to your daddy’s the ones in the Bush administration and on the 9/11 Commission. I am tired of dealing with illogical people who keep presenting the same argument over and over no matter how many times we expose the problems with the points that they make. I want to to deal with the people who put forth the 9/11 story, not the people who close their eyes and believe in it!

The Popular Mechanics article I referred to is only the most recent life raft for those still drinking the official 9/11 Kool-Aid. That issue should have come with a set of highlighter pens to help readers separate the author’s claims into three appropriate categories: lies, deceptions & omissions. But no one will come forward to publicly defend the contents of the article in a public forum with experts who are willing to expose its distortions an deceptions. Wonder why.

We have been begging for discussions. We have been screaming at the top of our lungs. We write editorials and blogs, author books, produce documentaries, interview witnesses, study films, - on and on. You name it we do it. We are journalists, former members of the military, the government, the CIA, the FBI, military intelligence and the clergy. We are pilots, scientists, lawyers, engineers, scholars, foreign government officials, foreign intelligence officers, police officers, fire fighters and just plain old jobless citizens. Some of us are researchers and some of us are just asking questions. Some of us go too far in drawing conclusions and some of us simply acknowledge that we don’t know what happened that day.

But we all have one thing in common: we now realize that the official story can not possibly be true. We are you and you don’t even know it!

We show up at your events. When we are able to get past big brother and pose a legitimate question to the 9/11 Commission members or to Rudy Giuliani, you toss us out on our asses like we were in Stalin’s Russia. You have our names taken and we end up on no fly lists. Yet we keep trying. But no matter how we try, we can’t access the criminals who have hijacked our government, not in Congress and surely not in the White House.

We couldn’t even a get good crime fighting Attorney General to hear our case. The hard working folks over at NY911Truth.org delivered a docket of evidence to Elliot Spitzer, then AG of New York, that might well have led to 9/11 related indictments! I was there when they did. But you managed to shut that door as well, and nothing came of it.

We have events. In NY for example, the NY911truth.org group headed by Les Jameson has public informative presentations on 9/11 related issues every single week! We have national conventions. We have community meetings and we have public demonstrations. We invite the gate keepers of the official story to these events. We invite the authors of the hit pieced like the one in Popular Mechanics to join us. We invite members of the corporate media to join us. We invite so called liberals like the folks of Air America Radio & so called bastions of truth like Amy Goodman to join us. We invite politicians to join us. We invite police, and fire fighters, from the top brass to the guys who are now dying of lung diseases contracted by trying to rescue their brothers and sisters at ground zero (You know, the people now dying because the Bush administration had the EPA issue a false report saying that the air at ground zero was safe, even though it wasn’t!)

And even when someone in the movement finally gets a moment of media exposure and tries to raise questions about the official 9/11 story to the unsuspecting public, you gang up on him or her and never, ever discuss the issue itself. You can’t kill the message so you rough up the messenger.

I’ve watched a few of these people get their 15 minutes in front of the camera. Some really great people have worked very hard to get some air time, but not everybody is adept at dealing with the tactics of the media. The people in the media are professionals. They know how to control a message. They know how to make even an intelligent person look stupid.

Some absolutely brilliant people, such as Professor Stephen Jones, have more understanding about the events of 9/11 than most Americans combined. But when you throw someone like that to the wolves (can you say Tucker Carlson?), they are going to be eaten alive. That’s what happens when we get a minute or two here or there. Occasionally we get someone like Charlie Sheen or Rosie O’Donnell to bring public attention to the issue. But celebrities are lightning rods. I don’t care who the person is, any celebrity easily can become the victim of character assassination.

This may sound arrogant and this may sound as if I am doing this for some self serving purpose, but I really feel that the 9/11 truth movement needs someone like me, and I am offering myself up as the person for the job. I doubt that any member of the corporate media can go one round with me, and I won’t let any fancy mouthpiece like Sean Hannity win a debate in which he is factually incorrect but in which he is the stronger and louder debater. Trust me, I’m no Alan Colmes.

So here is my offer to both the 9/11 truth movement and to the backers and creators of the official story: Bring it on!

To the 9/11 truth community: I’ll reach out to you and put together a hand picked team of members of the 9/11 research community. We’ll assemble the big guns. We’ll bring the researchers. We’ll bring the witnesses. We’ll bring the documentation. We’ll bring the questions. And we’ll bring the body of verifiable public information that the criminal corporate media have kept from the public.

To the 9/11 Commission, members of Congress, members of law enforcement, families of the victims, legal professionals, Popular Mechanics editorial staff, and to the portion of the general public who still believe the official explanation of the events of 9/11: assemble your team and get ready to educate us.

To the corporate media: Cover the events. Cover the events or you will end up on the wrong side of public rage when the truth finally emerges and is accepted by the general public. You know this is not the sixties. This is not the Kennedy assassination. We have access to information. We don’t have to wait 40 years to realize it when the media is protecting the people who hurt us. A word to the wise: get on board or sink with the ship.

I will arrange for a public conference, perhaps at a university, and perhaps one that spans several days. We will have hearings. Our researchers and witnesses will present a case, as if in a court of law. Our purpose will be to expose the lies contained within the official story. We will show how the 9/11 Commission changed, omitted or misrepresented much of the original evidence and testimony. We will make the case that the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelekow, refused testimony and evidence and did not allow any information that disputed the pre-approved official story. We will not go beyond what we know for certain although we will include all related information regarding means, motive, opportunity and suspicious behavior or coincidence. Then the representatives of the official story will address the issues as presented.

No conclusion will be reached at the event. Recordings of the event will be made available to the world. There will be no copyrights on the recorded event. It will be distributed at no cost (or at a small fee enough to cover materials and access like blank DVDs and Internet hosting and bandwidth) to the public via Internet and via individuals who will copy and distribute the recordings. Any conclusion about what really happened on 9/11 will be reached by the public.

