911 Mysteries
AND Facts

The 9-11Research Companion to
911 Mysteries - Demolitions

by Jim Hoffman

A detailed point-by-point critique of the film using an illustrated transcript

The video 911 Mysteries - Demolitions was released as a DVD in late 2006, and received acclaim from respected 9/11 Truth activists. For example:

“Excellent. The best of the 9/11 movies.”
“WOW! is my reaction to this movie. Great insight into demolitions and what really happened on 9/11/2001.”
–Steven E. Jones, physics professor, author of Why Indeed did the World Trade Center Buildings Collapse?

The film has also spawned its share of detractors, such as the anonymous makers of the video Screw 9/11 Mysteries.

A survey of reviews of the film shows a striking tendency towards polarization into two camps: one side showering the video with unqualified praise and the other attacking it as the work of delusional conspiracy theorists. This critique avoids consigning itself to the first camp despite the fact that 9-11 Research supports the central conclusion of the video: that the three WTC skyscrapers were felled by controlled demolitions. This is because we think it is vitally important to provide constructive criticism of the video, criticism that:

  • Amplifies and supplements strong points with references
  • Clarifies ambiguous and incomplete points
  • Flags unsupported and erroneous points

This critique is a work in progress and is missing the final section contained in the DVD: PROLOGUE. That section addresses some of the criticisms in this critique.

This critique is not a substitute for the video itself, a DVD of which can be ordered at 911WeKnow.com.

For a summary critique of the video, see the slides for the talk 911 Mysteries -- A Critical Review.


Hide Replies
Show Replies




"My name is Brad and I'm a conservative Republican. Last summer I happened to come across a video on the Internet about the World Trade Center demolition on September 11th. As a kind of "demolition hobbyist," I downloaded it and watched it. The title was "Painful Deceptions," by a guy called Eric Hufschmid. The video made me very angry. I was determined to prove the maker of the video wrong.
I purchased videos about 9/11 from CBS and PBS Nova, including one made by the Naudet brothers. These were considered the "official videos." After watching them carefully, and after researching thousands of websites and archives on the Internet -- literally not sleeping for an entire week -- I realized that [the] official story, not Eric Hufschmid's "Painful Deceptions," was unprovable, unsubstantiated, absolutely wrong.
What you are about to see is information you should already know. Our news reporters, government and media should have made all this material available to every one of us. Ask yourself why you've never seen it."
That Brad had to research thousands of websites and archives doesn't speak well for the persuasiveness of the material. Indeed there are so many false claims promoted as 9/11 truth, it's not easy to find a credible and concise case that the attack was an inside job. For such a summary Brad could have read the 9-11 Research Top Anomalies page.
That 911 Mysteries' opening passage highlights Eric Hufschmid provides an easy target for the film's detractors: Hufschmid is a self-described Holocaust denier whose unsupported accusations that most researchers of the attack are part of the "Zionist criminal network" allow him and his supporters to be dismissed as lunatics.


On September 11th, we learned that four passenger planes were hijacked and taken radically off course. Within an hour, two of the planes had flown into the enormous steel towers of the World Trade Center, creating fires and eventually toppling them.
Some media outlets, such as the New York Times, reported that the Twin Towers had been "toppled". This is description is blatantly false, as each Tower exploded from near the top downward.
Dazed by the news, the American public soon believed the fires in the towers had burned so hot they caused the steel frames of the buildings to give way.
A myth developed, fed by official sources through the media to a bewildered audience. Elements of the myth: the impact of the airplanes, gallons of burning jet fuel, steel melting, the buildings failing and suddenly imploding. In a mere 10 seconds, 110 stories hurtled earthward -- pulverizing into dust.
Critics of 911 Mysteries have flagged this as an error, pointing out that the official story blames collapses on the softening -- not melting -- of steel. However, in the days following the attack, the mainstream media featured numerous experts proclaiming that the fires had melted structural steel.
Eyewitnesses on street: "...we ran to the window..."
Right from the start, on the street itself, the official story was born:
Eyewitness on street: "...come out of nowhere and just reamed right into the side of the Twin Tower, exploding through the other side, and then I witnessed both towers collapse -- one first and then the second -- mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense."
This is a particularly vivid example of someone on the spot confidently proclaiming that he knows exactly why the Tower came down, while almost everyone else is in a state of shock. Is this man really just a bystander, or is his purpose to seed the official story? Contrast his pat explanation to the failure of agencies such as NIST to produce a plausible explanation of the collapse theory with 20 million dollars and three years at their disposal.
The myth bled into the FEMA report ... and was echoed by the experts.
Text: "While it was impossible for the fuel-rich, diffuse-flame fire to burn at a temperature high enough to melt the steel, its quick ignition and intense heat caused the steel to lose at least half its strength and to deform, causing buckling or crippling. This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse."
John Skilling and Les E. Robertson were the structural engineers who designed the streamlined steel frames of the Twin Towers in the 1960s. Because a wayward army bomber flew into the Empire State Building in 1945, the towers were built with skyscraper crashes in mind.
Leslie Robertson is often represented as the lead engineer in the engineering firm that designed the Twin Towers: Worthington, Skilling, Helle and Jackson. Robertson has become an apologist for the official story, while the actual lead architect, John Skilling, is not alive to defend his buildings, having died in 1998.
Les E. Robertson: "The airplane we were envisioning was the largest airplane of its time, flying slowly and low, lost in the fog. We designed the buildings to take the impact of the Boeing 707, hitting the building at any location."
Official Story narrator: "But the aircraft that hit the towers was a Boeing 767, heavier than a 707, fueled for a transcontinental flight and traveling fast."
707s and 767s are comparable. The maximum take-off weight of a fully loaded 707 is almost 334,000 pounds. As airplanes only carry the fuel load they need, the smaller-model 767s that struck the towers were not, in actuality, maximally fueled OR close to their maximum take-off weight.
Even FEMA's report admits that this is true, but the opposite is often implied by defenders of the official story: that the 767s were "jumbo-jets" far larger than the jets whose crashes the designers had anticipated.

A 1964 white paper from Robertson's firm belies his claim that the Towers were only designed for a plane flying slowly, stating that their study had shown the buildings were "found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour."
As for the heat of the fires, listen to the radio communications of these New York City firemen:
Firefighter: "Ladder One-Five, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor -- we've got two isolated pockets of fire..."
Text: Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor... Two isolated pockets of fire.
Isolated pockets of fire. "Two water lines" to knock them down.
The firefighter is Chief Oreo Palmer, and the audio recording of his call was suppressed by the Port Authority for more than a year.
FEMA's Executive Summary relays that much of the fuel in the planes (jet-grade kerosene) was consumed by the initial fireballs and the following few minutes of fire.
It then tells us that the burning jet fuel spread between floors and ignited the buildings' contents, causing more fire and generating heat. This was somehow enough to bring down the towers' 47-column steel core, 236 exterior columns and thousands of steel trusses all at the same time.
Watch the towers smoking in the aftermath of the plane strikes.
If you have ever tried to light a wood fire, you will know that smoking logs tell you the fire is NOT burning successfully. Smoke is the sign of an oxygen-starved fire. The Twin Towers stood for over an hour, smouldering[sic] but not flaming. During that time, thousands of people were evacuated by way of the stairwells.
This description over-simplifies the situation. Whereas fires in the South Tower appeared to dwindle over time, those in the North Tower appeared to spread, being far more extensive after the fall of the South Tower, with extensive regions of visible flames.
Others, trapped by debris, stood in the smoke-filled windows and signaled for help.
In fact, the towers did what they were built to do.
Frank A. De Martini: "The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it -- that was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting -- it really does nothing to the screen netting."
Frank A. De Martini, who had first came to work at the WTC after the 1993 bombing was killed in the 2001 attack.
The towers were built to withstand 140-mile-an-hour gusts produced by winter storms. Anyone in them on a windy day could feel them swaying. The single impact of a jetliner was no more of a blow than the continued battering of a hurricane.
Well, not exactly. The jetliner impacts obviously caused a great deal of structural damage, severing about 10-15 percent of each Tower's columns -- something a hurricane wouldn't do.
Eyewitness: "I was just putting my stuff away and all of the sudden we heard a loud crash -- and the building started shaking, kind of moving like a wave..."
New Yorkers were stunned, one hour later, when the first tower fell.
Les E. Robertson: "To the best of my knowledge, the considerations of the fuel in the airplane -- in terms of an explosion or a great fire -- was not considered. Now ... we were not responsible for that aspect of the design..."
Imagine – building expressly for airplane impact, but never thinking of the fuel.
As Kevin Ryan points out, there is an abundant documentation that the WTC designers did consider the effect of fires, including from lead engineer John Skilling.


