World Trade Center Building 7 Evaluation is an engineering study at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) using finite element modeling to evaluate the possible causes of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse. The study is being conducted by Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, Chair of UAF’s Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, and two Ph.D. research assistants. Professionals from the fields of structural engineering, civil engineering, mechanical engineering, architecture, building design and construction, physics, math, and science, as well as everyday citizens, are invited to get involved. Every aspect of the scientific process will be posted on http://WTC7Evaluation.org. The study is being crowd-funded by the nonprofit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
We attended this highly informative and sobering lecture which was hosted by the Pacific Institute of Resource Management at Victoria University of Wellington on Thursday 29 October at 5.30 pm. I highly recommend a listen to this lecture which is now posted at the Pacific Ecologist Website link here
The United States has been the dominant world power since World War II, even prior to USSR break-up, as indicated by more than 70 governments overthrown by the US in that period. The USSR collapse led to a complete reshaping of the European landscape, but at the same time China has emerged as a leading world power, as it had been before the 17th century. In recent years its growing financial and economic strength is transforming not only China, but also laying the foundations for a completely new economic order through a ‘new silk roads’ policy that is accompanied by a network of regional and world-wide agreements. Once again Eurasia is at the heart of what Sir Halford Mackinder in 1904 called the ‘world island’. For the west, these developments will shape the foreseeable future world-wide.
James writes on geopolitical issues with a legal and human rights perspective. He was educated at Canterbury, Victoria and Auckland Universities, and has practised as a barrister in Brisbane since 1984. He publishes in Counterpunch and New Eastern Outlook, and presents to organisations such as the Australian Institute for International Affairs.
by Kevin Ryan
People sometimes wonder why is it important to investigate the alleged hijackers and others officially accused of committing the 9/11 crimes. After all, the accused 19 hijackers could not have accomplished most of what happened. The answer is that the official accounts are important because they are part of the crimes. Identifying and examining the people who created the official 9/11 myth helps to reveal the ones who were responsible overall.
The people who actually committed the crimes of September 11th didn’t intend to just hijack planes and take down the buildings—they intended to blame others. To accomplish that plan the real criminals needed to create a false account of what happened and undoubtedly that need was considered well in advance. In this light, the official reports can be seen to provide a link between the “blaming others” part of the crimes and the physical parts.
Read article here
The truth about the September 11, 2001 terror attacks would not only destabilize the American political system but it would also take down the US as a global empire, an American scholar says.
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a founding member of the Scientific Panel for the Investigation of 9/11, made the remarks during an interview with Press TV on Tuesday, while commenting on the ongoing feud between Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and Jeb Bush over the 9/11 attacks.
On Friday, Trump blamed George W. Bush for the September 11, 2001 attacks. On Sunday, Trump said that if he had been president in 2001, his immigration policy would have kept al-Qaeda terrorists from attacking the US.
In response, Bush said his brother, former President George W. Bush, is not responsible for the 9/11 attacks. “Look, my brother responded to a crisis, and he did it as you would hope a president would do.”
“He united the country,” Bush told CNN. “He organized our country, and he kept us safe. And there’s no denying that. The great majority of Americans believe that.”
Read more here
Media interest in Saudi Arabian connections to the crimes of 9/11 has centered on calls for the release of the 28 missing pages from the Joint Congressional Inquiry’s report. However, those calls focus on the question of hijacker financing and omit the most interesting links between the 9/11 attacks and Saudi Arabia—links that implicate powerful people in the United States.
Read more here
Published on Sep 11, 2015
TRANSCRIPT, SOURCES AND MP3: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=16167
Forget for one moment everything you’ve been told about September 11, 2001. 9/11 was a crime. And as with any crime, there is one overriding imperative that detectives must follow to identify the perpetrators: follow the money. This is an investigation of the 9/11 money trail.
Published on Sep 10, 2015
On the tenth anniversary of the Attacks of September 11th, 2001, expert witnesses gathered at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada to provide evidence-based research that called into question the official story of 9/11. This was known as The Toronto Hearings on 9/11.