The nation needs to address this issue once and for all. We need to start the discussion or finally put an end to it. This event will merely expose the fact that there is a discussion to be had. If you are so confident that the official story is in fact the truth, then shut us up once and for all by defeating us in this court of public opinion. No more hit and run pot shots, like the Popular Mechanics piece. Stand up and respond to the people who have questions about 9/11.

If you can’t answer our questions, ALL OF THE QUESTIONS, the verdict will be obvious. If you refuse this challenge, your silence will show that you have no explanations and no defense to support the official story of 9/11. If you refuse to respond, you lose by default. Simple as that.

The burden of proof must now shift from the people with questions to the people who have given us the official explanation of the events of 9/11. Your explanation does not hold water. We can prove that. Can you prove that it does? If yes, then do so, and let us go back to our normal lives. If you can’t the American people better wake up and begin to understand what that means. And the American people had better be prepared to do something about it!

So come on Larry King, Oprah Winfrey, Regis, let’s do a few hours in front of America and see how the questions impact your viewers. Let’s dedicate a week of TV coverage, COMPLETE COVERAGE, to this vital issue. And I’ll set the agenda, not you. I won’t let you edit the segments and then bring on your hit men to talk about the issue with out our representatives there! No more playing by your rules because you are liars and I can prove it.

I’m ready to do this. Are you? Right now, either put up or shut up! - Jesse, Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

NOTE: Are you with me on this? Sign in and let your voice be heard. Then email a link to this to everyone you know.

UPDATED:

Question for the people who can’t take a hint and are now arguing, from their safe little Internet connection, and using the “debunk a raindrop to disprove a storm” approach to debate…how many Americans know about the war games on 9/11? How many Americans know about WTC7? How many Americans know about PNAC and their motives? This debate is not over because it never started! Americans could not possibly have made a sound decision about the events of 9/11 because THE MEDIA NEVER REPORTED THEM! Holy cow…Americans don’t know about hijackers turning up alive and about the FBI director admitting that they do not know the identities of the hijackers! So far I have never ever heard one person explain that! Man, I could not imagine how humanity survived with so many simpletons out there! Do people even know what logic is? Do you know the hijacker identity issue alone disproves the official story! Can you be so stupid as to not understand this? So what I am saying is let’s get this all out in the open once and for all. I’m betting that if ALL Americans were aware of what I am aware of…the official story would die a quick death and you would see some angry Americans taking to the streets!

Official 9/11 report team refuses to debate critics - These sons of bitches have a lot to hide and they are running scared! There is no excuse for this unless they are guilty! Go ahead…spin this!

9/11 Family Members File Petition with NISTteam refuses to debate critics

52 Responses to “To 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkers”: I’m Calling You Out…Show Up or Shut Up!”

  1. Jesse says:

    Interesting note: The first person to UNSUBSCRIBE to my newsletter after I sent this editorial out was from an email address at the Department of Justice.

    How interesting.

    Jesse

  2. VocalPatriot777 says:

    Great article, Jesse! Yes, it is high time the truth debunkers put up or shut up. I would rather they put up so we can finally expose the true criminals of that tragic day to this country and the rest of the world. Then - and ONLY then - can true justice be served and we can take this country back from the real hijackers: our government. I’m in the fight with you - 110%!

  3. brisa says:

    I think that perhaps you are whistling in the wind if you are counting on the corporate media ot promote truth. Their sole purpose is to propagate the official myth of the month. It has always been so.

    Count the lies throughout history: “Remember the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin non-incident, Kuwaiti babies were thrown out of incubators by mad Iraqi invaders, Oswald was the lone JFK assassin, the USS LIberty attack was a case of mistaken identity, and, of course, hydrocarbon fires caused the total collapse of three steel girder skyscrapers at freefall rate.

    The purpose of the corporate media is to manipulate, not to enlighten. They have been hopelessly co-opted by criminal thugs who have infiltrated and assumed control over the US government.

    I fear for the future of my children, as a government built and sustained by lies and mendacity will not stand and the only question is what form of tyranny will replace it.

  4. Jesse says:

    brisa on April 11 you wrote:
    “I think that perhaps you are whistling in the wind”

    To that I say I rather try and whistle than stand here silently.

    Peace,
    Jesse

  5. brisa says:

    Right on, Jesse.

  6. Truth Seeker on March 4, 1972 on January 7, 2003 on August 21, 2004, or no, sorry, actually says:

    I don’t know what happened on 9/11, but I know we have been lied to. I’d love to see an honest public debate on the issue. I don’t expect it to ever happen, of course, and if any type of debate did happen, it would be ignored and/or distorted in an attempt to make 9/11 Truthers look like extremist nuts. I support the idea and the effort, though.

  7. kazz67 says:

    At last a plan! Go for it Jesse!
    I’ve got a request for the event; WHEN it happens could you include a web-cast of some sort. I’d love to follow the events and being in the UK obviously means I wont be attending in person.

  8. Reggie says:

    That’s EXACTLY the point: we DON’T know what happened on 9/11…and the silence about the anomalies and discrepancies in the official story is deafening!

    Just remember, that without the attacks of 9/11, there would have been NO WARS in Iraq or Afghanistan, no PATRIOT ACT, no NSA spying, no huge corruption by HALLIBURTON and other contractors, no ABU GHRAIB, no GITMO, no WAR POWERS for the DICTATOR, and most probably no PNAC people in high places by now.’

  9. truthbeknown says:

    Even if the opposing team doesn’t show, you need to continue with telling the truth to as many people as you can.

    Words are stronger than any missile we have.

    I would love to attend this discussion please keep us, your readers informed.

  10. Truth Seeker on March 4, 1972 on January 7, 2003 on August 21, 2004, or no, sorry, actually says:

    Yeah, I got “the point”. I’ve been in firm possession of it for quite a few years now. :)

  11. robalb says:

    As you’ve demonstrated on more occasions than I can count, the corporate media you would face is so corrupt that I can’t see how it could be used as a vehicle for any kind of truth. You’re a brave man, Jesse, and I applaud your courage, but this could be a case where the horse is just too broken down to draw the wagon. I hope with all my might that I can be proved wrong in that.
    I stand with you, Jesse.