Never before in the history of the world has a steel building collapsed due to fire.
Jonathan R. Barnett, Ph.D.: "I have not seen until recently a protected steel structure that has collapsed in a fire."
9/11 Mysteries' assertion that fire has never caused the collapse of a steel building is almost certainly false. Barnett's statement is restricted to "[fire]-protected" steel structures. It does appear to be true that no steel-framed high-rise building has ever collapsed due to fire, whether or not the building was fire-protected.
True infernos have raged hot and long in steel-framed buildings, but not one of the buildings ever came down.
In 1975, the World Trade Center's North Tower suffered a nighttime fire that flamed for three hours, spreading vertically from floor to floor. It burned twice as long as the fires of 9/11, without even a hint of a building collapse.
The 1975 fire was indeed much longer-lasting than the 9/11/01 fires, but, of course, it didn't involve structural damage from aircraft collisions.
In February 2005, the Windsor Tower in Madrid, a skyscraper undergoing reconstruction, sustained a 20-hour fire. This is what was left -- a standing building strong enough to support a crane.
The Windsor fire isn't the best example for comparison because, unlike the 100% steel-framed Twin Towers, the Windsor building was framed partly with steel-reinforced concrete. However, there are several other examples of long-lasting fires in steel-framed skyscrapers much more similar to the World Trade Center skyscrapers.

Parts of the Windsor building did collapse, but did so gradually over several hours, rather than precipitously like the WTC skyscrapers.
Compare a 20-hour inferno to 90 minutes of smoke.
Significant areas of flame were visible for extended periods of time in at least the North Tower. 911 Mysteries weakens its case by failing to accurately describe the extent of fires on 9/11/01, and failing to note the differences between the severity of the fires in the North and South Towers.
Why are buildings made of steel? Strong, light and flexible, steel frames offer many advantages over wood and concrete, especially where skyscrapers are concerned. Steel makes big buildings relatively light, with tremendous load-bearing capacity. The upper floors won't crush the floors beneath them, and steel holds up better to weather and fire.


Paul Goldberger: "Most skyscrapers are built on steel or concrete frames, which is a grid of columns and beams that goes all the way through the building. The World Trade Center was different. It was what engineers call a "tube structure". It was a very very strong mesh of steel that surrounded the exterior."
The idea that the WTC Towers were radically different from other skyscrapers is part of the official myth -- something 911 Mysteries fails to point out. It's true that the structure was unique at the time, but most modern skyscrapers employ a form of the "tube structure".
Inside, there was the core. A rectangle of 47 columns made of 4-inch-thick steel at the base, thinning with increasing height, the cores combined might with ingenuity – anchoring the towers and allowing them to flex. Look at the size of this steel.
The very existence of the core structure is denied by the 9-11 Commission and minimized by FEMA.
Solid, pre-fabricated floor assemblies -- welded metal floor pans placed on top of trusses both welded AND bolted to the vertical frames.
Details of the floor construction. Proponents of the truss failure theory have misrepresented the floors' construction to make the failure of truss-to-column connections seem plausible.
The story we were told: This rock-like steel grid gave way because fire warped the trusses, causing the bolts to fail. As the trusses sagged and fell, the floors dropped with them.
This was the explanation given by FEMA and PBS, but it has since been replaced by NIST's theory, in which the bolts don't fail and the floors don't pancake.
In its 2002 documentary "Why the Towers Fell," PBS creates a video model.
PBS Narrator: "Once the trusses failed, the floors they were holding cascade down with a force too great to be withstood. The result is what's called a progressive collapse, as each floor pancakes down on the one below."
What remains standing? The tall, indestructible core. Why does PBS fail to explain the complete disappearance of the Twin Towers' cores?
Text: Where are the cores at Ground Zero?
The official story's central thesis is based on heat -- temperatures high enough to weaken steel. But people in the towers did not report such heat. Think about it -- neither steel, concrete, nor glass can burn. So what, in those buildings, could have burned to make such heat?
As a general point it's fair to say that the severity of the fires has been greatly exaggerated. However, it's misleading to suggest that there were no areas of intense fire -- particularly in the North Tower, photographs of which show flames extending nearly across entire floors after the fall of the South Tower.
How do these firefighters describe the collapse of the North Tower?
Firefighter 1: "We started running... Floor by floor, it started popping out..."
Firefighter 2: "It was as if they had detonators."
Firefighter 1: "Yeah, detonators, yeah..."
Firefighter 2: "As if they planned to take down a building. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom!"
Firefighter 1: "All the way down. I was watching it and running."
This excerpt is from the Naudet Brothers' film. They are describing the destruction of the South Tower, not the North Tower.
And others give similar descriptions:
There are many other such accounts, particularly in the long-suppressed oral histories of emergency responders.
News reporter: "At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as soon as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust -- and then a fire marshall[sic] came in and said we had to leave because if there was a third explosion, this building might not last."
Man in a hospital bed: "...like, it sounded like gunfire. You know -- bang, bang, bang, bang, bang! And then all of the sudden three big explosions..."
Man on street: "...started walking down the stairs to the 8th floor -- big explosion -- blew us back into the 8th floor..."
News reporter: "Do you know if it was an explosion or if it was a building collapse?"
Police officer: "To me, it sounded like an explosion"
News reporter: "...but it was a huge explosion..."
Pat Dawson, NBC News: "Chief Albert Turi told me that he was here after the events that took place this morning. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said that there was another explosion which took place ... and then an hour after, there was another explosion in one of the towers here. So, according to his theory, he thinks there were actually devices that were planted in the building."
Reports of bombs in the buildings, explosions. A CBS reporter to Dan Rather:
Carol Marin, CBS News: "...but I was coming toward the World Trade Center looking for CBS crews, and asked a firefighter if he saw any. All of the sudden there was a roll, an explosion, and we could see coming at us a ball of flame stories high."
Listen to the sound of a large explosion right before the South Tower begins to fall.
Sound reaches us after what we see. If the "boom" we just heard was the sound of the building collapsing, it would FOLLOW the collapse. Instead, the "boom" is heard before.
[voice of Dylan Avery:] "Ho, whoa, whoa -- bring it back..."


