- "Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload
of illogical humans." -Spock
- Most folks don't think, not logically, about 9-11. Most
people prefer that others-so-called experts--do the thinking for them.
Understandably, to really think about the events of 9-11 requires an abiding
love of truth, a logical mind, a rational mind far removed from emotion
and prejudice, and a trust of scientific law rather than an unquestioning
trust of the state. Let us now look at only five facets using these principles
- 1. A building constructed over a highly sensitive, highly
dangerous, highly expensive industrial site will be engineered and constructed
that much stronger. Logical and rational, right? WTC-7 was engineered
to be stronger, not weaker, than other buildings surrounding it, simply
because it enclosed an electrical power station. But WTC-7 fell at near
free fall speed. Logical deduction would conclude building 7 was purposely
demolished at the end of the day on September 11, 2001, most likely to
destroy evidence of arson and to clear the WTC site entirely.
- 2. Fuel fires burn intensely for short periods of time.
Fuel fires also burn at well-known scientific temperatures. Scientifically,
and thus logically, fuel fires cannot melt steel, which requires blast
furnace conditions. Melted pools of steel were discovered, observed and
recorded in the debris of three steel skyscrapers long after September
11, 2001. Logically then, fuel fires alone did not destroy the World Trade
Center. Logically then, some other, far more powerful substance that could
melt steel must have.
- 3. Passengers on commercial jets are required to check
in at the desk and present their ticket and boarding pass. No passenger
is allowed to board a major commercial carrier without first being logged
onto a computer today. This list of passengers is called a flight manifest.
This list of passengers is available to airline personnel within minutes.
Logically then, the names of ALL hijackers should have appeared in the
mainstream media hours (and days) after the flights crashed. They did not.
Either there never were any hijackers or they boarded through the complicity
of airline personnel, thus indicating a greater conspiracy. Logical.
- 4. When the chief of security of one government gives
$100,000 to an alleged terrorist mastermind, and then meets with the security
heads of the government to be attacked on the exact day of the attack,
logically, some complicity is suspected. In the days before September 11,
2001 the head of Pakistani Intelligence, General Mahmoud Ahmed, wired $100,000
to the lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta. Ahmed then attended breakfast on the
morning of 9-11 with Porter Goss, the head of the House Intelligence Committee
(and the next head of the CIA) and Florida Senator Bob Graham. Coincidentally,
Florida was home base to most of the alleged hijackers. According to the
FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, General Mahmoud Ahmad,
the alleged "money-man" (to use the FBI expression), allegedly
ordered the bank transfer of $100,000 to the accused 9/11 ring-leader,
Mohamed Atta, and then met on the morning of the attack with a trio of
US lawmakers and top intelligence insiders, Bob Graham, Porter Goss and
Jon Kyl for a friendly breakfast. What exactly did they discuss? Logically
then, one could conclude a huge conflict of interests. Logically one could
conclude a vast government conspiracy. As if to confirm a government conspiracy
between the two security states, $8 billion in US aid was funneled to Pakistan
between 2002 and 2006, ostensibly to fight the war on terror. No word where
that $100,000 came from (US taxpayers?), money that was wired to mastermind
Atta to attack America.
- 5. Airplane parts are easily traceable. Airplane parts
are stamped with serial numbers. Machined airplane parts are made to exact
specifications. Logically an aviation expert could take any large, machined
part from any of the 911 attack sites and say, yes or no, this part originated
from a Boeing 757. Or did NOT originate from a Boeing 757, as Jon Carlson
claims. Scientific study of the engine parts alone could have demolished
any and all 911 conspiracies. Logical, correct? But because no such investigations
were permitted or conducted, a huge government conspiracy appears likely.
Logically then, one could conclude the conspirators had something to hide.
- I have noted only FIVE suspicious anomalies. Dozens of
other examples exist. For example the disappearance of the black boxes
from the WTC. While first responders claimed the black boxes were found,
the government denies it. Since most of the WTC debris was sifted and sorted
(or melted), anyone could logically conclude the government had something
to hide. Anyone could logically conclude, without too much effort, that
911 was an inside job and continues to be the greatest unsolved crime in
- USAF veteran and author of suspense thriller, The Guns
of Dallas, Douglas Herman writes regularly for Rense.