Over a period of four days, these experts in Structural Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, and History gave researched and professional testimony to an international panel of distinguished judges. The panel of judges, in conjunction with the steering committee would go on to publish their final analysis of the evidence provided, which called for a new investigation into the Attacks of September 11th, 2001.
This film is a summary of the strongest evidence given over the four days of hearings. To see the hearings in their entirety please visit http://torontohearings.org/ or read the final report available on the aforementioned website.
For more info on The Toronto Hearings on 9/11 visit:
For the full 6 hour DVD visit:
I am pleased to inform you that on Friday, September 11, 2015, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, together with Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, will be premiering another indispensable piece in our collection of educational materials:Firefighters, Architects & Engineers: Expose the Myths of 9/11. I invite you to watch the two-minute trailer here.
This 90-minute film features a landmark joint presentation by Erik Lawyer, the founder of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, and me. Together we dismantle two dozen myths that comprise the official account of the WTC destruction. We also expose the failure of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to comply with the requirements of NFPA 921, the national guideline for fire and explosion investigations.
We hope this information-packed video will quickly become a go-to educational tool — particularly for outreach to firefighters and fire protection professionals all over the country.
The world premiere of Firefighters, Architects & Engineers will be held at 7:00 PM on Friday, September 11, 2015, in the West Park Presbyterian Church, located at 165 West 86th Street in New York City’s Upper West Side.
NEW YORK, September 9, 2015 – Fourteen years after the world-changing events of 9/11, new evidence refuting the official story continues to be unearthed by a Panel of 23 professional researchers.
Today the 9/11 Consensus Panel releases two new Consensus Points presenting evidence of official foreknowledge of the attacks.
The first Point deals with Able Danger, the code name for a high-level intelligence operation co-founded by Generals Hugh Shelton and Peter Schoomaker, Commanders in Chief of the Defence Department’s Special Operations Command (SOCOM).
Able Danger indicated that the man identified as “Mohamed Atta” had been in the United States in January-February 2000, about 18 months before the 9/11 attacks, whereas the official story said he arrived in June, 2000.
Officials also claimed that US intelligence didn’t know Atta was in the country before 9/11, whereas this vital arm of US intelligence knew he had been there since Jan-Feb, 2000.
Nevertheless: Able Danger’s evidence was consistently ignored by government officials before the attacks; the 9/11 Commission failed to mention its evidence afterwards; and the Defence Department’s Inspector General later covered this up.
Louis Freeh, the former director of the FBI, called the 9/11 Commission’s claim that this evidence was not historically significant “astounding.”
The second new Consensus Point shows that the attack on the Pentagon was expected in several quarters before the event. Several pre-911 military exercises involving planes flown into the Pentagon suggest that such an attack was not unexpected.
In addition, news reports contained warnings from security sources to Pentagon and other officials not to fly on September 11.
On the morning of 9/11, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld predicted a Pentagon attack. In his office, as he watched the TV coverage from New York, he reportedly said: “Believe me, this isn’t over yet. There’s going to be another attack, and it could be us.”
Meanwhile, within minutes of the attack, and during “extremely congested traffic conditions,” the FBI was reportedly arriving to confiscate security camera videotapes from several locations that overlooked the section of the Pentagon that had just been hit.
NBC’s Pentagon correspondent, Jim Miklaszewski, was warned in advance by a US military intelligence official, who reportedly said, “I would stay off the E Ring [the outer ring of the Pentagon, where the NBC office was] for the rest of the day, because we’re next.”
The Panel employs a methodology used in medicine to generate consensus statements of the best available evidence on specific topics. During the survey process, the expert respondents remain blind to one another through three rounds of revision and feedback.
Over a four-year period the Consensus Panel has published 46 Points of evidence refuting the official story.
Source: The 9/11 Consensus Panel @911consensus
Contact list: http://www.consensus911.org/media-contacts/