Let's consider the characteristics of steel. Steel is an alloy of iron, containing added carbon for flexibility, workability and strength. In the days of old, blacksmiths heated iron till it was red and pounded it for hours to form it. Horseshoes, knife blades and plowshares were typical creations. Steel was introduced in the mid-1800s and, by the end of the century, with the advent of the blast furnace, found widespread commercial use. A blast furnace is known as a "controlled environment" – high temperatures are reached as oxygen is pumped into a closed space.
The controlled environment of a blast furnace raises temperatures far above what can be attained in random, open-air fires. Blast furnaces typically do not use pure oxygen to achieve such temperatures, but instead:
  • Pre-heat air used to aspirate the combustion
  • Contain heat by using a large vessel lined with refractory brick
How and when does steel melt? Steel melts at temperatures of 2750 degrees Fahrenheit and above, attained ONLY in a blast furnace or when a powerful incendiary such as thermite is used. Steel, or any substance that is burned, will never become hotter than the temperature of the fire or heat applied to it.
An open-air hydrocarbon fire reaches a maximal temperature of some 1200 degrees Fahrenheit in a "dirty" or "uncontrolled" burn -- characterized by red-orange flames.
This is not strictly true. The temperature reached by even an "uncontrolled" hydrocarbon fire (one that has diffuse flames) is a function of the temperature of its surroundings. Temperatures of 2000 degrees Fahrenheit are reached in compartment fires, a kind of uncontrolled fire in which heat is contained.
Nonetheless, the statement is essentially true for the conditions that could have existed inside of the Towers.
Red-orange flames are what we saw on September 11th. Even the fireball caused by the plane strike was red-orange.
A "controlled burn" falls between a "dirty burn" (like a fireplace) and a "controlled environment" (the blast furnace). A "controlled burn" employs a regulated mix of air and fuel – an example being your gas stove or the engine in your car.
The critical factor in determining the flame temperature and color is the amount of pre-mixing of air and fuel. In a controlled flame such as that in a gas stove, air and fuel are pre-mixed in a nearly stoichiometric (ideal) ratio resulting in rapid and nearly complete combustion which ionizes gas molecules, producing the blue flame. In a random flame such as in a building fire or fuel tank explosion, combustion occurs outside of the ideal ratio of fuel and air resulting in a cooler, incomplete combustion, and producing fine soot particles which incandesce with a yellow or orange color.
You can fire up your gas stove all day long -- making soup, roasting a duck or simmering a stew. Made of steel, your stove will not melt ... and nor will your pots and pans.
This is a kerosene heater, designed for use in any ordinary house. The heater runs on jet-grade kerosene, contained in this tank. Made of steel, the heater can operate all night and all day. The kerosene fumes ignite and burn inside it, never causing even the smallest part of this heater to weaken or melt.
This kind of appeal to common sense is one of the major strengths of 911 Mysteries. Everyone has experience with hydrocarbon-burning stoves, but it's easy for people to fail to apply that experience to the events of 9/11/01.
Yet we were led to believe that these tremendous buildings, framed in steel and surfaced in aluminum, totally collapsed from small, scattered fires and 90 minutes of smoke. Take note of these hurtling beams, thrown laterally outward as the tower comes to earth. Would fire have the strength to eject such huge hunks of metal?
MIT engineering professor Thomas Eagar's 2001 paper is officially considered the academic standard for explaining the World Trade Center collapses. In it he tells us that steel loses half its strength at 650 degrees Celsius, and that the fires that day did not get much hotter than this. He stresses, however, that the fires did not burn evenly.
Eagar's paper may have represented the state of the art in explaining the collapses in 2001, but it has since been replaced by the NIST Report.
It was the uneven temperatures that caused the steel to deform and some of the floors to fail. These falling floors brought down the whole building.
Text: "While it was impossible for the fuel-rich, diffuse-flame fire to burn at a temperature high enough to melt the steel, its quick ignition and intense heat caused the steel to lose at least half its strength and to deform, causing buckling or crippling. This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse."
In plain language, straight from MIT:
  • Fires not hot enough to melt steel
  • Uneven fires deformed some of the steel
  • Some floors fell – smashing the entire building
  • Dr. Eagar ... what happened to the core?
What do falling buildings look like?
What do demolitions look like?
We are seeing typical implosions, characterized by gutting a building's base and then pulling it into itself. Computer-controlled sequencing fires the explosives in a rapid wave. Notice the jets of shooting concrete, the flashes, the pops ... the caving of the buildings as they fall into their footprint ... the tremendous, billowing clouds of dust.
Now let's look at the collapse of the Twin Towers:
We are seeing explosions, rather than implosions -- a first in demolition history. A sequenced rumble becomes a roar as debris is thrown outward:
The damage is not contained. Even the windows are blown from neighborhood buildings.
What kind of energy enabled this? Would fire hurl metal and concrete sideways into the air?
This is an obvious straw-man argument posed as a question. Collapse theorists will blame the sideways hurling of rubble on collapse-induced pressure, not the fires.
Here, a 600,000-pound chunk of steel (twice the weight of a Boeing airliner) was flung 400 feet, wedging itself deep into Three World Financial Center on Vesey Street.
A FEMA photographer taking pictures of Ground Zero wondered why so MANY steel beams were jutting from neighborhood buildings. What shot pieces of the towers all the way across the street?
In April 2006 New Yorkers were distressed to learn that bone fragments – human remains from 9/11 – had been found on the roof of the nearby Deutsche Bank building.
First New Yorker: "And how in God's name did those fragments get there?"
Second New Yorker: "It surprised me that there was still bone fragments -- or human remains -- that had not been discovered."
Third New Yorker: "How is it possible that after five years they are finally looking on the rooftop of the Deutsche building? I mean, that's crazy."
And bone fragments less than a centimeter long. How could they be so SMALL?
The condition of the human remains indicates a consistent application of destructive force that is difficult to reconcile with any scenario not involving explosives.
So much to be explained. Why did the South Tower fall first, when it was the second tower to be hit?
Watch the top third of Tower 2 leaning outward, about to topple. Then -- suddenly -- it disintegrates in mid-air. What causes this giant slab of steel and concrete to turn into dust before our eyes?
Watch both buildings collapsing straight down – directly INTO the path of MOST RESISTANCE – which is all the floors and all the mass of the building itself.
This is an excellent, easy-to-understand point that goes to the absurdity of the official story. The symmetry of the destruction is totally inconsistent with a natural collapse.
The World Trade Center Towers came down in approximately 10 seconds. Seismic data from Columbia University puts the North Tower collapse at about 8 seconds and the South Tower at approximately 10. Lynn Simpson, a survivor from the 89th floor of the North Tower, describes the sight:
Contrary to this popular misconception the Twin Towers each took about 15-18 seconds to come down.
Lynn Simpson: "And I saw the Trade Center literally collapse in upon itself floor by floor by floor -- and it took seconds for it to happen. It was a massive building, and it just pancaked."
Here the South Tower is half its original height, but wreckage from the upper collapse has not yet fallen this far. We are watching a demolition moving faster than gravity itself ... a building burst
10 seconds. These are 110-story buildings, coming to earth at free-fall speed – the rate at which an object drops through air. The lower floors would need to give way completely as the floors above them fell. Can a person walk through a closed door as quickly and smoothly as one that is open?
A 10-second collapse means the upper floors encountered no resistance from the undamaged floors beneath them. Watch the demolition wave rushing straight down.
Here the South Tower is half its original height, but wreckage from the upper collapse has not yet fallen this far. We are watching a demolition moving faster than gravity itself ... a building bursting into powder from top to bottom.
Here, the core of the North Tower finally gives up. 700 remaining feet of giant steel columns, among the strongest ever erected. What force acts upon the core to make it all of a sudden disappear?
Eric Hufschmid, author of the book "Painful Questions," is a metal-cutting software engineer.
Eric Hufschmid: "The floors of the World Trade Center towers were a three-dimensional mesh of steel beams. You have to keep in mind now, the floor is about an acre in size -- there are thousands of joints all over it. In order for the floor to fall down, thousands of joints would have to break simultaneously. So then, if you look at the speed at which this came down -- less th[a]n ten seconds -- you blink your eye and thousand of joints just popped somehow. The only way you can explain that is with explosives. They had to have had explosives placed all over the floors at the primary joints, and then that would explain how all of the joints broke at such a rapid rate.
The debris was crashing from one floor to the next. Debris cannot crash through steel and concrete floors as fast as it falls through the air -- and there was no slowing. Explosives had to be breaking the joints ahead of the falling rubble, which is why the top half starts off collapsing slowly and then it starts picking up speed..."
There are two points here:
  • How could so many structural connections have broken so rapidly without the involvement of explosives?
  • Once the Tower began to come down, how could rubble falling through intact structure have descended as fast as rubble falling through the air without the involvement of explosives?
The second point was one I originally articulated in my 2003 talk The Twin Towers Demolition.
This is a pancake collapse:
Not only does the aftermath of this pancake collapse look nothing like Ground Zero, the construction -- heavy concrete slabs -- was nothing like the WTC buildings. There is apparently not a single example of a pancake collapse of a steel-framed building.
Why don't we see piles of floors at Ground Zero?
Or even coherent fragments of floor assemblies? Although each Tower had about 4,700,000 square feet of corrugated floor pans and 9,460 double trusses, virtually none of these distinctive components can been seen in the many photographs of Ground Zero.
And paper blown everywhere. Wouldn't a pancake collapse have trapped the contents inside? What blew this paper all over New York?
If you were to drop a billiard ball from the top of the Twin Towers, it would hit the ground in just over 9 seconds, the average time it took for the towers to fall. Helped by gravity and falling through air, the ball will GAIN SPEED.
A billiard ball dropped from the roof of the Towers would probably take closer to 12 seconds to reach the ground -- about the time it took the first rubble to reach the ground. The ball would take significantly longer than the 9.2 seconds it would take accelerating at free-fall speed in a vacuum, because of air resistance.
The calculation for a "pure" pancake collapse of 110 stories, with each floor pulverizing to get out of the way, is 96 seconds. In the real world, with the floors creating resistance, a pancake collapse would LOSE speed – never would it GAIN speed.
A pancake collapse could gain speed, and the figure of 96 seconds doesn't appear to be based on any plausible collapse model. A simple model that takes into account the preservation of momentum results in collapse times of 11-13 seconds, assuming that the mass above the collapse zone stays aligned with the mass below. Adding more realistic assumptions for the distribution of mass increases collapse times to nearly 20 seconds.

Computations by Gordon Ross combining momentum transfer and the energy sink of concrete pulverization result in collapse times of around 30 seconds.