  12. fido says:

    I haven’t been around for a while, but I will be posting Jesse’s comment on all sites I come in touch with. Perhaps we should send Rosie a copy of this and let her have a go at advertising this. It makes sense thatr she could be a mouthpiece for such a debate.

    They had a contest to win a million if you could prove that the WTC wasn’t brought down by L/M-IHOP, and no one contested it. When temptation isn’t responded to by anyone with a credible explanation, then something nefarious is going on. No one can prove it didn’t come down with a litle IED(thermate?) help from higher friends, so time to call them out on their lies.

    You go Jesse!

  13. catlover says:

    God, I wish what you propose could be possible, but with the whores we have running our media, the odds aren’t good. That doesn’t mean I won’t keep fighting for the truth - at least until I leave the country!

  14. dogster says:

    9/11 Truthers need to put on their thinking caps and think of ways to get William Rodriguez on major media programs. Getting on Rosie would be a start but she doesn’t have control of the program.

    5 and a half years after the fact and no one knows who he is - we’re getting skunked!

  15. To 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkers”: Show Up or Shut Up!

    This message is addressed to all the deniers and nay sayers who have spent almost six years swearing to the lies of the official story of 9/11. It is high time to throw down the gauntlet and dare you to confront the questions that have to be answered. …

  16. i9natz says:

    “The Media is the Massage”.

  17. Synergist says:

    There’s nothing better to do that I see than presenting our case as strongly as possible. If they say that our arguments are irrational, then the burden of proof is on them to accurately state our position and prove it as wrong. They won’t do so. It’s un-American to blindly believe our government. The Founding Fathers made the British ursurpations of American rights visible, then made a strong case for the rights Americans hold dear. They did not blindly believe. Civil Rights leaders did not blindly believe. Both of these groups would be ashamed of anyone who would blindly believe our government when such a compelling case exists for falsification of the government story.

  18. Catherine says:

    I speak on behalf of the members of the TV News Lies discussion forums (except for a few winger-types who can’t stop watching Fogs News and listening to Rush Limbaugh), Jesse, and we’re with you all the way!

    Keep up the good blogging.

    Catherine

  19. [...] Full article here… - share this URL via social bookmarking - These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]

  20. Rabbit says:

    I agree completely with your feelings about dealing with these clowns. Since 2002 I have been banging my head against the same wall of ignorance and rank denial. From the time when we had good reason and some though minimal evidence of inside job, to now when the body of evidence is so enormous and irrefutable as to threaten to collapse the lies under it’s own weight without any new inbvestigation ever being commissioned; the same idiot responses are forthcoming in reply from the Faith Brigade.

    I too have sufferred years worth of frustration with not only the fools who parrot garbage they are too ignorant to recognise for being garbage but also with their so called experts and professionals who supposedly make the claims these ninnies repeat as pseudo facts. These self proclaimed torch bearers for the Fairy Tale refuse to engage in any real debate. They cannot debate their rubbish, since it falls apart logically and scientifically at the starting point. Undaunted they forge on, with spurious assertions, personal attacks and bland denial.

    So many of us, so often have tried to draw these morons out into rational debate, without success. Many have been searching for the magic combination of words that will finally goad them into putting their story up for public scrutiny against the body of evidence and questions which have arisen. My guess is that despite the eminently reasonable words you have written and despite it’s seeming irrefutable logic; that to ignore this will just destroy any credibility they may assume for themselves, not one will show.

    The situation has been surreal for a long time. The self projection and the cognitive dissonance of the Faith Brigade is the most amazing magic, I cannot see it as anything else. Maybe I was already less able to empathise with the majority since I have alwys been a non-conformist rabbit and an outcaste from popular society, but I am unable even to comprehend the thought processes which may or may not lie behind the denial and assertions of the Morons. I am no longer interested in trying to be polite to them either. Shortly after I find another Faith Brigader assuming the fuckwit position, I forget politeness and just proceed to tear them a new hole. What is the point of trying to communicate with an irrational transmitter? These dopes are not even on two way communication.

    Anyway, I’ll be watching this challenge with hope in my heart, but very little confidence it will amount to a hill of beans.

    On another note, here in Oz FOXTEL just ran a piece on the BBC reporting WTC-7 collpase early! My parents who are long time 9/11 Faith Brigaders, saw it, and reversed all their opinions of their son’s rantings about 9/11. They were shocked and dismayed, but could not ignore the obvious truth. I am still stunned that they woke up! They are also MORMONS, one of the main Christian Zionist churches. I have been beating my head against a wall with them on Israel, and the Middle East for some time. They ahve also begun to wake up to israel at last and are now actively criticising the abhorent abberation of a nation.

    Just remember nobody ever goes back when once they have seen the truth, about 9/11. The movement of the people is one way only, it is way past the point of no return, and it is not going away. Eventually we will win. It is not in doubt.

  21. Rabbit says:

    One other small matter. I have recently been involved in a terrible battle with administartion of the new ICH Blog. The site generally concentrates on Zionist issues, but had run a few 9/11 pieces lately. It became apparent to some of us that the site admin is spiking the 9/11 issue and even threads are being manipulated while a widely recognised effective 9/11 debater was banned from site. Many effective posts were being removed and some apparent professional trolls inserted into the debate also. I am stating categorically that the Information Clearing House Blog is spiking 9/11 truth. Anyone who wants I will supply details to but will not fill up this thread now.

  22. abbys says:

    As someone who believes more parts of the official story than the “MIHOP” one, could you please clarify as to what you mean by “You won’t let us speak to you in public”?

    I’ve talked to oodles of people who say that the events of 911 were “an inside job” in public and via email. Some were very kind. Most were angry that I didn’t agree with them, but some were open to dialogue.

    I think I can speak for most of them by saying the following: We don’t feel that it is our responsibility to prove that your theory is false to you. It is your responsibility to prove that your theory is true to us. Or else, science would be full of completely off base theories that become fact just by the idea that they weren’t addressed by the community at large.

    Finally, I wish to sign off with this: I believe that there were great holes in the 911 investigation. I do not think that NIST were pressured to create false findings, because certainly big business and the Port Authority was extremely displeased with some of their recommendations and demands for building creation in the future. However, I think that every time a member of 911 truth makes a false claim or a claim that goes against the firefighters testimony or a claim that downright insults the dead, we are that further away from knowing the truth. It has become so easy to write off those that have genuine questions behind 911. Primarily because of the truth movement.

    I guess that most here would say that makes me a “lefty gatekeeper”, but that’s exactly the type of thinking (writing off someone simply because they don’t agree) that makes the movement full of people that are more concerned with massaging their own egos vs. actually discovering new information.

  23. abbys says:

    Ah, dang, when I said I speak for most of them, I meant “debunkers”.

  24. mestor says:

    What questions do you have?

    Give me some and I will try and answer them to the best of my ability.

  25. shukork says:

    Unfortunately majority of Americans rely on the mainstream media. They are controlled by a certain group of people with power and also the government. They have been constantly fed with news that favours what they want the masses to believe and listened.
    I have strong faith on the truth and the false will be exposed.
    Carry on Jesse. It will be people like you who will help bring us the light. May God be with you.

  26. Rabbit says:

    Abbys

    We are left with no options but to be rude to such people as you.. Jesse has put the case succinctly, and left no room for rational refusal to actually debate matters directly. You make the same tired old spurious claims, repeat the patently faked assertion that we are yet to present anything solid for you to discredit as a device to avoid actually facing anything. We are not presenting theories when we say that the buildings fell in a time so short that it was impossible by viryue of gravity alone. That is a fact not a theory. The fact that the BBC reported that WTC-7 HAD COLLAPSED a full 26 minutes before it had collapsed is PROOF that someone knew the building was set to come down, and NO answer has been given to this beyond the usual grasping at straws and prevaricating deceptive avoidance and the rest. The seeming rational post you just made is the end of any rational approach by you to the matters. Anybody can claim to be logical and rational but when you demonstrate you are neither then you are just another Faith Brigade Moron.

    The explosions, were witnessed by hundreds of emergency workers, WTC staff and occupants and Fire Brigade as well as Police. The explosions are VERY CLEARLY and unavodiably visible in all the video footage of the collapsing towers. The admissions by Rumsfeld, Cheney, Silverstein and Bush at different times have directly indicated foreknowledge and complicity. These things are NOT THEORIES foolish abyss, they are entirely provable, sourced facts. The conclusions which are to be drawn upon examining the facts are invariably that the official story fails over and over and over to account for anything. various factors were mentioned in the piece above by Jesse, why have you not mentioned them you bozo? Why do you launch straight into your own hollow and unspecific counter challenge rather than at least deal directly with the matters of verifiable evidence which Jesse has just correctly stated your kind NEVER will confront. Like I said it is surreal.

    Jesse just pained a precise picture of a complete brainless hack job as being the only response one gets to demands for answers from the bozos like you who seem to think it is enough for you to close your eyes to everything and claim that since you see nothing it proves there is nothing to see. Idiot! You performed exactly on cue, as if you were following a script. The script is already in the challenge.

    You and your dwindling band of cowardly faith brigade morons are indeed the ones who are obligated at this stage to PUT UP OR SHUT UP! Because we have been putting up for years now, we have more now than ever before yet the only response we can get from the dwindling numbers of morons, is that we have not given ANY reason to doubt. You are the primest examples of faith based thinking ever to despoil human history. You are the proof that the Inquisition and witch burnings could easily find a supporting crowd again. If your elected Big Daddy told you the earth was flat after all and trotted out some dickhead scientists to say it was so, you’d stop travelling overseas for fear of falling off I expect.

    The next trick and you have already begun it, is to start bleating about how you are subject to conetmpt and insults. This is unfortunately what you earn for being such a dope that you still basically believe the earth is flat. Forget the well earned insults, prove you have a mind and they might lessen or stop, instead see if you can cope with some simple facts which tend to deamage the official story beyond repair, individually and collectively especially. remember you cannot disprove the storm by debunking a raindrop. You have already had your ass handed to you on a plate in Jesses’ challenge, and the only answer is to take it up. Deal with facts deal with the QUESTIONS wwe have, or admit they cannot be answered by your mob. Merely putting questions back to us, when we have already raised a very significant anomalous question is not an answer, it is avoidance. Even you must see that is what it is, and what makes you think we are not even more awake up to such stupidity? Living in the light does make it hard not to hold the dwellers of darkness in either pity or contempt. I personally choose contempt. The time has long passed when any reasonable doubt could be defended. The official fairy tale is complete bunk. It is debunked from every angle, from the identities of the alleged hijackers, to who they actually were and where whom trained them. From the fact it is proven the US agencies knew from many different sources about the attacks and that they happened when all four airliners were impossibly hijacked simulataneously and allowed to fly about in full view without any reaction from air defenses which were used to scrambing almost daily for much less.