The airplanes struck the towers high above the ground. But down in the lobby of the North Tower, marble facing flew off the walls -- the windows shattered, all the glass blown out.
Narrator: "Right away, a guy from the Port Authority told them the damage was somewhere above the 78th floor, but all you had to do was look around. It was obvious, something had happen right there in the lobby."
Firefighter 1: "And you just saw ... all the windows were blown out."
Firefighter 2: "The lobby looked like the plane hit the lobby."
"Like the plane hit the lobby." What caused so much wreckage in the lobby?
Although it is counterintuitive that so much damage to the lobby could be caused by the planes crashing so far above, it is plausible when one considers the nature of the crashes, the properties of jet fuel, and the design of the Towers. When Flight 11 hit the North Tower in a dead-centered blow centered around the 95th floor, most of its fuel was carried into the Tower's interior, and a good deal of it into the core. The core contained the elevator shafts, including several express elevator shafts that ran the height of the Tower. Jet fuel could have descended these elevator shafts without burning if its concentration was above its upper explosive limit (too rich a mixture to burn). By the time the fuel reached the lobby level, it may have been diluted to below the upper explosive limit, where any spark would have caused explosive ignition. Such a fuel-air explosion could have easily produced the reported damage in the North Tower's lobby.
William Rodriguez, a maintenance employee at the World Trade Center and the last human being to exit the towers alive, describes a giant blast below his building.
William Rodriguez: "...and all of the sudden we heard an explosion. It was a huge explosion that came from under my feet, meaning that it came from the sub-levels between B2 and B3, and there was a huge explosion at the top of the building."
Voice of office worker at 1 Liberty Plaza: "What the heck was that?"
William Rodriguez: "You could hear the difference from the bottom and all the way through the top. The one from the top -- which was actually seconds after -- was heard very far away. The one at the basement was pretty loud, and you felt your actual feet moving with the floor. The tremor that is sent through the floors -- the walls cracked and the false ceiling totally collapsed, and that's when a person name Felipe David came running into our office saying, 'Explosion! Explosion! Explosion!' And when I saw him, he has all his skin pulled from under his armpits and missing pieces on his face."
An explosion deep down in the tower, BEFORE the plane crash 95 floors above.
Others lived to report enormous explosions below the towers. Construction worker Phillip Morelli was in North Tower Sub-basement 4 at the time of the first plane strike.
Phillip Morelli: "I go downstairs. The foreman tells me to go to remove the containers. As I'm walking by the main freight car of the building, in the corridor -- that's, that's when I got blown. I mean the impact of the explosion -- of whatever happened -- it threw me to the floor -- and that's when everything starting happening..."
Blown to the floor. Let's hear what happened next.
Phillip Morelli: "I was racing -- I was going towards the bathroom. All of the sudden I opened the door -- I didn't know it was a bathroom -- and all of the sudden a big impact happened again, and all of the ceiling tile was falling down, the light fixtures were falling, swinging out of the ceiling ... and I come running out the door ... and everything -- the walls were down -- and now I start running towards the parking lots. ...There was a lot of smoke down there. There was a lot of people screaming. People came with us, running up the ramps..."
Philip then ran underground to the South Tower.
Phillip Morelli: "You know, you gotta go clear across the hole from One to Two World Trade Center, you know, I mean that's the way you got to run -- and then all of the sudden it happen all over again. Something else hit us to the floor. Right in the basement you felt it. Wall[s] were caving in, everything that was going on. I mean, I know people that got killed in the basement, I know people that got broken legs in there, in the basement. People got reconstructive surgery because the walls hit them in the face..."
Engineer Mike Pecoraro, in the sixth sub-basement, found the parking garage and machine shop reduced to rubble.


Rescue firemen and civilians spoke of hearing explosions throughout the towers. Firefighter Lou Cacchioli told People Magazine that as he and others evacuated workers, bombs were going off inside the building. Explosions stalled elevators and filled entire floors with smoke and debris.
[Text from Greg Szymanski article]
Radio firefighter 1: "I got an eyewitness that said there was explosion on floor Seven Eight, Seven Eight ..."
Radio firefighter 2: "...Warren Street because of the secondary explosion. We've got numerous people covered with dust from the secondary explosion"
Radio firefighter 3: "...in the Tower...Ten Thirteen, Ten Thirteen..." (Code = Fire Marshall Needs Assistance, Urgent Assist by NYPD)
Firefighter 4 on radio: "We have a bigger explosion and what looks like a complete collapse -- surrounding the entire area."
Firefighter 5 on radio: "...involved in a secondary explosion..."
William Rodriguez, helping the firefighters, reports blasts within the North Tower well before it fell.
William Rodriguez: "As I went up, I remember listening to small explosions on the upper floors, and these small explosions were not coming from the area of the impact -- it was coming from lower floors..."
And when the second plane hit the South Tower:
William Rodriguez: "We heard "boom." When we heard "boom" -- inside our building -- the North tower -- we heard "pop-pop-pop-pop-pop-pop" -- and on the security radio we heard, "We lost 65! We lost 65!" meaning the 65th floor collapsed ... and as we went down the stairwells you could hear the actual collapsing inside the building. You heard rumble. You heard the cracking of the walls. I mean pieces falling, right next to us, of the actual building..."


What happened at the base of the towers just before they came down? ... Smoke appeared at street level.
It is likely that there was burning debris at ground level prior to the destruction of either Tower, as the jet collisions had caused the ejection of tons of flammable materials. Thus, haze rising from the bases does not imply ground-level explosions.
This video was shot from New Jersey. An explosion is heard as white smoke rises at the base of the building.
Text: video filter applied
Watch the camera shake on its tripod as a large energy source rocks the ground. Nine seconds later, the North Tower falls.
Text: "I heard like an explosion and then a cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed ... I looked up and I saw it coming down." -- Timothy Julian, Firefighter, Ladder 118
Text: "As I came out of the North Tower, everything started trembling under my feet like an earthquake. The only thing I saw was a firetruck. I ran towards the firetruck and slid right under, when the building started to collapse right under the firetruck." – William Rodriguez


Across the Hudson River, Richard Siegel was filming an astonishing day.
The sound meter of Richard's camera caught something very significant. Adjusted for the distance involved (as sound travels more slowly than what we see), the camera registered multiple explosions in the towers. Here is the South Tower record:
Then the building fell.


Let's look carefully at the collapse itself. Notice the puffs of concrete issuing from the sides of the building well ahead of the collapse wave. Called "squibs" in demolition language, these are actual explosives – charges firing visibly through the exterior as gravity pulls the building down.
Here are more:
Shattering from the top, engulfed by banana-peel plumes, these were no ordinary implosions.
The Twin Towers each consisted of three multi-story buildings set on top of one another. To sustain the weight of so many floors, the "sky lobbies" had to be extra-heavily reinforced.
The Twin Towers have been described as stacks of three buildings to visualize their two-stage elevator system consisting of express and local elevators. This three-part division is not descriptive of their structural systems. The mechanical equipment floors two floors below the sky lobbies were heavier than typical floors, but the reinforcement was to support the equipment, not to "sustain the weight of so many floors".
Watch a big squib coming from the sky-lobby band.


A powerful blast produces what is called a "shockwave." Explosions generate extremely high compressional waves that exceed the limits of surrounding air and space, creating a violent force.
Eyewitness: "When the debris starting coming down I was right in the shadow of the South tower. I was less th[a]n a hundred yards away. Everybody saw the video, over and over again, of that cloud chasing people down the street. It was like a tornado. It was like being hit by a wave at the beach -- but the wave was intense -- it was hot -- it was noisy. It was like getting hit in the back by gravel -- rocks -- like somebody had picked up handfuls of rocks -- and was just throwing them at you. And the noise just kept coming and coming, and one second I was running, and the next second I was flying. I was just -- I had no control over my feet, no choice as to what direction I was going. I was in the air, and it seemed like I was being followed this -- this tornado ... this tornado of darkness."
The South Tower fell first. This is the shockwave blast as it rocks the tower next door:


As the buildings fell, they darkened Manhattan, filling the air with billowing clouds of dust and ash.
What produces these huge, scudding cauliflower-like masses of slowly moving dust?
True, a 110-story building has just been reduced to a million tons of rubble ... but is there anything in our experience we can compare it to?
A volcano.
Again, 911 Mysteries cuts through the official myth by appealing to common sense. The comparison to a volcano is the point of my 2003 poster The North Tower Eruption.
911 Mysteries narrator: "The US Geological Survey website provides us with a definition of a pyroclastic flow as a ground-hugging avalanche of hot gas and debris. The rising gas chimney is clearly visible in this photo of the North Tower implosion, with pyroclastic flows between buildings. The cauliflower shape of the debris cloud is a telltale sign of pyroclastic flows generated by massive explosions, typical of volcanic eruptions and controlled demolitions."
Reporter on radio: "This is the second building that has gone down..."
911 Mysteries narrator: "A pyroclastic surge can even flow over water as hot gases carry dust created by explosive energy. Here, the South Tower implosion creates a pyroclastic surge, moving out over the Hudson River."
A volcanic eruption produces exactly the same thick, scudding ash – heavy with debris, hugging the ground as it flows out from a tremendous internal explosion.


On the southern tip of Manhattan, surrounded by water, huge retaining walls were built below the World Trade Center to hold back the ocean and Hudson River. The "bathtub," as it was called, held 7 levels of parking garages, maintenance rooms and the New Jersey PATH train station.
After September 11th, the 3-foot-thick slurry walls were found to have shifted up to 18 inches inward.
Construction worker: "These walls are coming in. These wall[s] hold back the river, so if these wall[s] cave in, this place is going to get flooded out b[y] the river."
Let's think about this. A pancake collapse should have left the foundations in place. They had always borne the weight of 110 floors. But something happened in the sub-basements to disrupt them.
George J. Tamaro: "All the collapse had gone down to track level, so we had 60, 70 feet of wall totally unsupported."
What kind of force could have dislodged so many stories deep underground?
911 Mysteries' description of the slurry walls is accurate. See this more detailed description. However, the video implies here and elaborates on later that the damage to the slurry walls was caused by something other than the Towers' falling rubble. What happened primarily in the sub-basements to disrupt the steel-reinforced concrete floors that helped to support the slurry walls was that they were hammered by tens of thousands of tons of steel falling through the air from as high as 1300 feet.


Narrator: "The pile itself seemed to have a life of its own. It spewed fire when we dug into it."
The ground continued to burn. Les E. Robertson publicly reported that 3 weeks after the collapse, live fires burned and molten metal still flowed underground.
If Leslie Robertson reported this, as is suggested by an 2001 article in SEAUNEWS, The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah, Robertson has since backtracked. In a debate with Steven Jones broadcast on October 26, 2006 on KGNU Radio, Robertson stated: "I've never run across anyone who said they had in fact seen molten metal." Yet in the SEAUNEWS article, author James Williams, after stating that Robertson "was a guest of SEAU" and presented to them "a number of interesting facts" including, "as of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running." An e-mail senty by Gregg Roberts to the Seau.org contact e-mail address asking for clarification of this point went unanswered.
Ground Zero Crew Member 1: "...you see how this (inaudible) is still smoking? That's from the fire still burning. Eight weeks later we still got fires burning."
Ground Zero Crew Member 2: "Steel-toed boots is one of the biggest things. Out still on the rubble it's still -- I believe -- 1100 degrees. The guys' boots just melt within a few hours."
In November 2005, physics Professor Steven Jones of Brigham Young University published a 25-page treatise on the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7, applying the laws of physics to the official story. From an interview on MSNBC:
Jones: "As we read in the FEMA report, it says here -- and I put this in my paper, of course -- 'The best hypothesis' -- which is the only one they looked at -- fire -- 'has only a low probably of occurrence. Further investigation and analysis are needed to resolve this issue' ... and I agree with that."
Carlson: "I'm sorry that we are out of time, and I'm not sure that you have fully..."
Jones: "Whoa! One other thing I want to mention --"
Carlson: "Okay, if you could hit it, just really quickly –"
Jones: "Okay, here we go. Molten metal in the basements of all three buildings --"
Carlson: "Right."
Jones: "And yet all scientists now reasonably agree that the fires were not sufficiently hot to melt the steel. So what is this molten metal? It's direct evidence for the use of high temperature explosives, such as thermite. Thermite produces molten iron as an end product."
Carlson: "Okay, we appreciate your coming on, even if I don't understand your theories. We appreciate your trying to explain it. Thanks."
For more excerpts from this interview and analysis, see the essay: Steven E. Jones: A Physics Professor Speaks Out on 9-11: Reason, Publicity, and Reaction.
Professor Jones barely got in his mention of "thermite." An incendiary used by the military, thermite is a compound of iron oxide and aluminum which, when ignited, sustains an extreme heat reaction, creating molten iron. In just 2 seconds, thermite can reach temperatures over 4500 degrees Fahrenheit – quite enough to liquefy steel.
We know that open-air fires cannot burn hot enough to melt steel. But metal had melted at the base of the towers. The second product of a thermite reaction is aluminum oxide -- visible as white smoke.
Was thermite used in conjunction with explosives on September 11th? Watch this very bright substance pouring from the 81st floor of the South Tower:
The orange molten metal, and the rising plume of white smoke emanating from the same point, match thermite like a hand in a glove. NIST attempted to explain the orange spout as molten aluminum with mixed in hydrocarbons, a hypothesis conclusively disproved by Professor Steven Jones.
And white smoke appeared at the base of the building ... would this be aluminum oxide, the byproduct of a thermite reaction?
The white smoke from the base of the Towers could be from any of a number of things -- most likely not thermite.
Appendix C of the FEMA Report describes sulfur residues on the World Trade Center steel. The New York Times called this the "deepest mystery" of all. Sulfur slightly lowers the melting point of iron, and iron oxide and iron sulfide had formed on the surface of the structural steel. Sulfur used with thermite is called "thermate" -- producing even faster results.


Let's look at what happens in the demolition industry. Taking down large structures requires preparation. Powerful explosives and heavy equipment are used in advance to weaken the foundation and bottom sections of a building before additional explosives and gravity bring the rest of it down.
Conventional demolitions do not require the use of heavy equipment. Holes are often drilled to place cutter charges adjacent to columns. That is easily done with hand tools. If heavy equipment is used, it's generally to gut the building in order to reduce the dust produced during its demolition.
The words of a senior blaster:
Text: "We blow the basement -- all the columns in the basement. Then we crack it up at the top to get it started. We go every other floor all the way down. Every explosive has a timer on it -- that's why it's "controlled." When the columns go, each floor goes down and impacts the one below and keeps going."
This description of the engineering of a controlled demolition is fine and good, but because 9/11 Mysteries fails to point out how the demolition of the Twin Towers differed from a typical demolition, it is misleading. The demolition of the Twin Towers:
  • Was a top-down rather than a bottom-up process.
  • Almost certainly involved the use of telemetry not timers, to detonate charges. (See below.)
Here's what demolition experts use in steel-framed buildings. (pause) The linear shaped charge:
Mark Loizeaux: "It's a chevron-shaped or v-shaped charge that you can focus at a specific target, and it's lethal. It generates around 3 million pounds per square inch pressure at a speed -- depending on the explosive inside the shaped charge -- in excess of 27,000 feet per second."
Besides the unfathomably powerful shaped charge, blasters have a lot of tricks:
Comments from blasting videos:
Narrator: "There are over a thousand different types of explosives, different because they detonate at varying speeds..."
Blaster 1: "This is detonating cord, and this burns at about 21,000 feet per second. Comes in all colors, pastels too..."
Blaster 2: "With the use of delays, we can control pretty much where the debris lands; we can control vibration; we can control noise levels. Timing a delays are the keys to just about everything in our business."
911 Mysteries shows the laying of detonation cord without explaining that its use isn't necessary in a controlled demolition. Wireless detonation systems are available off the shelf. This is an unfortunate omission since the difficulty in concealing detonation cord is one of most common objections to demolition theories.
And what is the result?
Jack Loizeaux: "The thing that pleases me is the fragmentation and the control. When you take a building, break it up into millions of pieces and put it into its basement, as artfully as we do. And it works just like clockwork. So we've got it all down to a science. It just -- it gives me goose bumps to talk about it."


Were the underground explosions intended to blow out the Twin Towers' basements ... followed by blasts heard inside the buildings of shaped charges slicing the core?
Demolition "pre-weakening" usually takes place well in advance of the final blast, but at the World Trade Center critical prep work might have had to occur in a very compressed time frame – in the panicked aftermath of the plane strikes.
It's extremely unlikely and completely unnecessary that any demolition preparation work was done after the plane strikes.
These core columns were discovered after the collapse. The angled cut occurs exactly in the manner that shaped charges slice through steel beams to control the way they fall.
The angled cuts could easily have been made by torches during the cleanup operation.
Notice the hardened once-liquid metal. Was thermite used with the shaped charge?
Narrator: "The job of the shaped charge is to cut steel H-beams."
Blaster: "They way we do this is by cutting the beam at an angle which, through a series of beams cut at the same angle, will tend to make the building shift over and walk."
Let's look at the rubble of two 110-story buildings brought to the ground.
In a 7-story crater, lie nearly 2 million tons of debris. Had the basements not been blown out, where would 2 million tons have gone? Heaped on the ground, ready to slide and spill?
Nonsense. The downward force of falling rubble was itself sufficient to crush structures in the basements.
The art of controlled demolition ...
Text: "...to take a building, break it up into millions of pieces and put it into its basement." Jack Loizeaux, Controlled Demolition Inc.
Remember the pre-collapse and mid-collapse explosions caught by Richard Siegel's camera on the Jersey shore:
Were these the blasts that took the out core and upper basements ... just before the final crumble ... a mind-boggling sequence of computer-controlled delays that blew the exo-skeleton ... pulverized the concrete ... to bring the whole structure rolling to the ground?
Siegel's camera didn't capture any pre-collapse or mid-collapse explosions. The interpretation of the (unverified) sound track is entirely speculative.
Was this the story of that day? 6-stage demolition wrap-up:
Text: 1 Pre-collapse sub-basement explosions (lower basements and substructure)
Text: 2 Pre-collapse interior blasts (endo-skeleton, cutting core columns)
William Rodriguez: "Inside our building, the North tower, we heard "pop-pop-pop-poppop," and on the ..."
Text: 3 Pre-collapse ground-level explosions (upper basements and lower supports)
Text: 4 Top-level collapse initiation ("cracking the top")
Text: 5 Mid-collapse squibs (shooting sections ahead of collapse)
Text: 6 Final time-delayed roll (exo-skeleton and pulverization)