    How was someone able to tell the BBC and CNN more than half an hour before a seemingly solid WTC-7 collapsed; that it HAD COLLAPSED? Does such a genius as you no doubt account yourself, have any explanation which makes you feel satisfied? Assuming you admitted that although this is very suspicious, it proves nothing, would it occur to you that the admission by Silverstein that the building was pulled, a demolition term and one with no other rational explanation, does strengthen the overall level of suspicion at least? I expect you have already begun foaming at the mouth and even a pretense of rational thought will have passed you by, but on the offchance you are still intact logically, let me take it a step further. We now have two suspicious facts which while they don’t prove anything they lend some suspicion that the WTC-7 building may have been pre-wired for demolition. Now let us add the videos of the building collapsing where it can be seen to crimp in the centre and then collapse like a classic explosive deomiltion in every sense. The timing of the collapse, was NOT possible if gravity alone was involved. Even if the building had massive and uniform structural damage which it did not, it is not possible for it to have fallen inwards upon itself, at the same speed as gravity would have brought a free falling object to earth. Indeed a fraction faster, which is definately impossible without some force in excess of gravity, even if there was no lower floors to smash through. A well timed demolition sequence can actually cause a slight acceleration of the fall due to vaccuum effects, as it happens. This is not a theory. That the fall times were imposible without the complete and total destruction of the whole building simultaneously as is done in controlled demolitions, is NOT a theory, it is a fact. That the building resembled a controlled demolition is a fact, not an opinion, or a theory. So even if you are incapable of fully grasping the fairly simple science of Gravity and Conservation of Momentum etc, it must be apparent to anyone who wants to think about it, that a fall time even close to gravity would be pretty hard to imagine, and the fact that no such collpases have ever occurred in history before this day is also enough to mean that any presumption that any such thing has happened here, must needs extraordinary proof. So far all we have is a spurious assertion, with no working model, no working mathematical or physical model to make the ridiculous theory of pancaking collapses even look credible, with no history of fire or even fire and planes causing any collpase even remotely as complete or uniform as ALL THREE of these, you have a great deal of cheek to sit like a frog on a rock and demand we bring some more evidence to the table. With many controlled demolitions, bringing buildings like these and other skyscrapers to ground all over the world, there is also lots of video footage of same. These can be compared by anyone to the WTC collapses and the obvious is there, it is no fact that they are very similar. Since we have logic, witnesses, science, video and historical evidence all saying the same thing here, and since you have nothing but bland assertions with no basis in history, science or perception then it is entirely correct for us to demand you provide some explanation as to how the buildings fell like they did. We have already demostrated with History, science and visual media why the buildings looked like explosive demolitions and performed exactly like such, with the exception the North and South towers took the top down approach not normally done for it is less safe and usses more explosives. Though I think the core cutting was done from the basement early on and made the rest much easier. That last sentence is a theory in contrast to the precedding facts.

  27. Rabbit says:

    Abyss, since it is unlikely you will actually deal with anything substantial like fall times or pre-knowledge by media of the collapse of WTC-7, though I shall live in hope: Perhaps you would care to tell us what parts of the official story you believe? Do expect to have anything you claim for it challenged, since there is very little of the official story which is not thoroughly debunked, but if you can actually articulate anything it will give us a starting point. I won’t be surprised if you now begin to make claims for the official story which even it does not make. I have long gotten used to the fact that no faith brigader ever read the official story at all, so they often make ridiculaous claims for the reports which have no basis in fact. The most likely source for your information about 9/11 will be the Television news I have little doubt.

    I am making a bland statement here, see if you can prove it wrong.

    No important detail about the perpetrators or the methods of 9/11 is established with any veracity in either the FEMA report or the 9/11 Commission Whitewash. Every important claim of the official story can be thoroughly and convincingly debunked, disproven no less, with verifiable FACTS! This is my mini challenge to you Abyss, let’s see what this Faith Brigader has.

  28. Ed aka 2_4GHz says:

    Hey Jesse, I’m with you all the way. I have lost friends and my family thinks I’m nuts due to my beliefs about what really happened.

    I have posted your entire essay on my blog with a link pointing back here. Hope it helps.

    Howdy Mr. Rabbit, Thats why I quit posting over at ICH. And you all called me radical and a troll. Shame
    notanotherconspiracyDOTblogspotDOTcom

  29. [...] 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkers”: I’m Calling You Out…Show Up or Shut Up! To 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkers”: I’m Calling You Out…Show Up or Shut Up! This message is addressed to all the deniers and nay sayers who have spent almost six years [...]

  30. abbys says:

    Rabbit, your attitude is exactly why debunkers think of you guys as morons. And EXACTLY why you are hurting any chance of any type of new investigation

    You say that the fact that bbc reported that wtc7 had fallen is PROOF that it someone knew that this building was to come down. YES!!!! Firemen had thought it was going to collapse for some time.

    Here are some quotes:

    From Battalion Chief John Norman:

    “From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn’t really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged. ”

    From Captain Chris Boyle:

    “Boyle: …on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

    Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

    Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

    Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

    Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.”

    “…Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did.”

    From Daniel Nigro:

    “The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building’s integrity was in serious doubt.”

    From Deputy Chief Peter Hayden:

    “…also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse. ”

    Thinking that the idea that people knew wtc7 would fall means only that it was set to come down by controlled demolition is severely limiting and very poor research.

    And rabbit, your anger with me for even disagreeing with you, shows me that most of your activism is done via the internet and not face to face. This is another huge problem with your movement.

    So, in closing, Jesse, I’m offering myself up for discussion. I’m not sure why you’ve said that I refuse to speak with you in public.

  31. Reasonable Doubt says:

    Abbys

    Are you a contributor the FEMA Report, the 9/11 Commission Report, the NIST Report, the Popular Mechanics Article and Book, or any other investigation or report claiming to have proven the official story as FACT?

    If you are not, I do not believe you are the subject of this letter by Jesse.

    You say that the truth movement needs to prove to you the alternative theory. I believe you have it reversed.

    I believe the Government needs to prove it’s theory to the American Public. I say theory, because it is only that!

    The central issue for me is our government’s conduct in the aftermath of this tragedy. Why wasn’t ground zero treated like a crime scene?, why was the evidence shipped all over the world?, Why did the Bush administration seek to limit the scope of the investigation.

    Question: Why are we still debating the issue of what really happened on 9/11?

    Answer: Because what happened on 9/11 has not been proven.

    As a guy who is on the outside looking in, I share this observation:

    The official story is a case of reverse engineering. Start with the conclusion, then make sure the investigation leads to that conclusion.

    The truth movement or “MIHOP” has had issues with jumping to conclusions.

    Maybe the bigger question is:

    Do we really want the truth to be told?

    The repercussions could be huge!

  32. rbank says:

    Thank you Jesse, I am so tired of being lied to. I am tired of the media making a mountain out of a molehill but not talking about the real issues. They are so busy talking about Imus today, but they give us little real news.

    I remember after 911 having the same thought go over and over in my mind, “many will come in my name, but you will know them by their works.” I watch in horror as crime after crime is committed and nothing is done. I call my congress people but they do not listen. Got a letter from our senator stating how hard our boys are working in Iraq. What about the tillions of dollars missing.

    Yes i do believe that 911 was an inside job. Any leader who will stay on vacation, strumbing a gaitar and eating cake while 1500 people die in NO, wouldn’t care if 3000 people died as long as his friends can make money.

    Any day without TVNEWSLIES is a really boring day. Thank you for all the work you do.

  33. Ironman says:

    I have studied most of the facts of 911 for about 3 years. Being a Union Ironworker/ welder for 27 years puts me in a class of people who understand structual steel buildings. The demo end of it also. The Twin towers were at the time and still at todays standards amazingly strong. The innercore of 47 beams could support 10 times the weight they were holding. Some coworkers went to ground zero to lend a hand the day after. They were turned away. One of them brought a camera and took many pic’s. When they returned I sat with them and viewed all the pictures. Most of the innercore beams where precut on 45 degree angles. They said the odor in the air was thermite. Molten metal everywhere. I beams thrown outward great distances. Buildings 3,4,5 and 6 damaged beyond but all still standing. Because there were no explosives in them. And then building 7 one of the strongest fortified buildings ever built just falls 8 hrs later due to fire. Never in history has a steel building fell from any fire. But on 911 3 fell in there on footprint that day. After they asked me what I thought. We all said pretty much at the same time it is a demolishion job. Its the first time we all agreed on something since I knew these men. What needs to happen is a new non Bush investigation. Rallie’s of protest,marches. Spread the word and educate yourselves about just who is really running this country. New World order. Ilumminotti. Check out the history of puppet Bush and all the bush gangsters. There is no question in my mind that 911 was there new pearl harbor they all wanted so they could go to war. No bid contracts to make billions. They cant even lie straight. America needs to pull their head out of their ass and start reading the facts. And dont count on the media. They have that controlled fully. I think it will never happen we as American get it together. Instead we do what they want fighting between ourselves. I never in my life thought our country was run as it is. Our fore fathers said if the banks and corporations buy into and control our republic we are doomed. Our democracy is being challenged like never before. If we do nothing then we deserve to lose our freedom.

  34. SammL says:

    There are too many aspects of the official conspiracy story to list here, but the actions of the bush government show guilty not innocent actions.

    Since when does the U.S. Gov pay the survivors of dead people for anything? They did for 911 surviving family members. Since when does the government not investigate the crime of murder??? When bush says not to investigate and obstructs every effort until the 911 ConMission was scripted. Their job was not to find out who did it, but how to prevent a future attack, so don’t be telling lies the 911 attack were investigated, they still have not been.

    The crime(s) remains open for a court of law.

    ARE THERE ANY PATRIOTIC PROSECUTERS ANY MORE.

  35. knightc6 says:

    There is so much wrong with the above piece that Im not even sure where to begin.

    I wonder when being skeptical of what passes for support of a conspiracy automatically translated into swearing everything in the official story was the gospel, or when correcting false information (black smoke indicates oxygen deprived fire, elevator shafts were airtight, etc) labeled someone a an official story defender.
    I find that less and less people who believe in this conspiracy are able to draw a distinction between dispelling rumors and misconceptions and defending the official account. Your words above seem to suggest that you can’t either.

    Im also not sure how active you have been, but if it’s anywhere near the level that you imply you would know that there have been plenty of people who showed up to weigh the evidence at several 911 truth events- they just don’t get mentioned on prisonplanet for some odd reason.
    Regardless, your “gauntlet throwing” is a tad one sided, don’t you think?

    You seem to have set up the conditions so that another party is responsible for answering and explaining in great detail in score of questions on any and all subjects you might have, whether or not they are faulty in premise or whether they require a foundation of knowledge to begin to understand the answers.
    I know from experience in talking to the self labled “truth movement” followers that if they have even one question that can’t be answered to their satisfaction by me, then this conspiracy is still fanatically believed in, nevermind if I have proven that the sources they are drawing their conclusions from have either actively misled them or completely ignorant on the subjects involved.
    It’s just a matter of throwing as much crap on the wall as you can, hoping at least one piece will stick.

    But I’ll accept your “challenge”, since Im sure you are sincere in your quest for truth and not just looking for validation or verification of what you already want to be true. We can set the parameters to specified issues you have in advance, then discuss those. It’s not practical to just have an open “anything goes policy”, as Im sure you agree. I’ll bring my team and you bring yours.

    Sound good?

  36. abbys says:

    sammy, the us gov pays survivors of deaths in wars all the time.

  37. abbys says:

    I don’t understand, Jesse is asking NIST and FEMA to come on his radio show?

    Through a blog post?

    Understand, this smacks of an easy way to get no answer and then cry “cowards!”

  38. SammL says:

    Yo abbys, you are right, partially right that is. When there is a life insurance policy or as a soldier would have death benefits, but these were civilians without a prior insurance agreement. Wake the hell up folks. They paid these off to prevent the courts from exposing things.

  39. ROnald Wieck says:

    I accept your challenge. In the past year, I have debated Les Jamieson, and have hosted debates between Mark Roberts and the Loose Change boys. This week, Mark and I will debate James Fetzer, assuming he shows up.

    In five years of screaming, conspiracy liars have produced bogus science, distorted quotes, a blizzard of outright falsehoods–and not a shred of actual evidence for their pernicious and absurd fantasies.

    Every week, Mark Roberts confronts the charlatans and fools who profane Ground Zero. He will demolish any of them willing to subject their cherished fabrications to the light of reason and science. I lack his encyclopedic knowledge of 9/11 conspiracy myths, but I will debate any of the wrongheaded frauds who promote these thoroughly debunked canards.