Some people appear to have known the imminent future on that fateful day. FEMA had arrived in New York on Monday night, ready for a bio-terror drill. Spokesman Tom Kenney to Dan Rather:
Tom Kenney: "To be honest with you, we arrived on late Monday night and went into action on Tuesday morning, and not until today did we get a full opportunity to work the entire site -- other than this part of Church and Day to which we were deployed."
The staging of FEMA to the site prior to the attack for the TRIPOD III exercise is indeed suspicious. The meaning of Tom Kenney's comments are controversial.
And Rudy G[i]uliani, Mayor of New York, tells ABC's Peter Jennings that he was aware the towers would be coming down:
Rudy Giuliani: "What's going on now is a massive rescue effort."
Peter Jennings: "...and do you believe it is hundreds or thousands?."
Rudy Giuliani: "I really don't want to say right now, Peter. I think it's going to be a horrible number. I saw people jumping out of the World Trade Center. I saw some of the firefighters who I know going into the building, so... And we were in a building in which we were trapped for 10, 15 minutes -- and we set up headquarters at 75 Barclay Street which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the head of Emergency Management -- and we were operating out of there when we were told the World Trade Center was going to collapse."
Giuliani's foreknowledge of the "collapse" is even more specific than the ABC interview indicates -- he evacuated from the base of the Towers just 10 minutes before its destruction, leaving the company of other officials who would be killed.
Similarly, Larry Silverstein, new leaseholder of the World Trade Center, regretfully declared that a decision was made to "pull" Building 7 by the end of the day – the last structure added to the World Trade Center complex.
Let's hear Mr. Silverstein's actual words, delivered for our benefit in the 2002 PBS documentary "America Rebuilds": Silverstein: "I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me they were not sure they we going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'you know, we've had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it', and they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse."
"Blast," "shoot," "blow" and "pull" are terms used in the demolition industry to refer to bringing down buildings, bridges and other structures.
Blaster 1: "Because I actually blew the hospital down that I was born in --"
Blaster 2: "Originally we had figured to shoot it -- let it drop straight down."
Narrator: "Then, watch Demolition Dynamics attempt a big blast."
And from Ground Zero's own post-disaster wrecking crew:
Narrator: "By mid-December, the Department of Design and Construction had leveled World Trade Center buildings 4 and 5."
Crew: "Hello? Oh, were getting ready to pull Building 6."
The implication here is that Silverstein's statement was an admission that WTC 7 was demolished. But was it?
Silverstein, a commercial real-estate tycoon with international political connections, acquired a 99-year lease on the World Trade Center complex in the spring of 2001. Throughout the summer, he reworked the insurance policies on his new property, making sure that it was covered for "acts of terrorism." Explicit in the lease agreement was Silverstein's right to rebuild the complex if it were destroyed.
After 9/11, Mr. Silverstein fought in his insurers [] court to obtain double his policy limits for the destruction of his property, maintaining that the double hijacking constituted two disasters caused by terrorists, not just one. He won, and was awarded over $7 billion [dollars] – a magnificent return on his original (emphasize) $15 million [dollar] investment.
Silverstein: "My first reaction is to think about the families ... of those people -- the tragedy -- the magnitude of it. However, I firmly believe that we should rebuild."
For more information and references on this story, see the Controlling Interests page.


Aaron Brown, CNN: "Just in the last few seconds another building, Building number 7, one of the buildings in support of the World Trade Center towers, has collapsed..."
World Trade 7, functioning as the "command center" for the complex, housed giant diesel backup and oxygen systems, the Mayor's protected emergency bunker, and offices for the CIA, Secret Service, Department of Defense and Securities and Exchange Commission. Its other tenants were insurance companies, brokerages and banks.
For a more complete list, see this page on WTC 7 tenants.
No plane hit Building 7. But at 5:20 p.m. on September 11th, it collapsed in a heap on the ground. Some damage to Building 7 is said to have been caused by debris from Tower 1. Though this New York Times article tells us Building 7 "burned like a giant torch," the only visuals that exist are of unidentified smoke and a few small fires. Compare this to the wallops sustained by WTC 3 ... 4 ... 5 ... and 6:
Positioned right below the towers, damage to the surrounding World Trade Center buildings was infinitely worse. Still, the structures held up. But somehow rescue workers knew that Building 7 would fall.
Firefighter 1: "Did you hear that?
Firefighter 2: "Keep an eye on that building. It'll be coming down soon."
A 47-story skyscraper, Building 7 folded neatly, in 6-and-a-half seconds. A textbook descent right into its footprint. Silverstein Properties now tells us that its owner was referring to the team of firefighters inside the building when he spoke of the decision to "pull." Pulling the firemen out of harm's way.
However, there WERE no firefighters in Building 7, according to FEMA, N.I.S.T. and fire chief Frank Fellini. They were ordered out at 11:30 that morning. Six hours later, the building came down.
Eyewitness: "You know, we heard this -- this sound -- it sounded like a clap of thunder. Turned around, and it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building -- and the windows all busted out. It was horrifying. About a second later, the bottom floor caved out -- and the building followed after that.
Although there may have been no firefighters in WTC 7 in the afternoon, there were many firefighters around the building that the "pulling" could have referred to.
Radio host Alex Jones notes the mark of a classic implosion:
9/11 Martial Law - Alex Jones: "This is a photo taken one second into Building 7's collapse. Notice the 'crimp.' If we look at other controlled demolitions, we see that they first 'blow' one of the central columns, so the building falls in on itself. If you don't do this, the building falls outward, and can damage surrounding structures. Building 7 had a classic 'crimp,' or 'wedge.' Its central column was blown out first, so it didn't structurally damage buildings just a few feet away from it."
Indeed, the fall of the skyscraper was striking in its vertical precision and lack of significant collateral damage to the adjacent Post Office and Verizon buildings mostly unscathed. These are textbook features of a controlled demolition. However, 9/11 Mysteries' suggestion that 'blowing' a single column could have started a collapse is almost as absurd as NIST's cartoon theory of a domino-effect collapse.
Remember the Mayor's emergency bunker? Ensconced on the 23rd floor of Building 7, it was retrofitted with super-glass, water, oxygen and its own generator. But Mayor Giuliani chose to find emergency shelter elsewhere on September 11th.
Why Building 7? Even the media and its experts were confused. The History Channel interviews structural engineer Ramon Gilsanz, who points out the obvious crimp and even speaks of the "implosion."
Narrator: "Engineers are not just focusing on the Twin Towers. The most disturbing structural even was not that the Twin Towers fell, but that Tower 7, ignited by flying debris, fell due to fire alone."
Gilsanz: "Building 7 was a steel-framed building, and it's the first steel-framed building that has collapsed due to fire. The failure of the building was an implosion. It failed completely different from Towers 1 and 2, in which the floors failed first."
Why Building 7? Let's ask the question again. As the WTC command center, was it the hub for the 9/11 plan? ... Also, In 6-and-a-half seconds, lost forever were thousands of SEC case files on corporate fraud, including those relating to the notorious activities of giants Worldcom and Enron. A few indictments for stock fraud, but what of the $70-billion-dollar California electricity swindle? It disappeared.
News stories claimed that thousands of SEC case files were lost, but such claims are dubious given the likelihood that the SEC had off-site backups. The important thing is that the loss of WTC 7 gave the SEC an excuse to shelve the cases.