    You’re calling us out? You can’t be serious.

    Anywhere–any time.

  40. Jesse says:

    ROnald Wieck - I don’t want to hear from you. I am tired of people making arguments for the official story that have not been made by or have been contradicted by the creators of that official story. I want to hear from the 9/11 Commission and the Bush officials involved.

    You people keep defending the official story by using claims that have not even been made by the officials. How blind are you to what that means?

  41. ROnald Wieck says:

    Yes, we all get the idea that your challenge was not meant for the well-informed debunkers who would eagerly accept it and expose your deceptions. You are “calling out” people who will never see your empty rhetoric.

    NIST has published 10,000 pages of charts, diagrams, illustrations, photos, calculations, analysis, and commentary. You can’t refute anything in that mass of data. You can’t refute anything in the Popular Mechanics book. You can’t refute a single assertion made by Brent Blanchard in the Protec paper (he is a REAL demolitions expert–you people just make up stuff, remember?). You can’t cope with the implications of the seismic data complied by the Lamont-Doherty labs, so you persist in distorting it.

    Very simply, conspiracy liars have absolutely NOTHING to support their fantasies. You endlessly recycle the same distorted, carefully mined quotes and the same tired, thoroughly debunked canards.

    You bray, “Bring it on!” but when your offer is accepted, you head for the hills.

    Frauds–cowardly, ignorant, willfully obtuse frauds.

  42. ROnald Wieck says:

    A poster on the JREF asked an excellent question:

    WTF?!? So who was he talking about when he wrote:

    Originally Posted by Jesse
    I am sending this challenge to a whole range of people who are trying so hard to ridicule and destroy the credibility of the 9/11 truth movement. The gamut runs from Michael Chertoff’s cousin who wrote the recent propaganda piece in Popular Mechanics to all the people involved in a coordinated effort to eliminate any 9/11 discussion at all. It also includes every one of the people working with coordinated venom to discredit the reputation of anyone who might influence Americans to actually look at the 9/11 evidence.

    All of these people, along with their cohorts who regularly chime in and mock the 9/11 truth movement need to do one of two things: show up and discuss the evidence in public, recorded on video, with 9/11 experts CHOSEN BY ME, or shut the hell up!

  43. ROnald Wieck says:

    Incidentally, your cowardly non-challenge contains the discredited falsehood regarding Ben Chertoff’s imaginary relationship with Michael Chertoff. They have never met; they do not know one another; there is nothing to suggest that they are related. (Yes, we understand that Ben’s mother said that they could be cousins–we understand that because Ben explained the circumstances under which she made the misleading comment).

    But, then, you already knew that.

  44. knightc6 says:

    Good gracious, no response from the diligent seeker of truth, the noble researcher of the illumanati, the now infamous Jesse?

    You responded to only one of the people who accepted your one sided “challenge”, and that was to tell him that you meant to challenge everyone BUT him, or something along that ridiculous train of thought.

    Looks like you aren’t quite that concerned about the “truth” after all, rather what you WANT the truth to be.

    Another of the self labeled “truth movement” shows their true colors, nothing to see here folks.

  45. Tinfoilhatter says:

    r0n b**slaps yet another clueless 9/11 twoofer. Great entertainment.

  46. ROnald Wieck says:

    If you want a debate, let’s debate.

  47. qarnos says:

    Jesse. Ron has agreed to the terms of your challenge. Why won’t you do the honorable thing and accept him? You claim your message was not aimed at him. I strongly disagree. Allow me to quote your message:

    “This message is addressed to all the deniers and nay sayers who have spent almost six years swearing to the lies of the official story of 9/11.”

    Notice the part where you said “ALL”? You do know what “ALL” means, do you not? I’ll let you in on a little secret: It means “EVERYONE”. And Ron counts. Not satisfied? Again, I quote:

    “So here is my offer to both the 9/11 truth movement and to the backers and creators of the official story: Bring it on!”

    See the part where you said “the backers … of the official story”. Ron is a backer of the official story, Jesse. Surprised?

    “To the 9/11 Commission … and to the portion of the general public who still believe the official explanation of the events of 9/11: assemble your team and get ready to educate us.”

    I highlight the phrase, “and to the portion of the general public”. Guess what, Jesse? Ron is a member of the general public. Who would have guessed?!!!

    There is no excuse for you to back down on your challenge, yet you have. I have no doubt, you will go running to your truther friends, proclaiming that no one would debate you. If you do, you are a LIAR. Remember that.

    It’s time for some real truth, Jesse. You whine and whine that no-one in the media will touch you. Do you want to know why? Because THEY DON’T CARE. No - it’s not because they have sold-out. They don’t care about you or your pathetic “movement” for the same reason they don’t care about the man who claimed he can live without food or water - it’s just to whacked out and crazy to be true, and with a complete lack of any supporting empirical evidence to boot. YOU ARE A NUT.

    The only people who take you seriously enough to bother even debunking you are your old enemies - the skeptics. And even we begin to tire of it after the 10,000th truther has proudly marched into the JREF forums to smugly proclaim, as if no one else ever had, that “fire can’t melt steel”.

    I know why you do it. It makes you feel superior to the average Joe. There’s no shame in that - everybody like to feel superior to everyone else. The difference is, the “truth movement” makes it incredibly easy - all you have to do is roll out of bed. Done! You are superior because you haven’t “sold out”. You know “the truth”. And what’s more - you didn’t need a fancy university degree in order to discover “the truth”. You did it with your natural, superior (need I say), intelligence. How great that must feel.

    It must also feel great to know that you aren’t a sheep, yeah? I mean, you don’t blindly swallow the tripe spoon-fed by “the corporate media”. No! You’re too smart to fall for that crap! Instead, you blindly swallow the tripe spoon-fed to you by Avery, Jones (both of ‘em!), Fetzer, et al. Man, you are sooooo not a sheep.

    I will sign off with this, Jesse: You made a challenge. It was accepted. Now, SHOW UP OR SHUT UP!

    -qarnos.

  48. [...] Re: 9/11 Revisited errr where did u see an adequate explanation ???? The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is set to conclude its investigation of the World Trade Center complex by analyzing if bombs brought down WTC 7. LP: NIST To Probe Whether WTC 7 Downed By Bombs To 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkers”: I’m Calling You Out…Show Up or Shut Up! TvNewsLIES.org » Archive » To 9/11 “Conspiracy Debunkersâ€�: I’m Cal… [...]

  49. ROnald Wieck says:

    Sorry, but no conspiracy liars are “calling out” any rationalists. We are always willing to meet the liars in debate. They are understandably shy.

  50. frank says:

    ROnald,
    You touched upon some of the questions surrounding the collapse of WTC7. Putting aside some of the big ones, such as why it collapsed; why over five and a half years after the event NIST have been unable to deliver an explanation of it; why the 9/11 Commission decided it wasn’t a topic suitable for discussion; why most of the material evidence was shipped out of the country under high security within weeks and destroyed, etc, maybe you can help me out with some of these:

    The testimonial evidence about the condition of WTC7 prior to its precipitate collapse is contradictory and no doubt hampered by the obscuring clouds of dust and smoke. Whether the fatal damage occurred all at once or progressively is not decisive to the question of what caused the collapse. However, if there are any photographs available to corroborate the “huge gaping hole” Boyle referred to I’d like to see them.

    Photographic analyses at http://www.studyof911.com/articles/winstonwtc701/ and http://wtc7corner.blogspot.com/ show the best images available of the south side, but these don’t appear to support Boyle’s account. If you know of any that do, please let us know.

    Davin Coburn, Popular Mechanics’ contributor and “fact checker” for their “Debunking 9/11 Myths” book said in a radio interview that he had been shown pictures of this damage by the NY Police Department and various other governmental agencies.
    He was unable to explain why what he had seen was too sensitive for public scrutiny. He was also unable to explain why publishers of a magazine are allowed to view material that remains classified to the rest of us.
    http://www.apfn.net/pogo/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3
    Transcript here: http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060826165457842

    If there was widespread damage on the south side of the building, enough to cause a catastrophic collapse, why did it, instead of toppling over on that side, fall vertically and symmetrically, causing demolition expert Danny Jowenko to be absolutely certain he was watching a controlled demolition?
    http://911blogger.com/node/3231
    Incidentally, Van D Romero, Ph.D., formerly Director of Energetic Materials Research & Testing Center, New Mexico Tech. was the first of many highly qualified and experienced construction engineers, physicists and accident analysts to express a similar opinion about the Twin Towers. (Olivier Uyttebrouck, Albuquerque Journal, 21/09/01)
    Others referenced here: http://www.ae911truth.org/

    If buildings can be brought down neatly onto their foundations by blowing out one side, why do demolition experts take such pains to lay explosives on each side and time them to fire simultaneously?

    The FEMA report stated: “The performance of WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers.” http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf
    If the collapse was primarily due to fire, it must have been an exceptional one, because it achieved what no fire in the 100-year history of structural-steel framed buildings has before or since. “Experts said no building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire.” (New York Times, 29/11/01) Can you give me an example of a comparable building which has collapsed to its foundations as a result of fire? If it was an exceptional fire, why does none of the photographic evidence show a building engulfed in flames - just a few isolated fires?

    If there was clear evidence of damage sufficient to undermine the building’s integrity, why did the FEMA report not say so?

    If damage was a major factor, clearly FEMA’s report must be bogus because it explains the collapse without invoking this cause.

    If FEMA’s report arrived at its conclusion despite the evidence, will NIST do any better, given that they rely upon several of the same authors?

    Doesn’t the fact that “no steel was recovered from WTC7” (NCSTAR 1-3) rather limit the scope of their scientific analysis?

    Finally, I’ve yet to hear any satisfactory explanation of WTC owner Silverstein’s famous comment in reference to WTC7: “I remember getting a call from the, er, Fire Department Commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”

    If you show the video to someone who doesn’t even know WTC7 collapsed on 9/11, they will understand that he is talking about demolishing the building. Try it. The context of his remark in the film makes this interpretation inescapable. “America Rebuilds”: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/PullIt3.wmv
    The same documentary contains the phrase from a demolition worker “we’re getting ready to pull the building six” just before they demolished WTC6: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc6_pull.wmv
    What method of demolition he had in mind is immaterial, but he cannot have meant “maybe the smartest thing to do is pull the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building” (as the spokesman for Silverstein Properties later contended) because no firefighting was attempted at WTC7. “Preliminary indications were that, due to lack of water, no manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY.” (FEMA)
    “According to the FDNY first-person interviews, water was never an issue at WTC 7 since firefighting was never started in the building.” (NIST)

    However we understand the statement, it is implausible on several counts. Why in the midst of coordinating a major emergency response would the fire department commander telephone the owner of the property to tell him he was not sure whether they could contain the fire? What purpose would this serve or how would it assist his mission? Even stranger is the idea that he would be taking advice from Silverstein about either withdrawing his crew or demolishing the building. Besides, if the FEMA and NIST reports are to be believed, the commander would not tell Silverstein “they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire” because “firefighting was never started in the building”.

    Shown a year after the event, the documentary inevitably raised the topic of WTC7 to many previously unaware of it. Was Silverstein trying to deflect raised curiosity from casual observers by making the destruction of WTC7 sound like the result of a pragmatic decision rather than the enigma it remains? One can only guess, but absent of any logical interpretation, the remark is bound to add to other suspicions about Silverstein’s involvement in the events of 9/11 - suspicion he finds it either unnecessary or impossible to dispel. Those of us who accept there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that 9/11 was a false-flag event, regard his remark as but a tiny fragment of it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 291 access attempts in the last 7 days.