No one died in the collapse of Building 7. It was vacated well in advance of its implosion. But not the Twin Towers. Why weren't police, firemen and civilians in these buildings told what to expect? Tragically, employees in the towers were advised to return to their offices.
Female office worker: "The announcement came on that everything was fine. Tower 1 they were evacuating, but Tower 2 was fine, and we could go back to our offices."
Stanley Praimnath: "We were about to go through the turnstile ... the security guard says, 'Where you guys are going?' I said, 'Well, I'm going home because I saw fireballs coming down.' He said, 'No, your building is safe, it's secured. It is safer to stay in your building. Go back to your office.'"
Stanley Praimnath returned to the 81st floor. Then:
Stanley Praimnath: "I just happened to raise my head, looking straight towards the Statue of Liberty, and what I say was a giant airplane coming straight towards me."
The South Tower was hit between the 78th and 84th floors. Trapped on the 81st floor by crushing debris, Stanley was rescued by Brian Clark. Slowly and painfully, they made their way down a stairwell to freedom. Outside, Stanley had a feeling of uncanny prescience for what was to come:
Brian Clark: "And we peered through railing up through the trees at the tower, and Stanley said, 'You know, I think that tower could come down.'"
Stanley Praimnath: "I don't know why I am telling this man, 'This building is going', but I knew it was not over."
Brian Clark: "And I said, 'There's no way. That's a steel structure. That's just draperies and carpets and furniture burning. You know -- there's no way ...,' and I didn't finish my sentence when the tower started to slide. And I can still remember hearing -- first of all, this boom, boom, boom -- explosions..."
Not all were blessed with intuition or foresight. Joseph Milanowycz reached his son Greg by cell phone:
Joseph Milanowycz: "Greg at that time, I could tell by his voice, was scared. He said to me, 'Dad, could you get in touch with someone and tell them that there's about 20 of us on the northeast corner of the 93rd floor.'"
Narrator: "Greg had been about to leave the South tower after the North Tower was attacked, but was told it was safer to return to his desk."
Joseph Milanowycz: "A couple of times he said, 'Why did I listen? Why did I listen?'"
Who was a director in the company that provided electronic security for the World Trade Center and Washington's Dulles Airport – both involved in September 11th? None other than the president's younger brother.
From 1996 to 2000, Securacom installed what was referred to as "a new security system" at the World Trade Center. Wirt D. Walker III, a cousin of the Bush brothers, was CEO of Securacom from 1999 until 2002. Interestingly, these facts have not been made public. Was it only a security system that was added during those years ... or was it also the wiring for a long-awaited plan?
For more information on Securacom, see WTC Security.
Scott Forbes, an IT specialist in a firm that had leased space in the South Tower since its erection, reported an unprecedented "power down" in his building for almost the whole weekend prior to 9/11.
Scott Forbes: "We were notified three weeks in advance of the power down by the Port Authority. That was relatively short notice to plan to shut down all of our banking systems. It was a big deal. It was unprecedented. We had a data center on the 97th floor, so our originating servers were all there. During that weekend, the power down meant there was no security. The doors were all open, basically. And also, the security video cameras were all off. But, there were guys in overalls carrying huge toolboxes and reels of cable ... walking around the building on that weekend."
Employees were notified that Internet cables were being upgraded. But who were the strange workmen and what were they really doing?
William Rodriguez: "All the power was shut down. If there was a power down, that meant that everything was gone in terms of security -- in terms of access to the building -- so anybody could have come there and done any kind of set-up."
Having worked overtime to get his company's servers back up, Scott took the day off on September 11th. As he watched the towers collapse from New Jersey that morning, he was sure this had been the purpose of the mysterious weekend work. Scott notified many authorities, including the 9/11 Commission, about the unusual and lengthy power outage, but was ignored.
This entire story lacks any corroboration whatsoever. If the powerdown alleged by "Scott Forbes" had happened, thousands of World Trade Center workers would have known about it. See this analysis of the powerdown story.
Ben Fountain of Fireman's Fund spoke of unusual evacuations ordered at the Twin Towers during the weeks before September 11th. Others reported that the security alert was inexplicably lifted five days prior, and bomb-sniffing dogs were removed. What would the dogs have discovered had they remained on duty?


Not long after the disaster, Lower Manhattan saw banners like this one:
Although they were idolized as cathedral-like symbols of power and triumph that pierced the New York skyline, the Twin Towers were big money-losers for the Port Authority of New York. They cost millions a year to equip with the basics – electricity, water, heat, air-conditioning, sewage and even oxygen -- being airtight. As modern communications connected traders from all corners of the globe, tenancy in the Twin Towers continued to drop.
Text: "... a financial misfit, unsuited to fiber-optic and Internet technologies ... an albatross" – John Perkins Author, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
The towers presented another problem. Decades ago, their steel beams had been sprayed with fireproof asbestos -- a cancer-causing material banned from use in building in the mid-1980s. Although the World Trade Center complex was given several waivers, it was expected to "clean up its act."
But to remove the asbestos from every supporting beam in the Twin Towers would have been almost undoable. Quotes for this clean-up ran over a billion, and no insurance company was willing to bear the cost. (pause) An urban renewal project of unfathomable proportions.
Given the towers' issues and problems, September 11th proved an unexpected bonanza. The Trade Center was built in the 1960s to revive a rundown area of New York, and 40 years later urban renewal could again take place.
Two white elephants were removed, and a brand-new complex is in the works. The full height of the new "Freedom Tower" will soar to 1776 feet.
Text: "It is going to be a symbol of our freedom and independence" – New York Governor George Pataki
The suffocating dust that engulfed Manhattan was much more than dust. It was pulverized concrete, glass, metals, containing lead, mercury, dioxins, benzene – and, of course, asbestos. None of that was healthy for any living thing.
Today, thousands of rescue workers have developed lung cancer and serious, permanent health conditions. And the rescue dogs continue to die.
Text: "What you had was a ground-level municipal incinerator that smoldered for months ... burning up the most heavily computerized building in the world." --Thomas Cahill, Ph.D., Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Sciences, University of California at Davis
"Patients have had black paste coming out of their pores ... They have reported bowel movements that are blue or green, and have smelled like smoke – despite the fact that they have not been at a fire scene for months." – Jim Woodworth, President, New York Rescue Workers Detoxification Project
Only three days after September 11th, Washington instructed the EPA to declare Manhattan safe and re-open Wall Street, though the air remained toxic.
Reporter: "A federal judge is blasting former head of the Environmental Protection Agency for telling New Yorkers it was safe to return to their homes and offices near Ground Zero soon after the 9/11 attacks. The judge called Christine Todd Whitman's actions quote, 'conscious shocking' and refuse to grant her immunity..."
"It was documented that the White House ordered EPA to tell these lies, to downplay the seriousness of the environmental hazards." – Hugh Kaufman, EPA Senior Policy Analyst
In addition, 911 first responders who have fallen ill and applied for aid, have been denied.
For more information on the toxic legacy of the attack and the EPA's conscious cover-up of the health hazards see Ground Zero Hazards.


Asbestos plays a part in the myth of why the Twin Towers fell on September 11th.
Official Story narrator: "The steel had been sprayed with lightweight fireproof foam which, while cheaper, was much less adhesive. The New York Times has reported that the foam fell off easily, and the Port Authority had been fixing and replacing missing sections in the months before September 11th. But even if the fireproofing had been perfectly applied, the impact of the plane crashing into the North Tower was so powerful, it simply blew most of it off -- allowing the fire to attack the steel beneath."
James Glanz: "Once the planes hit, whatever condition it was in before the fact made no difference because an impact would knock it off, and the fire would have devastating effects on the steel."
One good smack from a jet plane and the puffs of asbestos are all blown off the steel. Would a few hundred doors slamming do the same thing?
Here, the History Channel tells us how, due to poor fireproofing, flames swept through the pockets between floors.
Official story narrator: "As much of the fireproofing had been dislodged on impact, the flames were attacking unprotected steel."
W. Gene Corley: "When steel is not protected the strength reduces very fast. When you get to about 1100 degrees Fahrenheit, you lose about half the strength of the steel."
40 years ago, the steel used to build the World Trade Center was certified by Underwriters Laboratories, a global product-compliance and public-safety guardian. Let's hear a lone voice that spoke out from this enormous company.
Kevin Ryan: "My name is Kevin Ryan and I was formerly a manager at Underwriters Laboratories. I was fired from my job five days after sending a letter to a government scientist at the NIST, questioning the report that the NIST had recently released in October of 2004. I wrote this letter because I had serious questions about what I saw in the report. Those questions went back to September of 2001 when U.L.'s CEO came to our location in South Bend. He told our entire staff the World Trade Center steel had been certified by U.L., and he said that we should be proud of how long the buildings had stood.
Over the next two years, I did some research and found some very disturbing facts, including that the steel had been disposed of in an unprecedented manner. Once I discovered those facts, I sent a written question the U.L.'s CEO asking him about these things and what he was doing to protect our reputation as a company. He replied in writing to me that U.L. did, in fact, test the steel. He talked about the quality of the sample and how well it had performed in the tests, and he said that our company had tested the steel, and it had done beautifully.
[Text: Test models did not fail]
After that, he asked me to be patient and wait for the NIST report because UL was working closely with them.
[Text: NIST FINAL REPORT ON WTC COLLAPSES, OCTOBER 2004, 10,000 pages, 16 million, 3 year study]
I saw this report in October of 2004, and in November I sent my letter to NIST asking for clarification. I felt it was an obligation on my part to ask the questions since no one else seemed to care to. After the 1993 bombing, the fireproofing in both buildings was updated considerably. But when you look at the NIST report, you don't see any testing that showed that a 767 would widely dislodge the fireproofing under any impact, let alone so far from the point of impact.
So now we've been left with a new theory, which is not really a theory at all, but only a collection of vague statements.
[Text: Dr. Frank W. Gayle of NIST with WTC steel specimen]
The NIST report represents what can really only be called anti-science. They started with their conclusions, and worked their way back to some leading hypothesis.
[Text: Temperatures to[o] LOW for structural steel failure]
When the results of the physical tests showed the temperatures were far too low to soften steel, and that the floors could not have collapsed, and that the fireproofing could not have been widely dislodged, the NIST ignored these results and built a black-box computer model that no one could argue with and that they know would spit out the right answers.
Today anyone who's conscious enough to know what is happening in the world knows that most government policy is being driven by this false story."
Television Reporter: "... tracked down and punish the perpetrators of this attack. This is being seen on Capit[o]l Hill as another Pearl Harbor..."
Kevin Ryan sacrificed his career and continues to work to expose the deceptions of FEMA, NIST, and UL in propping up the official story. See this review of his presentation 'A New Standard for Deception'. You can support Ryan's work by contributing to his Legal Defense Fund.
The steel, in dragon-like lengths and contortions, spoke for itself.
Bent, deformed, without cracks ...
Construction worker: "I found it hard to believe that it actually bent because of the size of it and how there's no cracks in the iron. It bent without almost a single crack in it. It takes thousands of degrees to bend steel like this."
Architect Mark Wagner: "Typically you'd have buckling and tearing on the tension side -- but there's [no] buckling at all."
Here is "the meteorite" – molten iron fused with concrete
Architect Bart Voorsanger: "And architects, engineers, people who work with steel, welders, have just have never seen the level of destruction and the level of deformation of this material in our lives"
It is true that heat expands steel. In a fire, steel members may swell and bend slightly.
But this? How could these huge tangles have been created? (pause) ... The steel below the towers had melted, at many thousands of degrees. Since metal conducts heat, were these twisted remains formed by high temperatures wicking their way through a gridwork of steel?
Explosives also deform steel. As they fire, gas pushes outward. The force of the gas can easily bend a large steel column.
Two kinds of debris. Huge shattered beams that could break a truck, combined with matter that was near pulverized.
Firefighter Joe Casaliggi: "You have two 110-story office buildings. You don't find a desk, you don't find a chair, you don't find a telephone, a computer. The biggest piece of a telephone I found was half of the keypad, and it was about this big."
In 1886, four gold miners lost their lives in an underground explosion. The bodies of these four men were brought to the surface in one barrel. The biggest piece recovered was part of a foot.
September 11th left over 1100 bodies unaccounted for.
These bodies were unrecovered despite a painstaking search and identification effort that continued for more than three years and used advanced DNA matching techniques. Of the nearly 2,800 victims, only 300 whole bodies were found, and 20,000 pieces of bodies were found. As many as 200 pieces were identified as belonging to a single individual.
At Ground Zero, this was found inside a length of steel:


Secrets cannot be kept forever. Just as that newspaper from 1969 revealed itself to us decades later, we will someday know the inside of September 11th. The reasons for the staging of such a production go far back into time.
Insurance policies covered nearly everything in the World Trade Center that was destroyed. But what if certain commodities could be removed in the nick of time? Gold and silver held by commercial banks and the Comex exchange is said to have been stored beneath Ground Zero. This single cache, belonging to the Bank of Nova Scotia, was unearthed and made public. Was there more -- and was it removed -- remains a question.
As Last Survivor William Rodriguez climbed the stairwell to rescue people, he remembers a very strange thing:
William Rodriguez: "As I stood there on the 33rd floor, I heard very strange noises on the 34th floor. Now the 34th floor was an empty floor. A floor that did not have any kind of walls or... It was a construction floor -- it was totally hollowed out. There was nothing there ... and I heard very heavy equipment being moved around, and it sounded like dumpsters with metal wheels being moved around ... and I got scared because I knew it was an empty floor -- nobody was supposed to be there. As a matter of fact, not even the elevator stopped there. You have to have a special access key to open the door on the 34th floor, so to find that there was strange noises there... And I continued actually bypassing that floor because I didn't dare to open the door on the 34th floor."
Something told William Rodriguez not to mess with the 34th floor. "I got scared." Yet William Rodriguez was not a man who was scared that day. He remained in a burning building against firemen's orders, endangering his own life as he saved the lives of others.
What could have been happening on the 34th floor? For weeks, Scott Forbes had heard similar noises on the 98th floor above him.
Scott Forbes: "It must have been at least four to six weeks before 9/11. It was like rebuilding work going on upstairs. The tenants, the people from Aon who had been there, were moved somewhere else. The offices were just vacant, and there was a lot of heavy machinery building work going on. It was almost like pneumatic drills and lots of hammering. So much so that the floors were shaking, that's how noticeable it was. It was almost as if something heavy was being moved, and then it was being taken off wheels, and it was like, BOOM! Our floor underneath literally shook. You could feel the weight above you. That was how large it was.
On one occasion I opened a door to see what was going on, being nosey. When I opened the door the whole office space was empty. There was nothing there at all. It was quite bizarre because it was just empty, completely empty, barren, nothing, zero -- not even cables hanging from the ceiling. But there'd been these heavy noises and vibrations up above. It was really strange.
And the noticeable dust in the building the week before:
Scott Forbes: "It was probably the week leading up to 9/11. Every morning I'd come in around 7 a.m., and the dust was incredible! It was filthy. I was like the cleaners weren't cleaning. Right were the windows were, there was a sill which enclosed radiators. I was sick to death of the dust which was appearing on the window sills. It was dirty gray and very, very noticeable in that week leading up to 9/11. Where was that dust coming from?"
How interesting that there are no corroborating reports of the dust or strange noises, despite the fact that there are thousands of surviving WTC workers.
Gray dust Scott himself had to clean. Was it powdered cement? The steel columns of the Twin Towers formed an endo- and exo-skeleton. Had something been placed around the edge of the building – holes been drilled to contain it? Was the dust in those final days a telltale sign?
As white elephants, the buildings were full of vacant offices. Tenants could be temporarily moved around for "upgrades" as Aon was, and a plan arranged to perfection. Was the strange "construction" that could be heard but not seen going on all over the towers? Larry Silverstein took possession 6 weeks before September 11th, when the strange "construction" began. Were the sounds that scared William Rodriguez the last of the rats as they left a sinking ship?
The Towers were not "full of vacant offices" -- they were at least 80% occupied at the time of their destruction. Check the tenant lists. What of those "strange sounds"? Since those reports are uncorroborated, they are of little value in instigating a genuine investigation -- especially when there is so much undeniable evidence that the buildings were felled by controlled demolitions.
By taking a day off, Scott Forbes saved his life. This woman was not so fortunate. She is 9/11's Iphigenia, calling soundlessly to people who could not help her.
[Text: "Iphigenia -- sacrificed by her father Agamemnon for the purpose of war -- Greek mythology"]
Christopher Hanley, trapped with 100 people on the 106th floor of Tower 1:
Emergency dispatch: "Fire Department 408. Where's the fire?"
Christopher Hanley: "Yeah hi, I'm on the 106th floor of the World Trade Center. We just had an explosion up here."
Emergency dispatch: "What building are you in sir, One or Two?"
Christopher Hanley: "One World Trade."
Emergency dispatch: "All right."
Christopher Hanley: "Yeah, there's smoke and we have about a hundred people up here."
Emergency dispatch: "Sit tight. Do not leave, okay? There's a fire or an explosion or something in the building. All right, I want you to stay where you are."
Christopher Hanley: "Yes.["]
Kevin Cosgrove, trapped on the 105th floor of the South Tower:
Kevin Cosgrove: "Smoke – real bad – 105, Two Tower. It's really bad, it's black, it's arid. My wife thinks I'm all right. I called and said I was leaving the building, I was fine, and then – bang! Three of us – two broken windows. Oh, God!"
Let's not forget these people, whose fate on this day was decided for them.
As we know, secrets cannot be kept forever.
But if controlled demolitions destroyed the Towers, where are the whistleblowers? That's a common question of demolition skeptics that 911 Mysteries fails to answer. It's the subject of this essay by Gregg Roberts that answers rather than just asks questions. 911 Mysteries unwittingly supports the idea that the lack of whistleblowers is a problem for the demolition theory by implying that the demolition of the WTC Towers had to be engineered like labor-intensive conventional demolitions.